An interesting look at the puzzles, weird questions and games that human resources departments have come up with to choose the best applicants for top positions. The author's focus is primarily on the United States, but many of the job selection processes he describes are used worldwide.

The name of the book comes from a question that goes: Would you rather fight one horse-sized duck or a hundred duck-sized horses? This is one of those teasers that doesn't have a "correct" answer per se, but helps the interviewer understand your thinking. You can interpret the question as asking if you want to solve one big problem or many small ones. Another answer is that a duck's legs might fail to carry all that extra weight and so it will just collapse to the ground - thus presenting little danger.

I most enjoyed the section on the origins of IQ testing and screening tests. Thomas Edison thought it was important that his employees notice things, so in 1921, he came up with 48 "extremely simple" questions to determine if someone got a job at his company: What countries border France? What is the speed of sound? Name three potent poisons. Who wrote Les Misérables?

Edison was so respected that his idea of ​​selecting candidates in this way gained currency, although, as Poundstone points out, the value of such an approach is questionable. What evidence is there that successful completion of such a quiz predicts future job performance?

During World War II, the practice fed into the search for personnel at the British code-breaking center Bletchley Park. The universities of Oxford and Cambridge, from which many applicants were recruited, were already known for their brain-bending questions such as: why don't animals have wheels? Bletchley Park was also looking for people interested in solving cryptic crosswords. Later, the computer industry in the 1950s saw firms using logic puzzles to hire programmers.

Poundstone argues that “puzzle-style questions have inherited the usual shortcomings of interviews. Estimates based on them may reflect confirmation bias.” (56) That is, interviewers form a favorable opinion and then look for evidence to support that opinion. Of course, in some areas, some groups in society rarely get to the interview stage at all.

Take professional musicians, almost all of whom until recently were men (the Berlin Philharmonic didn't hire women until 1982). Some of the reasons for not hiring women sound ridiculous—for example, that playing the French horn distorts a pretty face. One interesting solution was "blind listening" (60). A musician applying for a job performs a set behind a screen in front of a panel marked only by a number and without saying a word. This is usually one part of the interview process, but in 2019 the number of female members of American orchestras has increased to about 40%, up from less than 5% in the early 1970s.

All in all, this was an interesting read about math, reasoning, work, and culture. If you are up for a high-level job, it's definitely worth picking up a copy.
Thank you to the publishers and NetGalley for the opportunity to review a temporary digital ARC in exchange for an unbiased review.

Hiring is the hardest part of any business. Having great employees that are loyal to your company are rare. I enjoyed this book because it shows interview questions that I have never used before. It is outside of the box interviewing to get the best insights on a candidate. I recommend to anyone involved in the hiring process.

The uniquely named HOW DO YOU FIGHT A HORSE-SIZED DUCK? by William Poundstone describes itself as "Secrets to Succeeding at Interview Mind Games and Getting the Job You Want." Poundstone, a journalist who has written several other books (Head in the Cloud), divides this one into three parts: A Short History of Assessment; Mind Games; and Puzzles and Problem-Solving. As in his earlier work on interviewing, Are You Smart Enough to Work at Google?, Poundstone writes in an engaging, conversational manner and offers numerous hints, strategies, and rules. For example, he encourages readers to remember that "problems posed in interviews are often easier than they appear; think several moves ahead [and] when all else fails, draw a picture." I am excited to share this recent text and its many brainteasers with students – if only to further urge them to look at situations differently, to actively brainstorm, and to "think out of the box." Too often, they place an emphasis on finding a "right" answer when, particularly in early research stages, open minds and multiple perspectives are valuable. Poundstone echoes our work with students on critical thinking, building empathy, and creative problem-solving when he argues that "the most provocative and misunderstood [interview] questions are those that test 21st-century skills." Business or psychology students will also likely be interested in the afterword which touches upon confirmation bias and the role of failure in relation to innovation.

Even though I am not currently looking for a job, this book was very informative about hiring pratices.

This book is enjoyable in so many ways, even if you aren't planning on interviewing soon. The insight into hiring thought is interesting, and the puzzles posed to interviewees are varied and fascinating!