Most Recent Posts

Xerox runs 175 call centers around the world. In all, the centers employ 50,000 customer service agents who deal with questions about everything from cellphone bills to health insurance.

Teri Morse, who is in charge of recruiting all those people, says the company had a problem: It was hiring people who just weren't a good fit.

"People were in the training classes sharing with us that they weren't right for the position," she says. "You have to deal with a frustrated customer, hang up the phone and move on to the next, and not have to excuse yourself to go to the ladies' room and cry."

So a couple of years ago, Xerox hired a company to help the company do a better job of finding the right people

This company, called Evolv, began collecting lots of data about the people applying for jobs at Xerox call centers.

The applicants had to answer extensive surveys with questions like: "Which word better characterizes you: 'consistent' or 'witty'?"

Another question: "Can you name three pieces of computer hardware?"

Applicants were tested on pattern recognition and multitasking. They had to respond to a challenging customer service call.

Some of these people got hired. Not all of them were a good fit for the job. But the data gave the company a sense of which characteristics predicted that hires would be a good fit — and which didn't. Prior experience in a call center, for instance, didn't really matter.

A retail background was a predictor of success — except for people who worked as cashiers or in restaurants. Those people tended to do worse at the call centers.

With these new techniques, Xerox says it has been able to improve its hiring and significantly reduce turnover at its call centers.

Other companies that parse employee data are finding surprising results. Michael Rosenbaum of Pegged Software, a company that works with hospitals, says one piece of conventional wisdom is flat-out wrong: "We find zero statistically significant correlation between a college degree or a master's degree and success as a software developer."

Of course, using data to drive hiring decisions has its problems. Employers guided by data could wind up skipping over promising candidates. But Barbara Marder of the consulting firm Mercer points out that the way companies hire now has its own flaws. We like to hire people who are like us. People who went to schools we know. People who were referred to us by our friends.

"A lot of these new techniques do have the potential to eliminate biases," Marder says.

By a vote of 59-34 the Senate on Friday moved the nomination of Janet Yellen to be the next chairman of the Federal Reserve past a key procedural hurdle.

The vote invoked "cloture" — effectively preventing Republicans from filibustering President Obama's nominee.

Next up for Yellen's nomination: A confirmation vote, set for Jan. 6. With the Democratic caucus controlling 55 of the Senate's 100 seats, she's expected to get a majority and then become the first woman to head the central bank.

Yellen, 67, is currently the Fed's vice chairman. As we've written previously, post-confirmation hearing analyses of her recent testimony before the Senate Banking Committee concluded that Fed policy likely wouldn't change much, if at all, should she replace outgoing chairman Ben Bernanke. The central bank is expected to begin gradually reducing the amount of stimulus it's giving the economy, probably as soon as next month.

The Fed's thinking: The economy, which sank into recession in late 2007 and spent the better part of the next 5 years or so either in decline or only growing weakly, has regained some of its strength. That impression was reinforced Friday when the Bureau of Economic Analysis said gross domestic product expanded at a healthy 4.1 percent annual rate in the third quarter.

Bernanke's term expires on Jan. 31.

Update at 10:02 a.m. ET. News Conference Set For 2 P.M. ET:

The White House just announced that the president will hold a news conference at 2 p.m. ET.

So, we've changed our original headline from "If Obama Takes Questions ..." to "When."

Note: The president's sessions with reporters often get started a little late.

Our original post picks up the story:

There some open time on President Obama's schedule today — between a late morning meeting with advisers and an early evening departure for a two-week vacation in Hawaii.

How might he fill that gap? Politico is among the news outlets speculating that the president will endure a "torturous rite of passage ... a year-end press conference."

The topics he would be quizzed about seem fairly obvious. They include: The troubled roll out of HealthCare.gov; the two-year budget deal; Edward Snowden and his leaks about the National Security Agency; the ongoing crisis in Syria; and strained relations with Russia.

As we wait to hear for sure whether the president will or won't be appearing before the White House press corps, we wonder:

What would you ask the president?

The powers-that-be in Washington are typically, though certainly not always, wrestling with weighty issues.

Recently, they've also been debating height – and whether they prefer a stout, familiar dowager, or a taller, sleeker model.

Building heights, people: We're talking building heights in your nation's capital, where for more than a century the 1910 Building Height Act has kept the city's profile low.

Now, with the city's population expanding, and space to build in becoming increasingly scarce, discussion has intensified over whether to allow the city to soar higher.

Why should you care?

If you're one of the millions of Americans who have visited Washington – more than 16.8 million of you made the trek last year alone, a record – you've encountered a city that still looks a lot like the one envisioned by Major Pierre Charles L'Enfant in the late 1700s.

L'Enfant's "great plan," says the National Capital Planning Commission, "was conceived on a grand scale, and was influenced by the plans for Paris and Versailles" that emphasized broad avenues providing "long vistas with monumental focal points."

The vacation photos on your smart phones testify to the resilience of that plan, which allows the U.S. Capitol, the Lincoln Memorial and other monuments to shine. And it's the Congress-approved Height Act which, with some exceptions, limits building heights to around 130 feet, that has been key to preserving Washington's unique, ground-hugging skyline.

But critics of the limits say it has wrapped a vibrant, growing city in an 18th century straightjacket. They argue that higher structures, strategically built to preserve historic sight lines, would help accommodate the city's growing residential and business population, and help feed the city's coffers by increasing the tax base.

It has also been noted that politically powerful development and contracting interests would also be served.

But At What Cost?

Congress through the Height Act, and the city through its own zoning regulations, both have a say in what happens to the restrictions, so the debate has been predictably complicated.

Last year, Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., who chairs the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, asked the city to look into changes to the restrictions. City planners, with Mayor Vincent Gray's endorsement, came up with a variety of proposals to allow higher buildings, particularly outside the heart of the capital known as "L'Enfant City."

The Washington Post developed a graphic to show what the various proposals, from minimal changes to significant ones, would look like. Fast Company has a more whimsical take; it asked artists to imagine Washington with skyscrapers.

But the powerful National Capital Planning Commission recently nixed the city's proposals, arguing instead that the issue merited further study.

"The character of Washington's historic L'Enfant City – particularly the Monumental Core – establishes the city's iconic image as our capital," change opponents wrote, advocating preservation of the "iconic, horizontal skyline."

Not The Last Of It

During a congressional hearing earlier this month on the proposed Height Act changes, Issa noted the divergence of opinions between city planners and the NCPC and indicated the debate is not over.

"I'm not done looking at this," he said, "or listening, or reading."

Architecture critic Phil Kennicott summed up the mixed feelings many have about the height restrictions, and whether they should be eased.

He argued in a Washington Post column last year when the issue began to bubble that the limits have resulted in a downtown that looks "boxy and dull" and features "long, monotonous" city center corridors with little architectural interest.

Given ethical issues that have plagued city leaders in recent years, he and others have been loath to take Issa up on his offer to turn over some of the height decisions to the city exclusively.

"Theoretically," Kennicott wrote, "small changes to the Height Act could be good for urban density, development, smart growth and transit – if we make them responsibly."

But Washington, he said, where council members' relationships with developers has been the subject of scrutiny, "is not mature enough to step onto this slippery slope without slipping."

So, a dowager D.C. will remain, both beloved and criticized, at least for now.