What is the economic rationale behind every single company hiring

Because at the end of the day businesses are run on, by, and for PEOPLE who expect some minimum standard of social competence you sweaty neet

>>1406995
Go along, get along mentality.
It's not worth the headache of dealing with someone who can't mix, even if they're more qualified in other ways.

IBM recruiter (100% serious here):

>you can teach kids java, you can't teach them sales

I applied for a graduate consultant, I was literally the only CS graduate there, everybody else was English/Art/History.

Apparently 4 years of learning how to write software doesn't matter, they can teach you how to do that shit in a few weeks.

>>1406995
Idiocy

They outlawed a lot of other testing methods because they're discriminatory toward Tyrone and Jamal.

>>1407009
>Apparently 4 years of learning how to write software doesn't matter, they can teach you how to do that shit in a few weeks.
Can they teach anyone to do technical stuff in just a few weeks? Is this really true? Then what's the point of some of these "soft" technical degrees such as accounting, finance, CS etc.

>>1407058
The red pill here is that "programming" by itself is a monkey position which can be taught to anyone with a functioning cerebral cortex in a short period of time. If you have a CS degree, and want to work in software, you need to be working at the design or management level. Coding is for the pajeets.

>>1406995
All college is is a filter. You don't learn anything useful in college beyond introductory classes and if you specialize you better be the best there is at it, otherwise they'll just hire more experienced lads with the same background.

If you do well in college, that means you're easily programmed and thus the transition into working for the firm will be smooth. Compare that with someone who's "smart, but lazy" (see: intelligent enough to be aware of their disdain for being programmed/ unwilling).

Social skills also add into this by showing to the group that you're more team-oriented and likely to adopt its customs quickly.

That's why you'll be accepted into IB if you: have good grades in any major and are socially mature.

Literally, first-year (and a few years in) positions at IB are routine and mindless work. It can be taught to anyone intelligent and willing (see: social).

t. Someone working the field who has friends in IB

>>1407109
This

>>1407009
I'm really shocked by this. If i were running a tech company I would prefer to have autists (not literal autists) super passionate about software or engineering or whatever working on my projects.

>>1407109
(Cont.)

If you want to shoot past this courting ritual, then I would recommend you work on your skills (outside education) and have a portfolio/proof of work to show your employer for the niche (and independent position). Or start up your own firm if you're not a team player.

When I first started out I wanted to be a portfolio manager (because I liked making decisions in my trading) and from what I've read you have to start at the bottom (analyst) and work your way up.

But, what I didn't like was that I had to prove myself. I had to prove myself as a person instead of my, already excellent, track work doing the talking. I then realized the ideas in my former post. Analysts don't know shit. You have to be trained and in order for that to work smoothly, you need to have a personality that fits with your trainers.

So instead I chose to become a trader. I already had a track record that I could use to waive the initial interviews and get to proving more that I can make money, instead of fit in.

File: 1464072519142.jpg (50KB, 552x615px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 552x615px

To put it to you this way anon, there were a few guys at KPMG that I know of who get their annual reviews (obviously as accountants) and they are pretty strict on socializing with other co-workers. They really want you to do it because they expect people to move up and for them they can't have a manager or a senior manager who's a complete autistic shitbag neet. However, it also makes them money knowing that they have accountants that can socialize well with their clients.

>>1406995
An antisocial person is more likely to steal from the company or worse. If the person has no type of social circle before coming to work for you, they probably wont form or join one while working for you. With no ties to the company besides financial dependence, they are more unpredictable than the worker that has friends on the job. Fear of things like embezzlement grows more with antisocial people who are smarter too. Hiring a STEM grad with no friends is probably the dumbest thing you could do as a company, unless their potential value to the company drastically outweighs the risk of you getting caught in a pointless labor/financial chess match with some math monkey.

>>1407037
People want this to be the answer so bad, but its never really the case. The fact is that companies want people who are just slightly smarter than average. Being an academic superstar is legitimately dangerous to the functioning of a company, especially when you are some unknown guy who apparently has no friends. Literally no company wants to hire someone who poses a threat to the way the company functions. What they really want are pseudo-intellectuals who are smart enough to boss around the average person at the bottom of the totem pole, but not smart enough to question orders from their superiors higher up or challenge them for their positions.

Anyone who ever thinks its a good idea to hire legitimately smart antisocial people for entry level positions is begging to get Zuckerburged.

OP here. I live in the UK where for graduate jobs basic numerical and reading and pattern tests are common.

These are usually easy. DESU, that's fine, I understand you don't need rain man. But what's laughable is how easy some of them are.

For example, the investment banks use SHL tests that people take online. Let's be srs, if you are applying for a front office role you probably went to Oxford or something and you'd find these easy as shit. So would any competent person. So I guess they function well as a "not completely stupid" filter and a "not a spam application" filter. But what amazes me is that some companies like the big 4 / civil service use these exact same tests but with less questions and more time. And people supposedly fail these tests. My point is that their competency bar is really fucking low.

I've also had interviews at IBM. Wow, they don't want normies, they want people who are aggressively normie in the group exercises

>>1407200
I'd believe that people fail those tests. A lot of people can't do basic algebra.

File: 1469196985552.jpg (232KB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 1200x1600px

>>1406995

Social skills are 50% of business anon. It's just the way it is.

I run a business and I wouldn't be anywhere near where I am now if I did not charm the customer.

People wanna be charmed. And being charmed feels good, so can you blame them?

>he can't pretend to be energetic, outgoing, and likable for a 30 minute interview
There are like 5 rules, Christ

>>1406995

None.

Introverts aren't well liked anywhere.

>>1407120
IBM only hires technical guys for their top roles. Otherwise they want people with good enough understanding of technology and good social skills. They are a consulting firm after all.