Wednesday, June 27, 2007

Illogical Think-out-of-the-Box for Job Application

I received this e-mail this morning. Nowadays, there are many similar ones being forwarded around but clearly this really bring about my attention. Malaysian politics is getting boring these days. Bad things are not changing. Maybe that will only happen after the citizens change the government.

So, take a break and read this and be shocked by the credentials some companies are putting as "selection of candidate".

Question from the e-mail
You are driving along your car on a wild, stormy night, it's raining heavily, when suddenly you pass by a bus stop, and you see three people waiting for a bus:

1. An old lady who looks as if she is about to die.

2. An old friend who once saved your life.

3. The perfect partner you have been dreaming about.

Which one would you choose to offer a ride to, knowing very well that there could only be one passenger in your car?

Think before you continue reading............

This is a moral/ethical dilemma that was once actually used as part of a job application.

* You could pick up the old lady, because she is going to die, and thus you should save her first;

* or you could take the old friend because he once saved your life, and this would be the perfect hence to pay him back.

* However, you may never be able to find your perfect mate again.

The candidate who was hired (out of 200 applicants) had no trouble coming up with his answer.

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

The Selected Candidate's So-Called Brilliant Answer

"I would give the car keys to my Old friend and let him take the lady to the hospital. I would stay behind and wait for the bus with the partner of my dreams."

Sometimes, we gain more if we are able to give up our stubborn thought limitations... and begin to "Think Outside of the Box"!

Pass this on to others so that they may also think out of the box... I did!!!

My Answer
This is an illogical answer because the question states to offer a ride.

Look at the question:
"Which one would you choose to offer a ride to, knowing very well that
there could only be one passenger in your car?"

Points:
1) You cannot offer a ride if you give the keys to your old friend to drive going by English usage and logical standards.

2) You cannot have a passenger if you are not driving the car going by English usage and logical standards.

3) A person who saved your life may not be trustworthy enough to drive the car;
i) he may not be a good driver and end up both old lady and him dead while your car may destroyed in accident;
ii) he may throw off the old lady and sell your car for money (judging by Malaysian security standards these days).

4) It is irresponsible to let people do your job (of saving old lady) while you enjoy your time with partner of dreams. It is like abusing a good person who saved your own life to do your work. P.S. Your boss may use points like this against you.

The question puts you in a box instead or maybe the person has poor English during construction of the question. Otherwise, if the person who make this "trap" is your boss, I wish you good luck because they will require you to perform something extraordinary while giving you poor directions to work.

Think about it. Now, my answer is the result of thinking out of box. :-D

The candidate is suffering from problems with dealing with the details. The company that hired this candidate has poor management skills obviously. Expecting an illogical answer while giving a misleading question.

You can e-mail this post to your friends on this.

Regards,
http://sagaladoola.blogspot.com/

3 comments:

Roger said...

Your answer is thinking outside the box? =)
You are still confined inside the details, the words itself.
You didn't take the situation as a whole, and as a whole, how can you in that situation can make a smart decision that is beneficial to all parties.

You can't see the big picture man.

Sagaladoola said...

Like they say "the devil is in the details". The question itself is confining rather than the answer.

A smart decision needs to take into consideration the direction and rules given unless stated that the rules/laws can be broken. As a whole, there is no such mention.

For example, to make more business for a company, one has to abide by the regulations. Of course we may get more business by using corruption and bribery but it is against the company and country policies. So, that is not advisable to do so.

roger, I think it is you can't see the big picture

Sagaladoola said...

The original answer of the candidate can only be used if the question states that rules can be broken, in which, you must not necessarily ride in the car or carry a passenger.

In this case, it is not stated.

roger, I think you have not only missed the big picture but do not drill into rules, details and words, man.

That is the problem with most Malaysians, a lot of people sign contracts without looking into details. Do you know that one single word can alter the whole content of the contract?

Breaking the rules / laws can cause serious trouble to yourself and your company. Obviously, this company sucks in giving directions and the candidate will risk his company in lawsuits and reputation.

Perhaps, that is why there is so much of accident and inefficiency in Malaysia. Even our MPs do not follow rules.

Rules and laws are meant to be followed. Otherwise, it would be better to have an anarchy society.

Regards.. good luck...