Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Forums
Non-Cattle Specific Topics
Every Thing Else Board
Pay no attention to this post
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Help Support CattleToday:
Message
<blockquote data-quote="50/50Farms" data-source="post: 1790377" data-attributes="member: 42731"><p>Quantitative data vs qualitative data. Hence the principle. Your statement that anyone with $85 can apply to Harvard is irrelevant. I mentioned quit rates because those fuel replacement rates, everyone who has ever worked for a large company or the federal government knows that retention and replacement drives recruiting, not the other way around. Just because anyone with $85 can apply means nothing Ricky Mullet down in the methnostate with 3 misdemeanors in 3 years isn't applying to Harvard, he's applying to WalMart. What percentage of WalMart applicants have situations, problems, or demographic data (doesn't matter that they aren't supposed to select off of that, they do) that are adverse to recruiting? How many Harvard applicants have children, can only go part time at nights, and need a ride to get there? For both there's pre-qualification factors needed to keep your application from ending up in a shredder, the ones for Harvard are high enough to filter out a lot of people, the one's for WalMart aren't. And I'm not crapping on WalMart employees with this, anyone who has ever worked in a large retail, manufacturing, or service environment that has a modicum of critical thinking ability can go hang out around the hiring office and take note of who comes in and who gets the jobs and start correlating that data. To rely on numbers alone for anything is a fool's errand, this is very similar to the statistical argument used to infer that women are safer drivers than men across the board.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="50/50Farms, post: 1790377, member: 42731"] Quantitative data vs qualitative data. Hence the principle. Your statement that anyone with $85 can apply to Harvard is irrelevant. I mentioned quit rates because those fuel replacement rates, everyone who has ever worked for a large company or the federal government knows that retention and replacement drives recruiting, not the other way around. Just because anyone with $85 can apply means nothing Ricky Mullet down in the methnostate with 3 misdemeanors in 3 years isn't applying to Harvard, he's applying to WalMart. What percentage of WalMart applicants have situations, problems, or demographic data (doesn't matter that they aren't supposed to select off of that, they do) that are adverse to recruiting? How many Harvard applicants have children, can only go part time at nights, and need a ride to get there? For both there's pre-qualification factors needed to keep your application from ending up in a shredder, the ones for Harvard are high enough to filter out a lot of people, the one's for WalMart aren't. And I'm not crapping on WalMart employees with this, anyone who has ever worked in a large retail, manufacturing, or service environment that has a modicum of critical thinking ability can go hang out around the hiring office and take note of who comes in and who gets the jobs and start correlating that data. To rely on numbers alone for anything is a fool's errand, this is very similar to the statistical argument used to infer that women are safer drivers than men across the board. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Non-Cattle Specific Topics
Every Thing Else Board
Pay no attention to this post
Top