I’m not going to try to convince you in particular one way or another. I’ve just been reflecting about what you’ve said in general, because I think it’s insightful and it’s gotten me thinking.
While I think your analogy is more or less accurate, I think any reasonable economist/person could interpret whether hiring standardization is good or bad.
For instance, it’s very easy to interpret a standardization of practices as making the labor market more efficient as most people will know exactly what to expect, more or less, in the process. So they can study or prepare for a job and apply to a multitude of places. Someone could probably write a paper on how standardization of hiring processes has ultimately led to more people hired more, from a more diverse number of places and cultures, than it ever had in the past.
And of course another person could find issues in this for sure.
I end up feeling there are trade-offs with both and certainly processes can be improved. But I think that’s a more micro problem. Like most places don’t in actuality do the exact same hiring process so you can’t really paint with too broad a brush. At least in tech.
But standardization is actually a pretty amazing phenomenon and it can’t be understated how much it equalizes many areas of economies.
On the other hand, I’ll also point out it can disenfranchise those who wouldn’t do well in that standardized process. I’ve felt this in my own life with grad school entry processes. Unless you are the very very best on paper, the top schools ignore you. That’s been utterly dehumanizing and makes me very unhappy. So I really do feel it.
But again, pros and cons. Anyway, thanks for posting this.
By the way, only tangentially related, but my favorite book on standardization is Nature’s Metropolis by William Cronon. It’s inspired a lot of my interest in the intersection of economics, tech, and nature and how we impose standards upon the world.
While I think your analogy is more or less accurate, I think any reasonable economist/person could interpret whether hiring standardization is good or bad.
For instance, it’s very easy to interpret a standardization of practices as making the labor market more efficient as most people will know exactly what to expect, more or less, in the process. So they can study or prepare for a job and apply to a multitude of places. Someone could probably write a paper on how standardization of hiring processes has ultimately led to more people hired more, from a more diverse number of places and cultures, than it ever had in the past.
And of course another person could find issues in this for sure.
I end up feeling there are trade-offs with both and certainly processes can be improved. But I think that’s a more micro problem. Like most places don’t in actuality do the exact same hiring process so you can’t really paint with too broad a brush. At least in tech.
But standardization is actually a pretty amazing phenomenon and it can’t be understated how much it equalizes many areas of economies.
On the other hand, I’ll also point out it can disenfranchise those who wouldn’t do well in that standardized process. I’ve felt this in my own life with grad school entry processes. Unless you are the very very best on paper, the top schools ignore you. That’s been utterly dehumanizing and makes me very unhappy. So I really do feel it.
But again, pros and cons. Anyway, thanks for posting this.