HR is important because it is a consequence, a cause[,] and a solution.
without to at least talk about it.
without at least trying to talk about it/how it could be fixed/improved.
SW tool names
?
stuff of[f] amazon
I find it lazy to ask for a wool-milk-pig that lays eggs with the company logo and is used to eating a very specific diet of plants only prevalent in the valley that the company is located in.
This sounds like parody.
If we let high potential people occupy the remaining simple jobs then we will have social unrest
Sounded more reasonable than the attributed cause. (And seems more like a morale issue than a cause of social unrest.)
[a] There is no insight without failures.
[b] let us strive to be less wrong.
[b] seems, if not in conflict with [a], then not the best way of saying it.
If everyone is looking for A*B then I must seek C*(A+B) at a lower cost. C would likely be a greater number of rejection than selection criteria. The point is not to try to be better at establishing that A*B is true for a candidate and compete for it.
“seems, if not in conflict with”
I think you noticed that there is no contradiction, but I agree that I need to clarify.
Faced with a massive lack of information and the task to predict the future it is clear that it would be pure luck to make the best decision. Operating with that mindset might even be hindering.
″ I must seek C*(A+B) at a lower cost.”
I was trying to get into what to choose / look for in a finite set with competition.
A B C … are terms of criteria that I estimate to be fulfilled to some degree. For simplicity they shall be binary logic terms. Every option that I have has more properties than I even know about and those I do know and find relevant, I either seek or avoid. Any term might contain many such properties.
Knowing what others are looking and paying for and that the world is very complicated, I find it more sensible to intentionally not use the same function to assess options. Instead I must design my net to “fish” in other areas of the choice property space. This applies to HR or any other investment.
Styling:
without at least trying to talk about it/how it could be fixed/improved.
?
This sounds like parody.
Sounded more reasonable than the attributed cause. (And seems more like a morale issue than a cause of social unrest.)
[b] seems, if not in conflict with [a], then not the best way of saying it.
?
“Styling” I will (and can) make the edits.
“parody” I call it a polemic analogy.
“seems, if not in conflict with” I think you noticed that there is no contradiction, but I agree that I need to clarify. Faced with a massive lack of information and the task to predict the future it is clear that it would be pure luck to make the best decision. Operating with that mindset might even be hindering.
″ I must seek C*(A+B) at a lower cost.” I was trying to get into what to choose / look for in a finite set with competition. A B C … are terms of criteria that I estimate to be fulfilled to some degree. For simplicity they shall be binary logic terms. Every option that I have has more properties than I even know about and those I do know and find relevant, I either seek or avoid. Any term might contain many such properties. Knowing what others are looking and paying for and that the world is very complicated, I find it more sensible to intentionally not use the same function to assess options. Instead I must design my net to “fish” in other areas of the choice property space. This applies to HR or any other investment.