So what I've got here are series of correlation.

So I don't know how much you know about statistics and

one thing that I'm going to say repeatedly during this module.

He said if you haven't taken a course in statistics and

you're interested in this topic, I really strongly recommend that you take a couple

of introductory course in statistics.

Because they're kind of the compliment to what we are doing.

You will understand the people side of analytics and

how to apply analytics to people.

But statistics just gives you a little bit of understanding of some of the ways of

interpreting the results.

And so for those of you that haven't done this recently,

correlation is basically a measure of how closely two variables move together.

So correlation of zero means things are totally unrelated to one another.

A correlation of one means they move together perfectly.

That they could almost be the same thing.

And where they fall in that spectrum tells you how closely they're correlated.

And so, what you see in this growth is a variety of correlations, the largest

correlations of things that are doing the best job of predicting performance.

Correlation of 0.5 is quite strong, it's not a one-to-one correspondence.

But it tells you,this is quite good at predicting performance

when we get down to kind of 0.2, 0.3, that's a lot weaker.

And so what we've done here is we've listed in order how the various different

assessment techniques actually predict performance.

So if you got it right, congratulations, give yourself a pat on the back as long as

you're not anything heavy or something like that.

If you got it wrong, I'm sorry but better luck next time.

Anyway if you go through what you see is that there are a number of things that

really do predict performance quite effectively.

So more than anything else, perhaps not surprisingly is work samples and

so some companies when they hire, they ask people to either produce or

perform something like the work that they're going to do.

So for example, technical writers, maybe you'll give them a description of

a product and ask them to give a sample of their writing about it.

I've heard companies hiring analysis maybe we'll send them a spreadsheet of data and

ask them to analyze it.

Just getting a sense of can they perform the job that they're being asked to do.

Another thing that is surprisingly, I would say effective,

is cognitive ability testing.

It turns out that actually, general intelligence is really quite predictive

of performance in a very wide range of jobs.

And so some organizations will actually have candidates do something that

looks like an IQ test.

If intelligence is something they care about and

drives performance, it's the easiest way to measure it, okay?

The third thing that's seen as very effective is structured interviews.

And what's the difference between a structured interview and

an unstructured interview that comes down at the bottom?