A Short Parable
I've never actually heard of this study being performed, but my guess is that if it ever gets done the results will be what I'm expecting.
Our test subjects are interviewers. We ask them to interview two people. In each case, the interview should be short, not more than 5 minutes.
Now our 'candidate' walks in, wearing unobtrusive formal wear. He answers the techie questions of the interviewer. When he is asked the salary he is expecting, he answers something like "15 thousand dollars per month." Our interviewer has been asked not to haggle, so the interview ends here.
The next day, the SAME GUY again walks to be interviewed, wearing the SAME SHIRT, and wearing makeup, so the interviewer doesn't know it is him. Once again the interview goes on for 5 minutes. At the end, when asked about his expected pay, the candidate replies, "3 thousand dollars", or something similar.
Now here's the funny bit. A few days later, we ask our 'interviewer' just one question about the two candidates : "Which of your two candidates wore a better-quality SHIRT?"
And here's my guess as to what will happen. 90% of the interviewers are going to say, "The first one, the one who asked for 15 thousand dollars."
-----
What am I trying to say? I'm saying that if even if you are as good as person X, and are doing work of the same kind, you will be automatically considered 'inferior' if you work for less money than X. And if everyone knows that the primary reason you got the job was because you are doing it for much, much less than person X, it is taken for granted that you're a 2nd class employee.
Disclaimer : As is usual with parables and the morals to be derived from them, both are exaggerated versions of real life.
Our test subjects are interviewers. We ask them to interview two people. In each case, the interview should be short, not more than 5 minutes.
Now our 'candidate' walks in, wearing unobtrusive formal wear. He answers the techie questions of the interviewer. When he is asked the salary he is expecting, he answers something like "15 thousand dollars per month." Our interviewer has been asked not to haggle, so the interview ends here.
The next day, the SAME GUY again walks to be interviewed, wearing the SAME SHIRT, and wearing makeup, so the interviewer doesn't know it is him. Once again the interview goes on for 5 minutes. At the end, when asked about his expected pay, the candidate replies, "3 thousand dollars", or something similar.
Now here's the funny bit. A few days later, we ask our 'interviewer' just one question about the two candidates : "Which of your two candidates wore a better-quality SHIRT?"
And here's my guess as to what will happen. 90% of the interviewers are going to say, "The first one, the one who asked for 15 thousand dollars."
-----
What am I trying to say? I'm saying that if even if you are as good as person X, and are doing work of the same kind, you will be automatically considered 'inferior' if you work for less money than X. And if everyone knows that the primary reason you got the job was because you are doing it for much, much less than person X, it is taken for granted that you're a 2nd class employee.
Disclaimer : As is usual with parables and the morals to be derived from them, both are exaggerated versions of real life.
posted by Sudarshan | 5:24 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home