Programming people to be better employees

by Esther Dyson

In theory, it is hard to think of any nobler computer service than the typical “Help Wanted” board. It helps people find work that fulfills their potential, and it helps employers find people who can use their infrastructure (whether machines, office equipment or a methodology for service delivery) to satisfy the needs of businesses and consumers around the world.

That was why, long ago, I invested in a European job board. But when they asked me to give a talk in Tallinn, Estonia, under the title “How to find the right people,” I balked. That’s because, in practice, job boards fail to fulfill their potential. The best people usually find jobs (or are found) through professional connections, and most mediocre people get mediocre or worse jobs where they lose whatever potential they had.

Even at their best, all job boards do is allocate scarce talent resources; they don’t create them.

In the end, I agreed to do the talk in Tallinn, but only if I could change the title to “How to find and develop great people.”

I recalled that episode recently when a startup came to me with an idea that included an online market for “life coaches.” (I’m being vague because the company is in stealth mode.)




Of course, that’s just my experience. Through extreme luck, I happened to sit next to former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor at a recent dinner. I asked her: “Is it just me, or do juries really rise to the challenge?” She replied: “Only twice in my career have I disagreed with the verdict of my jury.”


In the meantime, I was approached by a company called Talent Sciences, which I am sure has a good idea. The proposition is ultimately simple: Use computers not just to find good employees, but also to help people become better employees.

In part, that means generating data to assess and match people to the right jobs; it also means simulating situations — learning experiences — in which people can develop the habits, skills and attitudes they need to match any particular job and employer.

The first step for Talent Sciences is to work with a large employer and assess “talent” with a set of games and interactive experiences: How do people reason and make decisions?


There are no right answers, only patterns. Some patterns match successful employees in particular jobs; others match successful employees in other jobs (you want different traits in an advertising copywriter and in an accountant). Each company, and each kind of job within it, will have its own patterns of success (as defined by who stays and gets promoted). In a company with a pathological culture, success will be defined by liars and social climbers. But the goal is not just selecting employees (ideally within good companies). After that, the service can be used to coach employees and empower them to improve themselves.



It remains unclear how effective this will be, but I’m betting on it. Experience shapes us as much as our genes (or innate talents) do, and online experience is cheaper and easier to shape.

