|
|
Today I saw an interviewer present a "tough" question to decide whether to hire the candidates who came for the interview! The question was: "After pouring a glass of milk into the sea, how would you retrieve it?" Before you rush to read on, tell me, how would you answer this question?
Of course, in interviews, some questions don't have absolute standard answers. "After pouring a glass of milk into the sea, how would you retrieve it?" Such questions make applicants rack their brains, and they come up with various answers. For example, "Drain the seawater and then extract the milk" or "If the milk is important, I would make sure this situation doesn't happen; if it's not important, I would buy another glass."
Seeing this, I believe you're already curious about what kind of answer can successfully secure this job opening. This applicant gave a unique answer: "Don't dwell on whether to take it back or not at the moment. The key is to eventually effectively recover the value of the milk from the sea. That's what constitutes successfully retrieving it." Seeing this response, are you surprised?
Undoubtedly, this answer won the favor of the interviewer. They posed this question to test the logical thinking ability of the candidates and their approach to dealing with unchangeable mistakes, and this applicant's answer met their expectations.
However, when this answer was exposed in the online world, netizens from all walks of life expressed confusion. Various comments poured in: I don't want to work for a company that asks such questions; it's a bit hypocritical. Interviews should be a two-way choice; this kind of pretentious stuff is really annoying. Essentially, it caters to bureaucratic culture. My first reaction was, since it's already poured into the sea, why retrieve it? What's the point? Why do something meaningless? |
|
Post time 17-4-2024 21:15:46