12
votes
How to gauge the degree of someone's self-awareness?
It's common in my job - and likely many jobs - to require learning and correction. I've noticed that people who have stronger self awareness are more likely to improve and learn from projects/mistakes/correction etc. I can say a lot more about the value of introspection, but I'll get to the point: I'd like to gauge someone's ability to do this by having a conversation with them.
If you were interviewing a candidate to work for you, what would you ask them to find out how self-aware they are? I figure if you asked: "how self aware are you?", each candidate would respond "in addition to my strong organizational skills and quick learning, I am also incredibly self aware." So I'll need to sneak up on the idea a bit.
Ask them questions about mistakes they'd made at previous jobs and how they handled it/learned from them. Also, just ask more soft-skill, situational questions.
Fun anecdote - I was interviewing someone about a year ago, and asked, "You're given a problem, and settle on solution A. The rest of the team, though, thinks solution B is the way to go. What do you do?" To which he answered, "Tell them to shut up and just do it my way."
That was a quick no, but it made a funny story around the office.
There is a survey you could have them do: Self Consciousness Scale (SCS-R)
It breaks down a persons, private/public self consciousness, as well as social anxiety. I feel it might not be exactly what you're looking for but might get you started.
I've written a quick python program to calculate your code :) I'd love any feedback i can get, as i'm a python beginner.
A few quick notes to serve as code review:
restart
is initialized in three separate places, but isn't actually modified in any meaningful way.while
loop's condition. In fact, I would simply scrap thewhile
loop andrestart
variable completely. Either that, or initializerestart
toTrue
before the while loop, dowhile(restart):
, and setrestart
toFalse
exactly once within the loop to ensure that it runs only once (thenrestart = False
can be removed or commented out if you want to test it repeatedly).i
,j
,k
, andl
, but you only ever usei
. You should remove the additional three unused variables.i
doesn't need to be initialized prior to use in yourfor
loop. You should remove thei = 0
line for brevity's sake.if
statements within theif i+1 in {8, 11}:
block that can be completely eliminated in favor of simple arithmetic:addScore = 3 - addScore
. You'll be trading 8 lines of complicated code for one line of simple code that way.addScore
tototScore
on each iteration of the loop is unnecessary. Instead, consider simply calculating thetotScore
value at the end of the loop withtotScore = privateConScore + publicConScore + anxietyScore
. This makes your intent much clearer.addScore = 0
is unnecessary because you overwrite that value with a value from user input, anyway. You should simply delete that line.There are other improvements you could make, but those are the big ones that immediately stand out.
I should really clean up my code after I'm done!
Also i'm kinda not sure when a variable needs to be initialized and when not. But i guess it doesn't need to be when you dont perform an operation on it, right?
With the addScore = 3 - addScore, i was sure there has to be a simple way to do that, but i just couldn't think of it.
I don't agree on the totScore being clearer when adding up the 3 subscores. When glancing over the code, it could be possible that the 3 subscores share a question. I didn't even notice they do not share one! However i agree that it's cleaner to perform a single operation instead of one every loop.
Thank you for the feedback, i appreciate it!
Feel free to tell me the other stuff you noticed :)
Correct. A variable needs only to be declared before it's actually used. In the case of a
for
loop, the variable declaration is part of the loop.It can be really easy to miss simple solutions. I still do on occasion.
Interestingly enough, this is one of those scenarios where habits and code familiarity can make this fairly difficult to assess. Personally, I find that throwing in an accumulator in the middle of a loop can be confusing because its placement is arbitrary and the effects of the accumulation are implicit rather than explicit--that is, you have to determine the behavior by viewing surrounding code. By placing a single arithmetic expression after the loop, it gives you a place to naturally seek out the total sum value and the use of the arithmetic expression makes the behavior very explicit and obvious.
If that were the case, then your scoring system would likely be more funky and a simple accumulator probably wouldn't do the trick. Since that's not the case, it's often better to operate under the observed behavior that no subscores share a question, and to address any functionality changes as they arrive later on. Premature optimization and all that.
No problem! I like helping out when I can :)
Sure thing! Some additional notes:
privateConQuestions = {1,4,6,8,12,14,17,19,21}
.if i+1 in privateConQuestions:
, which is way more explicit.9
in the9 * 3
comes from the length of the proposedprivateConQuestions
. You should eliminate these and instead do e.g.len(privateConQuestions) * 3
. This has the additional benefit of automatically updating the value if you update the list for any reason. You may also want to take the3
s out and replace them with ascoreModifier
with3
assigned to it.The personality traits you may be looking for is conscientiousness.
You can take a free Big 5 Personality test here that is proven to be valid and reliable:
http://www.personal.psu.edu/~j5j/IPIP/ipipneo300.htm
Just so you are aware, you might want to do a thorough job analysis to determine whether or not the traits you are looking for, are the traits necessary to do a job.
You can look up the job on O*Net to get the first baby steps for a job analysis.
https://www.onetonline.org/
It's important to do a job analysis to prove that the selection procedures your company does is fair and unbiased. In this instance, you are going to want to rely on a survey-based assessment so your own implicit biases don't affect the judgment of a candidate.
Furthermore, you are going to have to prove the assessment you use is also constructed in a way that is also reliable and valid. I would be more than happy to walk you through a job analysis if you needed or if you have any more IO Psych questions so you can better select the right people or make some other organizational change.
An interview environment would probably be one of the less representative ways to gauge someone's self-awareness because of the Hawthorne effect. It's almost a guarantee that the version of someone you're going to be interacting with in that situation is divergent in some way from the person they're going to be day in and day out in a work environment because in that moment they're trying to impress you more than usual.
So in that scenario I'd probably rely on an investigation of their digital footprint as an indicator of their overall degree of self-awareness – even a lack of a digital footprint would tell me something about that person in this day and age.
I would highly advise against examining an applicants digital footprint to make a hiring decision. Unless you have a very standardized, clear-cut process for doing so.
I didn't say it could be used to make a hiring decision, I said it could be used to gauge someone's degree of self-awareness better than an interview environment would allow. Whether the interviewer in question chooses to use self-awareness as one of the traits that factors into their hiring decision is a separate matter. Whether that interviewer agrees that digital footprints even reflect self-awareness at all is another matter too.
Beyond that, looking at digital footprints for hiring purposes is a practice that takes place often across a variety of industries already, and for good reason depending on how regulated each industry is.
My apologies but the OPs original question examined the use of self awareness in an interview setting and you said a digital footprint would be a better indicator and place to measure. I didn't want OP to take what you said and run with it, looking up social media profiles of applicants, judging self-awareness without a tool, and getting in legal trouble with the OFCCP becuase it seems like they are asking about it for employment purposes.
And yes companies do it today. Some fields it's a good thing such as with federal jobs or other jobs with a high degree of confidentiality needed.
But as far as I'm aware, I haven't seen research that shows social media usage as an indicator of self-awareness. The most I have seen is a slight correlation with some personality traits but the statistical power was low.
Many of the replies here discuss personality metrics and scales. These are not necessarily bad options, but handing someone a "Self Consciousness Scale" at an interview will probably end up making them more self-conscious in the moment, and may not actually reflect their day-to-day behavior. I agree with silva that the Hawthorne effect will come into play here.
I work in mental health, and being able to evaluate someone's insight is often crucial. I would use some form of the following questions to evaluate this:
Tell me about a time where you disagreed with a team decision, how did you handle this?
Tell me about a time that you felt your superior or peers did not listen to you, how did you handle that?
Tell me what you feel your best contribution was at your previous job. How did you accomplish this?
I feel that you can gather a lot of information based on how the person responds to these questions. You're looking for flares of personality. Does the person share credit with team members? What is the nature of the story where they weren't listened to? Does the person tie it back to "I was ultimately right" - and does it sound like something subjective? How do they discuss the decisions? If there is still a lot of emotion visible, it is probably unprocessed and may not reflect a lot of skill with moving past things, especially if it was an older story. How about their "best contribution" - does it focus entirely on themselves, or do they describe benefits to the whole team?
There isn't a right or wrong answer to these, it's more about how the person answers and approaches the question. I use forms of these to evaluate someone's readiness-to-change when working with substance abuse patients. An example there would be, "Can you tell me how your substance use has affected your relationships?" It's sometimes less about the content of the answer and more about how the person responds (their affect, tone of voice, body language, etc).
Hope that helps!