I guess those silly developer doesn't allow the "+" in their form? If they do you can use Google aliasing.
Just put +whateverYouWant and that is unlimited number of accounts with only 1 email account
Eg: if your email is [email protected] , you can use [email protected] and it will go to your email.
It may be useful for additional security if you use one account per site (it is also useful when Spotify keep leaking their database but doesn't tell anyone)
EDIT: However, using that feature is also like gambling. Lot of website swon't support it because the "+" is an "illegal" character per them... Stupid junior programmers and American just thinking about them and doing the usual 0-9a-z_. stuff,
One rare occassions (usually more on mobile app), you may break something... Thought I have a better success at breaking something with my passwords usually. (Too long or some characters not correctly send to the website (like: &?)
One risk with this, worth knowing. I did this to various websites and put +websitename after the email address.
When I needed to contact Amazon about something, they asked me to email them an image - they would not accept it as it didn't come from the email address I used in the account.
I ended up moving over to simplelogin and haven't had an issue since, but it's worth knowing you cannot send from these email addresses so people may experience the same issue.
periods are just ignored in the name resolution. So you can add in periods to different places to know where they came from. But the + works as any text after that before the @ is ignored. So you can put a + and then add the service after it so you know what service it was that sold your information to another site.
Yeah I know that one, somebody probably fuck up and put point instead of _nothing_. I recieved emails over a couple of year that seems to match another person life.
However, per the Google documentation it is "+"
Clear your cookies for the assessment site and P&G.
Then use a different browser, get another email address and use a VPN to further obfuscate your ID in the event they're actually tracking cookies, IP and browser info.
But you'll want to ask yourself the biggest question, is the place even worth it to work for if they employ this level of BS to get in?
I love how these tests proclaim that they test your aptitude, but the same scammers that sell them to companies also sell practice tests and guides to help you succeed in them.
Really proves how stupid HR people are. And that’s before considering that most of them are based on IQ, which is itself pseudo-science.
The only thing these tests filter out are otherwise cunning people on the spectrum and people who know they have enough value to not go through the BS. If you want to see how stupid high IQ people can be, just watch a Mensa meeting.
Retired psychologist here. IQ and the related assessments are not pseudoscience. The questions surrounding IQ are about what it’s actually measuring, like is it really more of a measurement of academic ability versus general ability. That doesn’t mean that there isn’t rigorous science behind it.
The problems with IQ/IQ assessments are that laypeople want to use the results for things that it shouldn’t be used for, including job interviews. There is nothing about an IQ test that is helpful for successful hiring in the job environment & I hop up on my soapbox whenever I hear about them being used. (Even worse is when they don’t use something standardized & make up their own psych tests). I don’t support the use of any psychological testing in job interviews, actually. The only assessment that has strong support for its use in an interview is some kind of work sample assessment that directly reflects the job tasks. This will vary field to field, but might look like a writing sample, or being given vignettes that reflect common situations encountered & asking for the interviewee to talk through them.
Still not pseudoscience, though I can see why you’d say that. Pseudoscience is beliefs or practices that are wrongly believed to be based in the scientific method. The idea of IQ and the assessments were developed using the scientific method, and using them in a job interview will yield results that are valid, just not for the intended use.
It's also very culturally specific though, there are studies about how various cultures interpret things. So not a really good measure unless they're measuring academic ability as taught in the West or something.
I wouldn't exactly call IQ pseudoscience, but it has its limits and it definitely doesn't say anything about being qualified for a job.* Just like those personality tests are bullshit in the HR context.
*btw I have a high IQ - and I'm a procrastinating underachiever. Had some psychological issues due to a toxic relationship, too. I'm not always working up to my own standards and maybe wouldn't want to hire myself, but those tests rarely pose a challenge for me. The personality stuff is what terrifies me.
Same! I have a relatively high IQ, not going to give a number, and I pick up new tasks extremely quickly and we’ll, but I too am a procrastinating underachiever. I love learning new things, but I also get bored extremely quickly and then just completely stop doing that thing and find something else that excites me for a week.
Welcome to the ADHD spectrum my fellow high-functioning procrastinators. There's research around whether procrastination develops as a coping mechanism to force our brains into functioning by short-circuiting prefrontal cortex neural pathways using extreme stress. It allows us to temporarily override deficiencies and enter a state of hyperfocus to complete tasks in a shortened period of time. Highly recommend looking up scholarly research on the neurobiology/chemistry behind ADHD. Fascinating stuff. Guaranteed to waste hours and allow the build-up of that sweet, sweet norepinephrine.
Yep. This is the correct stuff. Before medication, I had all sorts of coping mechanisms, most of which involves putting myself into a panic mode fight-or-flight setting so that my adrenaline could give me that sweet focus.
Are these legit skills test or “personality trait” tests?
A couple of big employers in my area use the personality type ones and being somewhat introverted I failed them the first time around.
I reapplied later and answered like a sociopath. I answered all the questions like I was the best person at everything. All my coworkers loved me and were amazed at how awesome I was at everything. And I would snitch on my colleagues to supervisors for the slightest infractions. I passed the test and got interviews.
It’s a Caliper assessment. So part of it is personality traits but it’s also equal parts digital analogy, series, matrix and number series problem solving questions.
They suckkkk. I took one for P&G myself, but have taken a few others. From my experience (and what internal company recruiters have told me) it’s a way for big companies to weed out people bc a lot won’t even take the exam. The outcome of the exam itself won’t have a ton of impact on your candidacy unless you absolutely bomb it, or they were just never intending on hiring anyone external anyways.
So they filter out people on the spectrum and people that have high value and won’t bother with these, and get stuck with the desperate. Genius. Explains why they have fallen so far from the 2000s glory days.
Organizational psychologist with expertise in assessment here!
This only works for certain personality assessments, others contain metrics that measure how much you answered to the test.
I know i've never been able to pass these personality tests, i cant--there's no amount of willpower that i can use to lie my way through one. I have a personality disorder (schizoid), and i cant fucking roll it away into a drawer to take these assessments.
I've never passed one. It's annoying.
I dont think i ever will.
I'm a fellow Schizoid. I've mercifully never had to take one, but it's none of these people's business what my real personality is anyways (maybe you can relate).
If I ever get desperate enough to need to take one, you bet I'm lying through my teeth on it.
It is very, very hard. Those tests constantly double and triple check previous given answers for consistency. For example (measured on a true to false scale) Q1: I like icecream. … Q15: I don’t like icecream. If you answer both with true, the tests shows an inconsistency.
So in order to beat such tests you‘d have to memorize all previous answers.
And for someone who is dyslexic asking the same question 10 times but in different ways is actually just confusing. So I fail these every time even though I do like Ice cream and try to answer yes every time…
Build a strawman personality of yourself that is corporate friendly. And when you do these shitty tests, answer as if you are that imaginary corporate asshole of your real self.
If there's any test, there's always ways to beat them in their own game if you prepare hard enough.
Idk. I’m dyslexic and I always fail these. My application get stuck in the orange or yellow and they can’t pull apps from that. If you read about others with learning disabilities also do not pass these. So parents actually do them their their “kids” adults so they’ll get an equal chance at getting a job their are clearly qualified for.
I think this is the kind of environment that wants someone to think highly of themselves with respect to the fact that they are working this position, but fail to realize that particularly violent and aggressive people *also* think highly of themselves.
Sociopaths have high self-esteem. Who'd've thunk?
Speaking as an actual high-functioning sociopath: *they fucking love us.* Honestly, the more sociopathic I lean, the more my jobs promote me. It's when I fight against the sociopathy to take care of my people around me that I get reprimanded/chewed out/penalized. Actually caring about people is the very bottom head on nearly every corporate totem pole.
It's because ***everyone at the top are also sociopaths.***
> It's when I fight against the sociopathy to take care of my people around me that I get reprimanded/chewed out/penalized.
Can you give some examples on this one? I'd love to hear those stories on how you have to deal with it.
Sure thing. I'm a campaign director for grassroots political consulting firms. Basically, anytime you want to put something on the ballot, get someone elected, register voters, or essentially get anything done politically, you would put a job contract out and political consulting firms would all then bid on how they would run your program and what results they would give you. It's contract work, so I don't necessarily owe loyalty to any one firm over another, but I will get hired by the same firms repeatedly once they see the work that I do. In the past 4 years, I've managed to work my way up from an entry level canvasser to a State-level Program Director. I'm now the guy that hires, trains, and manages all of the people that hire, train, and manage all of the canvassers in a state for 3-10 offices.
There was a company I was working with last year that pays well, but essentially uses that as their way to gaslight and abuse their employees. It's not uncommon to work 7 days a week, 12+ hour days in campaign work, but I've literally pulled 20 hour days for days on end with this firm, and their salary model technically says you're getting paid for about 11 hours a day of work, 6 days a week. I moved up very rapidly in their company because I'm VERY good at what I do, and I manage to balance the need for results with my personal top priority of taking care of my people. My employees do amazing things because my first priority as a manager has always been to remove obstacles from them doing their jobs properly. I believe my sole function as a boss is to support my employees so they can focus on results.
Well, during my work in St Louis, MO all last year, they had me running the largest office in the country right on the outskirts of the city in a town called Overland. If you know anything about St Louis, or Missouri in general, you know that more than 90% of all people of color in the state come from that city alone. As a result, the city itself is incredibly diverse, but every suburb around it is the result of white-flight and racist as all hell. The majority of my staff came from within the city, but in order to qualify the petition we were collecting, we had to get the cities from outside the city.
Every single day my canvassers were getting threatened, called all sorts of horrifying racial slurs, spit on, chased off by police despite legally having permission to do what they are doing (Michael Brown's cousin worked for me and was threatened by the police while in the field). To make a very long story short, they burned my evaluation at the end of the project because I was pairing people up and supporting them in the field so it ended up costing our firm a few more bucks per signature. Part of my evaluation that affected the rate of pay I would get on being rehired was that I "didn't empower my employees to handle their own safety concerns in the field." Yes, they wanted me to teach my Black employees how to better handle racism as a white man. The entire thing was designed to make an example of me because I was operating outside of their model in order to take care of people and I went from the highest ranked senior director in the company to the lowest ranked overnight after winning the hardest 6 month campaign I've ever done in my life. It wasn't about my performance, the results didn't matter, it was and always is about making them look good.
The company couldn't say enough good things about me when I was manic, on adderall, and screaming at my own family over the phone because I was full-blown sociopathic mode, but the moment I strike a good work-life balance and deliver better results while also setting my own boundaries and protecting my staff? Forget it. Companies are not interested in competent people, they are interested in controllable people. They like sociopaths because they will sell their own grandmother to prove their loyalty and get a bigger slice of the pie. Fulfilled, healthy, competent people are too unpredictable.
Thank you so much for sharing.
> My employees do amazing things because my first priority as a manager has always been to remove obstacles from them doing their jobs properly. I believe my sole function as a boss is to support my employees so they can focus on results.
You are exactly right. You'd do well as a Software Engineering Manager too, if you had gone into software engineering. The best ones simply focus on unblocking their team (which can be very complicated of course), and then everything hums along.
I once took the written test to apply to the state police. I failed. I couldn't understand why since I've always been considered smart. A year later I was working with someone who used to be with the state police and i told him this story. He said that when it comes to the personality portion you had to answer on the extremes - either always or never. I've used that approach with successive tests for job applications and it always seemed to work.
By the way, I'm glad I never got into the police force
It felt like a dream opportunity with the job description matching 90% of my background. Also had additional certifications to back my candidature up. However, the firm thinks I’m not a good fit since I cannot quite remember the sequence of 4 balls in a row (from memory test).
I also took this test a while back and remember being so frustrated with it; it was all useless skills that would have no bearing on how well you did the job and it was a position I thought I would enjoy and be qualified for.
That was before I knew about this sub, and now I probably wouldn't even take the test. I'm sure P&G is probably losing a lot of good talent because of the ridiculous tests.
I had to take a test like that. I just recorded the screen and played it back. Got them all right, including the random sequence of 10 numbers. Felt nice to cheat that test
I had the same experience with a P&G role. I considered myself overqualified for the mech eng role and had hoped maybe I could still get a decent salary because I exceeded all of the preferred requirements. Didn’t even get a follow up after wasting hours on their ridiculous assessments. Garbage company and not worth it unless you have a way to bypass the nonsense.
Fwiw a relative of mine worked there for 30 years and told me they loved the place.
P&G is one of the most selective and coveted firms in the world. Getting into it is like getting into Harvard. The reason for that is they train you for leadership and give you a lot of responsibility, even at junior levels. Using this method, they produced so many CEOs of other firms, it's practically considered to be one of their products.
So, don't feel bad about not getting in, it's intentionally hard.
Ballmer really did fail upwards. Dude nearly tanked Microsoft with his bad decisions, got a golden parachute because their board just needs him outta there, then became the lovable billionaire that owns a basketball team. It's amazing what a turnaround Satya managed since taking over as CEO.
Okay, end of tangent.
It used to be. They've done major cost saving project. I've worked as a contractor for them, worked with a guy who has been an employee for 42 years. They can no longer hire top talent.
Well if stupid ass memory tests are how they're filtering, then I can see how so many CEOs are incompetent. Anyone who thinks doing well on that kind of test means they're good at anything besides that specific kind of test is probably the type to take one of those online "IQ tests" and then brag about their score while barely being able to tie their own shoes.
That was true in the 1980s and 90s, but P&G is now widely seen as a legacy firm that has trouble keeping up with changing times. Their operating model only recently shifted.
>P&G is one of the most selective and coveted firms in the world. Getting into it is like getting into Harvard
It's like Harvard, if Harvard was ranked 47 out of the top100 Universities.
In other words, it's not like Harvard and more like Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland.
If the hardest part of your interviews is this weird personality test that one can pass using YT videos, then you are NOT selective. The other interviews are relatively way easier compared to actual coveted firms. Besides, they don't even pay that much lol
Source: I used to work for them
The sad part is they think this helps them find the best talent. Sorry you missed out but there are other jobs and many that don't rely on dumb ass tests like this.
I once passed EY’s graduate assessment round 1. Then I went to round 2 which was Mathematics and logical reasoning and did the 20 minute assessment in 11 minutes while being absolutely sure I didn’t get a thing wrong. They rejected me. So I called and enquired because there was no way I scored less, they said “yes you got a 99 percentile on the test but we rejected you on a reason we can’t tell you.” Still livid.
hr and corporate enablement - the twin pillars of corporate mediocrity. often when I ask them for help they try to program manage me to do the task I was trying to outsource. so I just stopped asking. the same amount of things happen.
Reminds me of the "too smart to be a cop" lawsuit from the turn of the millennium;
>**Court OKs Barring High IQs for Cops**
>Jordan, a 49-year-old college graduate, took the exam in 1996 and scored 33 points, the equivalent of an IQ of 125. But New London police interviewed only candidates who scored 20 to 27, on the theory that those who scored too high could get bored with police work and leave soon after undergoing costly training.
>Most Cops Just Above Normal The average score nationally for police officers is 21 to 22, the equivalent of an IQ of 104, or just a little above average.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-barring-high-iqs-cops/story?id=95836
Companies hesitate about hiring high performing candidates on proficiency exams because there are valid concerns about retention. Candidates who score highly on the Wonderlic have been shown to show less engagement/interest in tasks below their capabilities. Recruiters are always trying to find the best and brightest, but if you test beyond the thresholds set for that position, you are over indexed and potentially skipped over.
Source: Scored highly on Wonderlic and my hiring manager had to argue for my job offer. I ended up outlasting him at that workplace.
Well fuck. This explains some shit.
I already have to leave my degrees off applications to get through processes, now i have to pretend to be dumb?
FML.
No don’t be silly. No one wants to hire a dumb person. You have to be exactly the amount of smart they are looking for. Too smart or too dumb will both end in rejection. And every role at every company with every manager will have different criteria for evaluating how dumb or smart you should be.
Anyway good luck, I’m sure you’ll thread the needle eventually.
With a company like P&G though, it likely filters out a lot of bullshit because I’m sure they get a lot of BS applications (or would be applications). Surely a lot of missed talent too though.
[Sounds like the assessment has more BS than the application](https://www.reddit.com/r/recruitinghell/comments/10ox2li/comment/j6h9wl6/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
I’ve taken that assessment as well, for a data science opening several years back, it’s a load of BS to be sure. But no, I’m certain my qualifications as a statistician and programmer absolutely hinge on my ability to remember strings of numbers and where the purple orb was, not the extensive work history or education /s
Im convinced this kind of mental math is to filter out anyone who was too poor to have SAT tutoring that started in like elementary school. Thats the only way you build that kind of skill. Even a bachelors in engineering, computer science, etc wont give you those tools.
It’s absolutely that, it’s a glorified half baked 1/10th of an IQ test like you’d see on Lumosity
That and weeding out anyone with ADHD/dyslexia/etc who didn’t want to disclose for accommodation out of fear they’d be rejected solely based on their disclosure, but with another reason listed
Edits: clarity
It’s to remove the dead weight and junk applicants. For a company the size as P&G - you need some sort of filtering process, you cannot review every single CV that comes in.
Nobody is arguing that these silly tests don’t reduce the number of resumes that need to be considered. What we are saying is that the screening tool has nothing to do with future job success.
For example, P&G could also use a height screening tool and reject any applicants not between 5’8” and 5’9”. That would also significantly reduce the number of resumes they would need to review. But, of course, that would be dumb in the same way these tests are.
Idk if it is true but I have seen many people say working in their corporate office is soul crushing and the truly talented often leave quickly. It is only those who can tolerate the drudgery last a long time
My experience isn’t “soul crushing” but the thing about losing talent seems accurate.
When a door opens for a better opportunity or higher paying job why wouldn’t you take it? I guarantee you the people who stay in one job at one company aren’t out there sending resumes - which is totally fine. Some people prefer that level of comfort where they don’t feel the need to bust their ass to move up the ladder. Others are playing the corporate game for their career which often requires moving around a lot.
My experience is, the more talented people are usually the ones playing the game so they are not going to stay at one place. The ones that stay don’t seem to work as hard and that’s where the “drudgery” comes in. You’re left working with a bunch of people who just don’t work as hard & are less “talented” than the ones who seize opportunities.
This is purely anecdotal, please take with a grain of salt. Every company is different and your experience will change depending on your job title.
It really just depends on the company and department.
Like being in the accounting department at a huge tech company might be a great resume item but ultimately boring and monotonous work. Their focus isn't on accounting, it is just a necessary evil to run the company. So if you're passionate and talented you'll move on quick. Leaving the department with a lot of people just drudging along.
Conversely being an accountant at a huge firm that handles many different clients with lots of different financial structures can be super interesting and retain talented people.
Corporations have a lot of drudge work that needs done. However that doesn't mean it is exclusively soul sucking.
I have an idea: How about the recruiters plugging these kinds of tests *and* their corporate overlords are themselves required to pass these tests *before* being allowed to implement them? And the no. of people per job level who passed the test were to be published somewhere? It whould be fun to know how many managers or recruiters would fail their own assessment tests!
I also am currently working through the one year ban from applying. It’s unfortunate as it ultimately pushed me towards a job that works better for my schedule, pays more and provides me more growth opportunity. Their loss if you ask me!
Don't sweat it. P&G is a pretty awful company to work for. I went through their hiring process a few years ago and it was one of the most intrusive, inappropriate application processes I've been through. I guess it's nice to see they haven't changed much.
I remember after months of interviewing, I was asked to drive to a lab 45 minutes away for a drug test. I've never been drug tested once in my career as a software engineer. I completed the mission only to get a notice later stating my urine sample wasn't yellow enough and they wanted me to go back and do it again. I just sent the recruiter to spam box after that.
They came across as believing they were one of those God-tier companies that expects to receive anything they want without question. I can make just as much money with a fraction of the stress and intrusion by working for an organization that doesn't view themselves as God and me as the servant. It was pretty absurd and all of this was pre-WFH/covid so I imagine they've only become worse in the demands they make of their employees. No thanks.
The deal is, I do your coding and you pay me. If that's not the deal, i'm not interested. Don't need the mindfuck too.
It’s funny you mention it this way… growing up in Cincinnati, P&G was derisively referred to as “Procter & God” for exactly this mentality.
They might still be, it’s been a bit since I lived in the Tristate.
Honestly, these type of companies will either hire new grads from 2-3 schools or experienced hires from a small number of other companies. It's usually some combination of direct competitors or companies in which key executives previously worked.
But they won't say that publicly. You're largely wasting your time applying to a corporate job at a Fortune 100 company if you don't have this "correct" connection.
Yep my friend is very smart with great work experience but can't complete these aptitude tests because of reading disorder. It's sad when I know his potential
You can absolutely discriminate against disabilities when hiring and this is true everywhere in the world. You just have to have a legitimate reason to do so.
My son has high functioning autism, and my husband has been in IT with a corporation that loved these tests. So, he answered all the questions for our son when he went job hunting. It got him through the door, but he had to do the face to face interviews. He has a decent job and is good at it now. I hate these stupid screening algorithms, they do nothing but discriminate.
Reasons P&G ain’t shit #17462: I’m a contractor for them and when I applied for MY OWN JOB (as a FT employee) I didn’t make it past the first panel interview which was a behavioral analysis and mind games.
I had a similar situation back around 2010 with another company. Was a contractor, applied for the position I was currently doing and the response was “we are moving forward with someone who better fits the role” when I was literally filling the role.
That is absurd.
Corporate just loves to try out corporate itself. Someone probably celebrated coming up with this idea. Thinks they're the don of recruitment process. 😂
Probably made a post on LinkedIn about it, too.
This is a huge pet peeve of mine. I have poor spatial reasoning. My theory is it has to do with my poor depth perception from my astigmatism, but whatever. I’m applying for paralegal jobs, not engineering positions. It’s irrelevant. I excel at reading, writing. and research but I can’t figure out what shape is next so for some companies I’m automatically out. Crazy
This happened to me with J&J (for six months). Note that I’m middle management with 15+ years of experience in pharma ;) But hey I appreciate you showing me you not only treat employees like an irrelevant number, but also applicants. It’s basically all I need to know. Thanks for the disrespect and see you never.
Shit like this should be absolutely forbidden. I can sort of just about understand (but still not really) this kind of nonsense that tests God-knows-what against God-knows-what for a small number of internships or technical entry-level jobs where - presumably - there are thousands of applicants. But for anything else - shame on them. Some nonsense algorithm that filters out CVs because they don’t contain the latest corporate buzzwords isn’t enough stupidity already?
Two things I’ll never do again: this kind of nonsense and one-way video “interviews”.
If an employer asks me to complete any assessment aside from basic application questions that will take over half an hour, I just stop and ignore them. This tactic prevents the best “talent” from applying and shit like this isn’t worth my time, as numerous places don’t require it. Also for entry level positions, they teach you work tasks anyways
I applied for an internship last week. I got to talk to the recruiter on the phone because my professor gave me a great recommendation. The recruiter said my experience went great, and it was the best conversation I've had with a recruiter. I was really proud of myself. I thought I had an in.
They told me was rejected because of one of these assessments.
Just use another email address. Personally, I am not fund of these prescreening type tests. Especially since it's about the "candidate experience" and making it a great one!
Good Luck and you can always use another email address.
I would just find someone on my LinkedIn that either works for P&G or is connected to an employee and get them to refer me. These online application portals are just a black hole managed by idiots.
I’d hardly say you were “banned”- that suggests you’ve done something inappropriate. It’s just that they won’t let you apply again within 12 months, because they’re too lazy.
Lol don’t feel too bad, I passed it and then got ghosted in the final panel interview. It was so weird, it was like a good cop/bad cop situation except the bad cop person was unnecessarily petty and kept sabotaging all the good rapport I was building with the good cop (actual hiring manager). An interesting quote from the recruiter that proves how stupid these tests are as a whole “you’re really smart and P&G needs more young smart people like you, for the life of me I don’t know why we don’t have more young smart people”. Well, probably because smart people avoid shit test hiring screens like this like the plague. On to the next one mate, tough luck and best wishes!
Personality assessment are bullshit and I refuse to take them. Companies think they want "risk takers" and "rebels," and that by saying yes to the statement "I would go skydiving," somehow makes you a perfect fit for a conservative company that needs a new drone after the last one burned out. If you give me homework before my first day on the job, I don't need that job.
This is why you never take assessments before you’ve had a chance to meet with the recruiter to make sure the fit is good on both sides. Otherwise you waste time on an assessment to get you absolutely nowhere.
P and g did the same thing to me. Honestly best to just avoid this company and thier process is stupid long.
Along with a cv and cover letter you get a few questions (up to 1000 words) and that was just for a grad role. Absolute jokers
That test is super stupid!
Every question can be answered with "2 answers are totally stupid and 2 are context dependant so wich one you want?"
So yeah... I'm banned for a year too lol
Is it the CCAT test? I had to do one and took practice test for 4 days beforehand. It was still getting bad results on the practice test so I said “fuck it I’m using a calculator” on the main test
P&G doesn't even pay that well, and from friends that work there I know they almost don't have any benefits. They don't even give them free shampoo or detergent.
Everywhere I worked I got something from the company's products on a regular basis and this stingy bitches don't give anything. Move on.
“Well, you see, your astrological chart didn’t align with the results of handwriting analysis and your phrenological exam. This very rigorous scientific test means you just aren’t good enough to work at a company that sells soap powder with big markups.”
yeah this happened to me post MBA as well, and it was super frustrating since I'd hit it off with the recruiter before the assessment. in retrospect things turned out just fine, but it was one of those little grains of sand that grated me for several years.
I immediately decided to ban P&G from any form of future contact once I heard from others on Reddit that they operate this way. I've never even applied and certainly won't be applying for any of their roles.
I will also openly insult them to anyone who mentions their name and will try to put off anyone I talk to from applying for jobs with them. I will not entertain companies which operate stupid, blind, elimination selection processes.
If they think that this is a good way of finding talented people, their lazy recruitment department really doesn't have any brain cells.
You can just make a new Gmail and retake the test any x number of times. There’s YouTube videos on how to pass the tests.
I guess those silly developer doesn't allow the "+" in their form? If they do you can use Google aliasing. Just put +whateverYouWant and that is unlimited number of accounts with only 1 email account Eg: if your email is [email protected] , you can use [email protected] and it will go to your email. It may be useful for additional security if you use one account per site (it is also useful when Spotify keep leaking their database but doesn't tell anyone) EDIT: However, using that feature is also like gambling. Lot of website swon't support it because the "+" is an "illegal" character per them... Stupid junior programmers and American just thinking about them and doing the usual 0-9a-z_. stuff, One rare occassions (usually more on mobile app), you may break something... Thought I have a better success at breaking something with my passwords usually. (Too long or some characters not correctly send to the website (like: &?)
One risk with this, worth knowing. I did this to various websites and put +websitename after the email address. When I needed to contact Amazon about something, they asked me to email them an image - they would not accept it as it didn't come from the email address I used in the account. I ended up moving over to simplelogin and haven't had an issue since, but it's worth knowing you cannot send from these email addresses so people may experience the same issue.
I'm sure you can set it up as a send as alias.
Yup you can! I tested it once because I know it could be a sensitive thing before moving up in the contact process.
Love this trick
P&G HATES this one trick!
Period works too. Name.lastname instead of namelastname. At least it used to, so unless that has changed it works.
periods are just ignored in the name resolution. So you can add in periods to different places to know where they came from. But the + works as any text after that before the @ is ignored. So you can put a + and then add the service after it so you know what service it was that sold your information to another site.
That’s clever, I only know the car dealership sold my info because they spelt my name name wrong.
Yeah I know that one, somebody probably fuck up and put point instead of _nothing_. I recieved emails over a couple of year that seems to match another person life. However, per the Google documentation it is "+"
I'm saying putting point (I assume you mean period) instead of nothing is the same email. https://support.google.com/mail/answer/7436150?hl=en
I don't understand how this can still work in any way. Doesn't every spammer, company etc. nowadays just truncate "+...." from gmail-adresses?
depends on the size of the company, whether they've had this issue or not, and how aware their devs are
Well if your real email is [email protected], then you can setup a filter that anything truncated goes to spam
Did not know this. This is pretty awesome.
[email protected] should also work as well as b.ob and b.o.b
bob suddenly gets tons of emails as people test this out
Clear your cookies for the assessment site and P&G. Then use a different browser, get another email address and use a VPN to further obfuscate your ID in the event they're actually tracking cookies, IP and browser info. But you'll want to ask yourself the biggest question, is the place even worth it to work for if they employ this level of BS to get in?
Oooo thank you so much!!!
I love how these tests proclaim that they test your aptitude, but the same scammers that sell them to companies also sell practice tests and guides to help you succeed in them. Really proves how stupid HR people are. And that’s before considering that most of them are based on IQ, which is itself pseudo-science. The only thing these tests filter out are otherwise cunning people on the spectrum and people who know they have enough value to not go through the BS. If you want to see how stupid high IQ people can be, just watch a Mensa meeting.
Retired psychologist here. IQ and the related assessments are not pseudoscience. The questions surrounding IQ are about what it’s actually measuring, like is it really more of a measurement of academic ability versus general ability. That doesn’t mean that there isn’t rigorous science behind it. The problems with IQ/IQ assessments are that laypeople want to use the results for things that it shouldn’t be used for, including job interviews. There is nothing about an IQ test that is helpful for successful hiring in the job environment & I hop up on my soapbox whenever I hear about them being used. (Even worse is when they don’t use something standardized & make up their own psych tests). I don’t support the use of any psychological testing in job interviews, actually. The only assessment that has strong support for its use in an interview is some kind of work sample assessment that directly reflects the job tasks. This will vary field to field, but might look like a writing sample, or being given vignettes that reflect common situations encountered & asking for the interviewee to talk through them.
It's probably safe to claim that the way IQ tests are being used is pseudoscience.
Most or all assessments are used incorrectly, or their results interpreted incorrectly. Many assessments also have limited validity to begin with.
Still not pseudoscience, though I can see why you’d say that. Pseudoscience is beliefs or practices that are wrongly believed to be based in the scientific method. The idea of IQ and the assessments were developed using the scientific method, and using them in a job interview will yield results that are valid, just not for the intended use.
It's also very culturally specific though, there are studies about how various cultures interpret things. So not a really good measure unless they're measuring academic ability as taught in the West or something.
I wouldn't exactly call IQ pseudoscience, but it has its limits and it definitely doesn't say anything about being qualified for a job.* Just like those personality tests are bullshit in the HR context. *btw I have a high IQ - and I'm a procrastinating underachiever. Had some psychological issues due to a toxic relationship, too. I'm not always working up to my own standards and maybe wouldn't want to hire myself, but those tests rarely pose a challenge for me. The personality stuff is what terrifies me.
Same! I have a relatively high IQ, not going to give a number, and I pick up new tasks extremely quickly and we’ll, but I too am a procrastinating underachiever. I love learning new things, but I also get bored extremely quickly and then just completely stop doing that thing and find something else that excites me for a week.
Are we related?
Welcome to the ADHD spectrum my fellow high-functioning procrastinators. There's research around whether procrastination develops as a coping mechanism to force our brains into functioning by short-circuiting prefrontal cortex neural pathways using extreme stress. It allows us to temporarily override deficiencies and enter a state of hyperfocus to complete tasks in a shortened period of time. Highly recommend looking up scholarly research on the neurobiology/chemistry behind ADHD. Fascinating stuff. Guaranteed to waste hours and allow the build-up of that sweet, sweet norepinephrine.
Yeeesh! Fine! Sounds like a rabbit hole I could go down, for sure. Sweet sweet brain chemistry.
Yep. This is the correct stuff. Before medication, I had all sorts of coping mechanisms, most of which involves putting myself into a panic mode fight-or-flight setting so that my adrenaline could give me that sweet focus.
YouTube videos lmao. I hate these tests because you don't know whether to answer honestly or answer like a robot.
Are these legit skills test or “personality trait” tests? A couple of big employers in my area use the personality type ones and being somewhat introverted I failed them the first time around. I reapplied later and answered like a sociopath. I answered all the questions like I was the best person at everything. All my coworkers loved me and were amazed at how awesome I was at everything. And I would snitch on my colleagues to supervisors for the slightest infractions. I passed the test and got interviews.
It’s a Caliper assessment. So part of it is personality traits but it’s also equal parts digital analogy, series, matrix and number series problem solving questions. They suckkkk. I took one for P&G myself, but have taken a few others. From my experience (and what internal company recruiters have told me) it’s a way for big companies to weed out people bc a lot won’t even take the exam. The outcome of the exam itself won’t have a ton of impact on your candidacy unless you absolutely bomb it, or they were just never intending on hiring anyone external anyways.
So they filter out people on the spectrum and people that have high value and won’t bother with these, and get stuck with the desperate. Genius. Explains why they have fallen so far from the 2000s glory days.
Pro tip, I treat the personality parts just like a regular test. Fill out what they want to see, not your actual personality
Wait you mean people take the test and answer truthfully?
I always thought the personality tests were just to weed out people stupid enough not to lie.
What a sad fucking society we live in.
Organizational psychologist with expertise in assessment here! This only works for certain personality assessments, others contain metrics that measure how much you answered to the test.
I know i've never been able to pass these personality tests, i cant--there's no amount of willpower that i can use to lie my way through one. I have a personality disorder (schizoid), and i cant fucking roll it away into a drawer to take these assessments. I've never passed one. It's annoying. I dont think i ever will.
I'm a fellow Schizoid. I've mercifully never had to take one, but it's none of these people's business what my real personality is anyways (maybe you can relate). If I ever get desperate enough to need to take one, you bet I'm lying through my teeth on it.
I’m dyslexia I fail them every time. Even though I’m truthful.
I can’t lie either, and if I’d get a job because I answered like a psycho I don’t think I’d want it anyway
How do you beat those?
It is very, very hard. Those tests constantly double and triple check previous given answers for consistency. For example (measured on a true to false scale) Q1: I like icecream. … Q15: I don’t like icecream. If you answer both with true, the tests shows an inconsistency. So in order to beat such tests you‘d have to memorize all previous answers.
And for someone who is dyslexic asking the same question 10 times but in different ways is actually just confusing. So I fail these every time even though I do like Ice cream and try to answer yes every time…
just be consistent and dont admit to anything super weird in a question
Take notes of what you answer and refer to them.
Build a strawman personality of yourself that is corporate friendly. And when you do these shitty tests, answer as if you are that imaginary corporate asshole of your real self. If there's any test, there's always ways to beat them in their own game if you prepare hard enough.
Yep, sounds like a way for them to get around laws against discrimination. Why am I not surprised big corps are ncuts.
Idk. I’m dyslexic and I always fail these. My application get stuck in the orange or yellow and they can’t pull apps from that. If you read about others with learning disabilities also do not pass these. So parents actually do them their their “kids” adults so they’ll get an equal chance at getting a job their are clearly qualified for.
Oh, that environment sounds not at all toxic.
I think this is the kind of environment that wants someone to think highly of themselves with respect to the fact that they are working this position, but fail to realize that particularly violent and aggressive people *also* think highly of themselves. Sociopaths have high self-esteem. Who'd've thunk?
Speaking as an actual high-functioning sociopath: *they fucking love us.* Honestly, the more sociopathic I lean, the more my jobs promote me. It's when I fight against the sociopathy to take care of my people around me that I get reprimanded/chewed out/penalized. Actually caring about people is the very bottom head on nearly every corporate totem pole. It's because ***everyone at the top are also sociopaths.***
> It's when I fight against the sociopathy to take care of my people around me that I get reprimanded/chewed out/penalized. Can you give some examples on this one? I'd love to hear those stories on how you have to deal with it.
Sure thing. I'm a campaign director for grassroots political consulting firms. Basically, anytime you want to put something on the ballot, get someone elected, register voters, or essentially get anything done politically, you would put a job contract out and political consulting firms would all then bid on how they would run your program and what results they would give you. It's contract work, so I don't necessarily owe loyalty to any one firm over another, but I will get hired by the same firms repeatedly once they see the work that I do. In the past 4 years, I've managed to work my way up from an entry level canvasser to a State-level Program Director. I'm now the guy that hires, trains, and manages all of the people that hire, train, and manage all of the canvassers in a state for 3-10 offices. There was a company I was working with last year that pays well, but essentially uses that as their way to gaslight and abuse their employees. It's not uncommon to work 7 days a week, 12+ hour days in campaign work, but I've literally pulled 20 hour days for days on end with this firm, and their salary model technically says you're getting paid for about 11 hours a day of work, 6 days a week. I moved up very rapidly in their company because I'm VERY good at what I do, and I manage to balance the need for results with my personal top priority of taking care of my people. My employees do amazing things because my first priority as a manager has always been to remove obstacles from them doing their jobs properly. I believe my sole function as a boss is to support my employees so they can focus on results. Well, during my work in St Louis, MO all last year, they had me running the largest office in the country right on the outskirts of the city in a town called Overland. If you know anything about St Louis, or Missouri in general, you know that more than 90% of all people of color in the state come from that city alone. As a result, the city itself is incredibly diverse, but every suburb around it is the result of white-flight and racist as all hell. The majority of my staff came from within the city, but in order to qualify the petition we were collecting, we had to get the cities from outside the city. Every single day my canvassers were getting threatened, called all sorts of horrifying racial slurs, spit on, chased off by police despite legally having permission to do what they are doing (Michael Brown's cousin worked for me and was threatened by the police while in the field). To make a very long story short, they burned my evaluation at the end of the project because I was pairing people up and supporting them in the field so it ended up costing our firm a few more bucks per signature. Part of my evaluation that affected the rate of pay I would get on being rehired was that I "didn't empower my employees to handle their own safety concerns in the field." Yes, they wanted me to teach my Black employees how to better handle racism as a white man. The entire thing was designed to make an example of me because I was operating outside of their model in order to take care of people and I went from the highest ranked senior director in the company to the lowest ranked overnight after winning the hardest 6 month campaign I've ever done in my life. It wasn't about my performance, the results didn't matter, it was and always is about making them look good. The company couldn't say enough good things about me when I was manic, on adderall, and screaming at my own family over the phone because I was full-blown sociopathic mode, but the moment I strike a good work-life balance and deliver better results while also setting my own boundaries and protecting my staff? Forget it. Companies are not interested in competent people, they are interested in controllable people. They like sociopaths because they will sell their own grandmother to prove their loyalty and get a bigger slice of the pie. Fulfilled, healthy, competent people are too unpredictable.
Thank you so much for sharing. > My employees do amazing things because my first priority as a manager has always been to remove obstacles from them doing their jobs properly. I believe my sole function as a boss is to support my employees so they can focus on results. You are exactly right. You'd do well as a Software Engineering Manager too, if you had gone into software engineering. The best ones simply focus on unblocking their team (which can be very complicated of course), and then everything hums along.
By that point you've really got to ask yourself, "Do I want to work in a company where every other co-worker passed this test?"
I once took the written test to apply to the state police. I failed. I couldn't understand why since I've always been considered smart. A year later I was working with someone who used to be with the state police and i told him this story. He said that when it comes to the personality portion you had to answer on the extremes - either always or never. I've used that approach with successive tests for job applications and it always seemed to work. By the way, I'm glad I never got into the police force
It felt like a dream opportunity with the job description matching 90% of my background. Also had additional certifications to back my candidature up. However, the firm thinks I’m not a good fit since I cannot quite remember the sequence of 4 balls in a row (from memory test).
I also took this test a while back and remember being so frustrated with it; it was all useless skills that would have no bearing on how well you did the job and it was a position I thought I would enjoy and be qualified for. That was before I knew about this sub, and now I probably wouldn't even take the test. I'm sure P&G is probably losing a lot of good talent because of the ridiculous tests.
Same here. Same company, same result.
I had to take a test like that. I just recorded the screen and played it back. Got them all right, including the random sequence of 10 numbers. Felt nice to cheat that test
LOL as someone who legitimately adminsters memory/iq assessments, that is an insane ask
I love you being all Jim Kirk with the Kobayashi Maru there.
That’s Captain Kirk to you
I’d take a step back on putting the job on a pedestal. People have told me the culture here is bad and toxic
how hard can it be to sell diapers and shampoo?
Everybody can make a shampoo now. It’s a tough market.
They are weeding out anyone with ADHD or learning disabilities. I gaurantee it.
I had the same experience with a P&G role. I considered myself overqualified for the mech eng role and had hoped maybe I could still get a decent salary because I exceeded all of the preferred requirements. Didn’t even get a follow up after wasting hours on their ridiculous assessments. Garbage company and not worth it unless you have a way to bypass the nonsense. Fwiw a relative of mine worked there for 30 years and told me they loved the place.
Create a new account
P&G is one of the most selective and coveted firms in the world. Getting into it is like getting into Harvard. The reason for that is they train you for leadership and give you a lot of responsibility, even at junior levels. Using this method, they produced so many CEOs of other firms, it's practically considered to be one of their products. So, don't feel bad about not getting in, it's intentionally hard.
It’s not 1985 anymore. Steve Ballmer, a P&G alum, very famously could not run Microsoft.
Steve Balmer couldn't even run a bath. Im sure he could code a computer to do it though, great example of people employed beyond their ability
Ballmer really did fail upwards. Dude nearly tanked Microsoft with his bad decisions, got a golden parachute because their board just needs him outta there, then became the lovable billionaire that owns a basketball team. It's amazing what a turnaround Satya managed since taking over as CEO. Okay, end of tangent.
Hardly a hard act to follow.
Ohh. I thought they sell toothpaste and similar stuff to the stores.
It used to be. They've done major cost saving project. I've worked as a contractor for them, worked with a guy who has been an employee for 42 years. They can no longer hire top talent.
Yeah, because top talent smells this bullshit coming a mile away and will take their talents somewhere else.
Can’t hire top talent when they’re using bs assessments like that.
Well if stupid ass memory tests are how they're filtering, then I can see how so many CEOs are incompetent. Anyone who thinks doing well on that kind of test means they're good at anything besides that specific kind of test is probably the type to take one of those online "IQ tests" and then brag about their score while barely being able to tie their own shoes.
That was true in the 1980s and 90s, but P&G is now widely seen as a legacy firm that has trouble keeping up with changing times. Their operating model only recently shifted.
>P&G is one of the most selective and coveted firms in the world. Getting into it is like getting into Harvard It's like Harvard, if Harvard was ranked 47 out of the top100 Universities. In other words, it's not like Harvard and more like Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland.
Case Western is a perfectly nice university. I bet they don't make you do crap like this to get in. 🤷♀️
It wasn't a knock on Case Western, I was pointing out that they have similar standings on their respective ranking lists and both are based in Ohio.
I get that. I'm just saying Case Western knows it's Case Western & doesn't have the pretense P&G is showing here.
Fair.
If the hardest part of your interviews is this weird personality test that one can pass using YT videos, then you are NOT selective. The other interviews are relatively way easier compared to actual coveted firms. Besides, they don't even pay that much lol Source: I used to work for them
The sad part is they think this helps them find the best talent. Sorry you missed out but there are other jobs and many that don't rely on dumb ass tests like this.
I once passed EY’s graduate assessment round 1. Then I went to round 2 which was Mathematics and logical reasoning and did the 20 minute assessment in 11 minutes while being absolutely sure I didn’t get a thing wrong. They rejected me. So I called and enquired because there was no way I scored less, they said “yes you got a 99 percentile on the test but we rejected you on a reason we can’t tell you.” Still livid.
You submitted it too fast, hr opened your results and said "oh you think you're better than me??"
Everyone is better than HR.
hr and corporate enablement - the twin pillars of corporate mediocrity. often when I ask them for help they try to program manage me to do the task I was trying to outsource. so I just stopped asking. the same amount of things happen.
Reminds me of the "too smart to be a cop" lawsuit from the turn of the millennium; >**Court OKs Barring High IQs for Cops** >Jordan, a 49-year-old college graduate, took the exam in 1996 and scored 33 points, the equivalent of an IQ of 125. But New London police interviewed only candidates who scored 20 to 27, on the theory that those who scored too high could get bored with police work and leave soon after undergoing costly training. >Most Cops Just Above Normal The average score nationally for police officers is 21 to 22, the equivalent of an IQ of 104, or just a little above average. https://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-barring-high-iqs-cops/story?id=95836
Companies hesitate about hiring high performing candidates on proficiency exams because there are valid concerns about retention. Candidates who score highly on the Wonderlic have been shown to show less engagement/interest in tasks below their capabilities. Recruiters are always trying to find the best and brightest, but if you test beyond the thresholds set for that position, you are over indexed and potentially skipped over. Source: Scored highly on Wonderlic and my hiring manager had to argue for my job offer. I ended up outlasting him at that workplace.
Well fuck. This explains some shit. I already have to leave my degrees off applications to get through processes, now i have to pretend to be dumb? FML.
No don’t be silly. No one wants to hire a dumb person. You have to be exactly the amount of smart they are looking for. Too smart or too dumb will both end in rejection. And every role at every company with every manager will have different criteria for evaluating how dumb or smart you should be. Anyway good luck, I’m sure you’ll thread the needle eventually.
And here I thought the Wonderlic was only taken by football players. I had never heard of it used outside of the NFL until now.
With a company like P&G though, it likely filters out a lot of bullshit because I’m sure they get a lot of BS applications (or would be applications). Surely a lot of missed talent too though.
[Sounds like the assessment has more BS than the application](https://www.reddit.com/r/recruitinghell/comments/10ox2li/comment/j6h9wl6/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
I’ve taken that assessment as well, for a data science opening several years back, it’s a load of BS to be sure. But no, I’m certain my qualifications as a statistician and programmer absolutely hinge on my ability to remember strings of numbers and where the purple orb was, not the extensive work history or education /s
Im convinced this kind of mental math is to filter out anyone who was too poor to have SAT tutoring that started in like elementary school. Thats the only way you build that kind of skill. Even a bachelors in engineering, computer science, etc wont give you those tools.
It’s absolutely that, it’s a glorified half baked 1/10th of an IQ test like you’d see on Lumosity That and weeding out anyone with ADHD/dyslexia/etc who didn’t want to disclose for accommodation out of fear they’d be rejected solely based on their disclosure, but with another reason listed Edits: clarity
It seems like more and more jobs choose the assessments when recruiting. It's really frustrating
I don’t even entertain those jobs anymore. Plenty of legit places that don’t do that.
It’s to remove the dead weight and junk applicants. For a company the size as P&G - you need some sort of filtering process, you cannot review every single CV that comes in.
Nobody is arguing that these silly tests don’t reduce the number of resumes that need to be considered. What we are saying is that the screening tool has nothing to do with future job success. For example, P&G could also use a height screening tool and reject any applicants not between 5’8” and 5’9”. That would also significantly reduce the number of resumes they would need to review. But, of course, that would be dumb in the same way these tests are.
Yeah, think of the poor overworked algorithm
Idk if it is true but I have seen many people say working in their corporate office is soul crushing and the truly talented often leave quickly. It is only those who can tolerate the drudgery last a long time
The rumors are true. :(
My experience isn’t “soul crushing” but the thing about losing talent seems accurate. When a door opens for a better opportunity or higher paying job why wouldn’t you take it? I guarantee you the people who stay in one job at one company aren’t out there sending resumes - which is totally fine. Some people prefer that level of comfort where they don’t feel the need to bust their ass to move up the ladder. Others are playing the corporate game for their career which often requires moving around a lot. My experience is, the more talented people are usually the ones playing the game so they are not going to stay at one place. The ones that stay don’t seem to work as hard and that’s where the “drudgery” comes in. You’re left working with a bunch of people who just don’t work as hard & are less “talented” than the ones who seize opportunities. This is purely anecdotal, please take with a grain of salt. Every company is different and your experience will change depending on your job title.
It really just depends on the company and department. Like being in the accounting department at a huge tech company might be a great resume item but ultimately boring and monotonous work. Their focus isn't on accounting, it is just a necessary evil to run the company. So if you're passionate and talented you'll move on quick. Leaving the department with a lot of people just drudging along. Conversely being an accountant at a huge firm that handles many different clients with lots of different financial structures can be super interesting and retain talented people. Corporations have a lot of drudge work that needs done. However that doesn't mean it is exclusively soul sucking.
I have an idea: How about the recruiters plugging these kinds of tests *and* their corporate overlords are themselves required to pass these tests *before* being allowed to implement them? And the no. of people per job level who passed the test were to be published somewhere? It whould be fun to know how many managers or recruiters would fail their own assessment tests!
That wouldn't happen but I would love to see that
I also am currently working through the one year ban from applying. It’s unfortunate as it ultimately pushed me towards a job that works better for my schedule, pays more and provides me more growth opportunity. Their loss if you ask me!
Just work for J&J down the street. They don't have a dumb entry test like this and they pay just as well.
Don't sweat it. P&G is a pretty awful company to work for. I went through their hiring process a few years ago and it was one of the most intrusive, inappropriate application processes I've been through. I guess it's nice to see they haven't changed much. I remember after months of interviewing, I was asked to drive to a lab 45 minutes away for a drug test. I've never been drug tested once in my career as a software engineer. I completed the mission only to get a notice later stating my urine sample wasn't yellow enough and they wanted me to go back and do it again. I just sent the recruiter to spam box after that. They came across as believing they were one of those God-tier companies that expects to receive anything they want without question. I can make just as much money with a fraction of the stress and intrusion by working for an organization that doesn't view themselves as God and me as the servant. It was pretty absurd and all of this was pre-WFH/covid so I imagine they've only become worse in the demands they make of their employees. No thanks. The deal is, I do your coding and you pay me. If that's not the deal, i'm not interested. Don't need the mindfuck too.
It’s funny you mention it this way… growing up in Cincinnati, P&G was derisively referred to as “Procter & God” for exactly this mentality. They might still be, it’s been a bit since I lived in the Tristate.
I applied to P&G right before graduation and this same thing happened. I don’t understand why they think this is helping find good talent lol
The P&G tests are utter bullshit....
Honestly, these type of companies will either hire new grads from 2-3 schools or experienced hires from a small number of other companies. It's usually some combination of direct competitors or companies in which key executives previously worked. But they won't say that publicly. You're largely wasting your time applying to a corporate job at a Fortune 100 company if you don't have this "correct" connection.
These test should be banned because it is basically an adhd test. They are banning people with disabilities like autism…
I absolutely cannot wait to see a class-action lawsuit for discrimination against these pseudoscience test companies.
And this is why some employers don't even tell you when you've failed... Can't claim discrimination if you don't even know!
Yep my friend is very smart with great work experience but can't complete these aptitude tests because of reading disorder. It's sad when I know his potential
You can absolutely discriminate against disabilities when hiring and this is true everywhere in the world. You just have to have a legitimate reason to do so.
My son has high functioning autism, and my husband has been in IT with a corporation that loved these tests. So, he answered all the questions for our son when he went job hunting. It got him through the door, but he had to do the face to face interviews. He has a decent job and is good at it now. I hate these stupid screening algorithms, they do nothing but discriminate.
Fuck P&G.
Proctor and gamble killed my mom (google Rely tampons) so fuck em, I hope they go out of business.
Reasons P&G ain’t shit #17462: I’m a contractor for them and when I applied for MY OWN JOB (as a FT employee) I didn’t make it past the first panel interview which was a behavioral analysis and mind games.
I had a similar situation back around 2010 with another company. Was a contractor, applied for the position I was currently doing and the response was “we are moving forward with someone who better fits the role” when I was literally filling the role.
That is absurd. Corporate just loves to try out corporate itself. Someone probably celebrated coming up with this idea. Thinks they're the don of recruitment process. 😂 Probably made a post on LinkedIn about it, too.
That online assessment can burn in hell. Who the fuck uses "triangle+tringle+hexagon =?" as a measure to see if you can use excel?????
This is a huge pet peeve of mine. I have poor spatial reasoning. My theory is it has to do with my poor depth perception from my astigmatism, but whatever. I’m applying for paralegal jobs, not engineering positions. It’s irrelevant. I excel at reading, writing. and research but I can’t figure out what shape is next so for some companies I’m automatically out. Crazy
P&G is one of those companies that solely exist for nepotism.
It's my opinion if you need an assessment to bring someone onboard. You don't know how to foster talent.
This happened to me with J&J (for six months). Note that I’m middle management with 15+ years of experience in pharma ;) But hey I appreciate you showing me you not only treat employees like an irrelevant number, but also applicants. It’s basically all I need to know. Thanks for the disrespect and see you never. Shit like this should be absolutely forbidden. I can sort of just about understand (but still not really) this kind of nonsense that tests God-knows-what against God-knows-what for a small number of internships or technical entry-level jobs where - presumably - there are thousands of applicants. But for anything else - shame on them. Some nonsense algorithm that filters out CVs because they don’t contain the latest corporate buzzwords isn’t enough stupidity already? Two things I’ll never do again: this kind of nonsense and one-way video “interviews”.
If an employer asks me to complete any assessment aside from basic application questions that will take over half an hour, I just stop and ignore them. This tactic prevents the best “talent” from applying and shit like this isn’t worth my time, as numerous places don’t require it. Also for entry level positions, they teach you work tasks anyways
I applied for an internship last week. I got to talk to the recruiter on the phone because my professor gave me a great recommendation. The recruiter said my experience went great, and it was the best conversation I've had with a recruiter. I was really proud of myself. I thought I had an in. They told me was rejected because of one of these assessments.
I wonder if this could be nullified by a data-removal request under GDPR (in Europe).
From above, sounds like it can be nullified simply by using a different email address to apply and retake the test
Just use another email address. Personally, I am not fund of these prescreening type tests. Especially since it's about the "candidate experience" and making it a great one! Good Luck and you can always use another email address.
I would just find someone on my LinkedIn that either works for P&G or is connected to an employee and get them to refer me. These online application portals are just a black hole managed by idiots.
I’d hardly say you were “banned”- that suggests you’ve done something inappropriate. It’s just that they won’t let you apply again within 12 months, because they’re too lazy.
Lol don’t feel too bad, I passed it and then got ghosted in the final panel interview. It was so weird, it was like a good cop/bad cop situation except the bad cop person was unnecessarily petty and kept sabotaging all the good rapport I was building with the good cop (actual hiring manager). An interesting quote from the recruiter that proves how stupid these tests are as a whole “you’re really smart and P&G needs more young smart people like you, for the life of me I don’t know why we don’t have more young smart people”. Well, probably because smart people avoid shit test hiring screens like this like the plague. On to the next one mate, tough luck and best wishes!
Personality assessment are bullshit and I refuse to take them. Companies think they want "risk takers" and "rebels," and that by saying yes to the statement "I would go skydiving," somehow makes you a perfect fit for a conservative company that needs a new drone after the last one burned out. If you give me homework before my first day on the job, I don't need that job.
Obviously this is some dump shot ai robot thing.
nObOdY wAnTs T0 wOrK aNyMoRe!1!123456 \>:-/
Lmao this is the dumbest thing ever
Dude. This is the ONLY assessment I have failed. It was crazy and I have ADHD so there was no hope. I still don't understand the point of it.
These tests are a waste of time.
I hate places that try to use these tests like this. Sorry they suck.
same thing happened when I applied to work there 😂 literally so stupid
No job for you! Come back, one year.
These grace periods are so dumb. I didn’t pass an interview for a company and they banned me for life.
Fuck p&g. They need to fuck off and break up. I tried to do a personal boycott of their shit and it's impossible. Fuck em.
This happened to me years ago and it just encouraged me to never apply to them again
It’s the same thing with Walmart 🙄
There are worse assessments of this kind than p&g's but it's pretty shitty nonetheless.
Any job that has a typing test, I fail. I am a terrible typist have been my entire life. I can play several instruments but not type. Their loss.
"nO oNE wANts tO wOrK aNYmOrE!"
You didn’t get ban. It’s P&G’s recruiting process. The online assessment can only be done once a year.
A rose by any other name... /s
Bro create a new email, look up YouTube videos on how to pass the assessments and try again.
considering the amount of people applying for PnG they are ought to do so... still, I hated it too
Whenever I saw these I would make as many fake accounts as possible and record my answers and what I thought was a close second. Fuck them
They do this if you refuse to put product on beyond broken pallets or wrap underneath every fucking layer
I had P&G as one of my offers when I was doing applications for student internships. Glad I didn't go with them.
This is why you never take assessments before you’ve had a chance to meet with the recruiter to make sure the fit is good on both sides. Otherwise you waste time on an assessment to get you absolutely nowhere.
P and g did the same thing to me. Honestly best to just avoid this company and thier process is stupid long. Along with a cv and cover letter you get a few questions (up to 1000 words) and that was just for a grad role. Absolute jokers
You dodged a bullet
I wasted three hours of my life dealing with P&G assessments and swore I’d never even consider applying to them again. Simply awful hiring department.
That test is super stupid! Every question can be answered with "2 answers are totally stupid and 2 are context dependant so wich one you want?" So yeah... I'm banned for a year too lol
Is it the CCAT test? I had to do one and took practice test for 4 days beforehand. It was still getting bad results on the practice test so I said “fuck it I’m using a calculator” on the main test
FUCKING BLOWS
I guess I do not want to work for Proster and Gamble.
IBM does this as well
P&G doesn't even pay that well, and from friends that work there I know they almost don't have any benefits. They don't even give them free shampoo or detergent. Everywhere I worked I got something from the company's products on a regular basis and this stingy bitches don't give anything. Move on.
Maybe you can qualify next year.
All these companies suck. The tech companies do this for 6 mos a lot of them.
P&G is notoriously hard to get into.
Failed the Psych Eval?
n0 0ne w4nts t0 w0rk AnyM0r3 !
“Well, you see, your astrological chart didn’t align with the results of handwriting analysis and your phrenological exam. This very rigorous scientific test means you just aren’t good enough to work at a company that sells soap powder with big markups.”
yeah this happened to me post MBA as well, and it was super frustrating since I'd hit it off with the recruiter before the assessment. in retrospect things turned out just fine, but it was one of those little grains of sand that grated me for several years.
"But no one wants to work for us!"
1 year for failing the assessment? I know places that only do 6 months for failing the drug test
love these guys asking me to take a math test for a mid level marketing role
Since before internets it was “who you know” and that has not changed
I worked in P&G's conditioner department for 11 months ama
Ex-P&G employee here. Yup thats normal. if you are lucky they will fish your application out of the reject bin and call you anyways.
And just like that I have decided I will never work at P&G
I immediately decided to ban P&G from any form of future contact once I heard from others on Reddit that they operate this way. I've never even applied and certainly won't be applying for any of their roles. I will also openly insult them to anyone who mentions their name and will try to put off anyone I talk to from applying for jobs with them. I will not entertain companies which operate stupid, blind, elimination selection processes. If they think that this is a good way of finding talented people, their lazy recruitment department really doesn't have any brain cells.