Thanks Puja! This is such an interesting topic. Not too long ago, I was asked to take a 30-40 minute “cognitive assessment” after submitting a job application to a high-growth social media company. Similar to your experience at BCG, I was not sure what the team sought to understand from my performance, and felt uneasy having my “potential” assessed through this avenue alone. Perhaps if I had the chance to speak with someone from HR before the assessment to (1) understand their goals; and (2) share a bit more about myself, I would have been more willing to participate. Maybe I should get with the times (probably), but I also think it’s important that companies don’t lose sight of the personal touch in hiring.
So interesting! Totally agree with the risks you’ve stated — I also wonder if this could lead to inequity between employees? If you threaten to leave, or have more mobility to do so given your life circumstances, does that mean you’ll be provided with more perks and incentives to stay? I’m sure there are many employees who are fantastic performers but are unable to leave their job for whatever reason — will they end up getting less than their peers because of this?
So interesting! Completely agree that Ovia’s employer value-proposition is questionable. I’d be curious to understand how exactly the aggregate data is influencing HR policies and maternity leave planning. Could this be done by just interviewing people? I could also see female employees feeling pressure or a responsibility to participate in this program to influence and improve maternity policies (which we know are generally bad). This feels like a sticky trade-off — no one should feel obligated to provide intimate data in order to be sufficiently cared for by their employer.