or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Business, Careers & Education › Idiots in job interviews
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Idiots in job interviews - Page 4

post #46 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinnyGoomba View Post

If they weren't smart would you still pay them for their work?

Agreed. You get the best person you can get.
post #47 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinnyGoomba View Post

If they weren't smart would you still pay them for their work?

Smart is hugely over-rated. Unless the job actually calls for you to be smart, and most don't, then it is more of a liability than a benefit. The trick is not to appear high maintenance and banging on about your degree isn't the way to do it. Until you reach PHD level a degree basically proves that you are capable of learning and little else (I say this as an ex-academic - non-trust fund baby division).
post #48 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinnyGoomba View Post

If they weren't smart would you still pay them for their work?

yes? bit of a smarty-pants rhetorical question there...

perhaps you misunderstood. in my experience, recent grads often seem to think "being smart" is the ultimate be-all, end-all in terms of job skills when it is often just a small part of what an employer will look for. "being smart" / having a relevant degree may mean you are able to fulfill the competencies required for the job, which is just the minimum standard to even get in the door. a candidate flaunting his degree, or, in other words, constantly re-iterating how he or she possesses the absolute lowest level of knowledge, skills, and ability necessary to succeed is not what they should be selling themselves on.

don't get me wrong - obviously, all other things being equal i would much rather hire someone with a head on their shoulders. however, if job experience is lacking as it most often is with recent grads, they should be highlighting organizational/culture fit, their own personal portfolio, or finding other ways how they can demonstrate value to the company. knowledge, skills, and abilities are easy to qualify - once they're qualified, thats it. great, they can do the job. culture fit is much harder to qualify and is ultimately what determines if a candidate is successful in an organization. given that the best predictor of future performance is past behavior, and i am asking behaviorally-based questions to determine this, "being smart" is largely irrelevant. showing how they are able to utilize their intelligence by demonstrating multiple past experiences that resulted in some quantifiable positive outcome - which is incidentally highlighting their attitude and work ethic more than anything else - is what i care about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by passingtime View Post

Smart is hugely over-rated. Unless the job actually calls for you to be smart, and most don't, then it is more of a liability than a benefit. The trick is not to appear high maintenance and banging on about your degree isn't the way to do it. Until you reach PHD level a degree basically proves that you are capable of learning and little else (I say this as an ex-academic - non-trust fund baby division).

+1.
post #49 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by passingtime View Post

Smart is hugely over-rated. Unless the job actually calls for you to be smart, and most don't, then it is more of a liability than a benefit. The trick is not to appear high maintenance and banging on about your degree isn't the way to do it. Until you reach PHD level a degree basically proves that you are capable of learning and little else (I say this as an ex-academic - non-trust fund baby division).

+1

Most jobs out there require the candidate to be able to add, subtract, write legibly and be bearable to be around for extended periods of time. It's been my experience that the truly bright kids stay in academia pursuing research in what interests them (and their interests can be wide ranging). For example, a friend of mine aiming to pursue a math PhD is currently working on the electrical systems of a satellite, data mining for a hedge fund and is also a web developer.

And no Fuuma, my comments are not a direct attack on academia. In fact, many of my closest friends are pursuing MA's/PhD's currently. What it constitutes is a comment on the lack of exposure to different elements of society in an upper-middle class upbringing. As a result of not being forced to be polite/hold your tongue/deal with assholes that they have to not offend in employment they may not have developed the acute awareness of what is appropriate to say in an interview situation.
post #50 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nereis View Post


And no Fuuma, my comments are not a direct attack on academia. In fact, many of my closest friends are pursuing MA's/PhD's currently. What it constitutes is a comment on the lack of exposure to different elements of society in an upper-middle class upbringing. As a result of not being forced to be polite/hold your tongue/deal with assholes that they have to not offend in employment they may not have developed the acute awareness of what is appropriate to say in an interview situation.

But why single academia if your comment is that people from the UMC are sheltered, something that is still highly debatable. I mean sheltered compared to what/whom? I think people who haven't taken enough cocaine are sheltered from what a hungover really is. Oh and people with luxury cars and multiple vacation homes are not UMC, they're upper class. UMC young adults often go to college, don't have to work and have their apt paid for and some "fun" money (already a very nice advantage) but they don't go to school driving a luxury car and live in some mansion away from campus. Once again, you don't make much sense. If I were you I heavily rework my statement or retract it.

I think people who work in offices are sheltered from the harsh reality of academia.

ps: I have many black friends so I can't be racist (good fallacy here).
post #51 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuuma View Post

But why single academia if your comment is that people from the UMC are sheltered, something that is still highly debatable. I mean sheltered compared to what/whom? I think people who haven't taken enough cocaine are sheltered from what a hungover really is. Oh and people with luxury cars and multiple vacation homes are not UMC, they're upper class. UMC young adults often go to college, don't have to work and have their apt paid for and some "fun" money (already a very nice advantage) but they don't go to school driving a luxury car and live in some mansion away from campus. Once again, you don't make much sense. If I were you I heavily rework my statement or retract it.
I think people who work in offices are sheltered from the harsh reality of academia.
ps: I have many black friends so I can't be racist (good fallacy here).

Once again, it is the context of that candidate's surprise at what kind of toys an average salary in academia can get you.

Someone who has gone straight from undergrad to a masters and then PhD program, if they had come from a privileged upbringing, would not necessarily understand exactly how much money they would have to make to own the sort of 'toys' they had grown up having. For one, their cost of living would be heavily subsidised by their parents unless they had a scholarship and hence they would have more disposable income.

And no, notice how my prior statement is not of the form: 'All who have an ivory tower view are academics' or 'All who are in academia have an ivory tower view'. You may in fact notice that the 'some' refers to the segment who have pursued study as a consequence of having the financial freedom of not being forced to earn a living or pay back student loans as soon as undergrad is over.

You have a vested interest in this, being in academia and from a rather privileged background yourself, but I do hope you can see how someone who has only ever been surrounded by other people of similar financial standing and has never really had to answer to someone could: 1. Not have the inclination to shut their mouths when presented with real authority or 2. Not realise that supporting yourself on an academic salary usually means a lower standard of living than what they have been accustomed to.
post #52 of 75
Yes, I'm being a smarty pants, but I doubt you would be having a conversation with them if they were not smart or didn't have the degree they are banging on.
post #53 of 75
What about acting like an arrogant bastard, does this garner points? I suspect many would enjoy the arrogant bastard shtick instead of the the rest that has been mentioned.
post #54 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinnyGoomba View Post

Yes, I'm being a smarty pants, but I doubt you would be having a conversation with them if they were not smart or didn't have the degree they are banging on.

which is exactly what i stated in the post you decided to be so clever about fing02[1].gif
post #55 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by jarude View Post

which is exactly what i stated in the post you decided to be so clever about fing02[1].gif

That's a stretch...
post #56 of 75

we give people tests

and pay them for their time

 

for example a CADD guy will be given a sketch, data, etc., and told to draw it up

if he asks where the files are so he can rob a similar job, that is a plus

if he asks how much time he has, another

 

an enginner might be given some questions from the EIT and PE exam sample tests

we might ask him to use excel to develop a simple cost estimate for a scope of work

or layout a sewer line, alignment and inverts

make an index for a permit application: engineers report, general info, application, permit specific modules

maybe take a trip to a project or plant and see what he knows

 

don't tell me what you can do, show me

 

you'ld be surprised how many degreed people can't do basic stuff

post #57 of 75
I was helping interview candidates for a potential coworker, and the guy was an arrogant jackass. Everyone else on my team liked him - he was an internal candidate that had a good reputation for solving problems. But he acted as though he neither needed or wanted the job, and he came in in ripped up jeans (admittedly work is pretty casual) and was slouching in his chair, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur PE View Post

we give people tests
and pay them for their time

for example a CADD guy will be given a sketch, data, etc., and told to draw it up
if he asks where the files are so he can rob a similar job, that is a plus
if he asks how much time he has, another

an enginner might be given some questions from the EIT and PE exam sample tests
we might ask him to use excel to develop a simple cost estimate for a scope of work
or layout a sewer line, alignment and inverts
make an index for a permit application: engineers report, general info, application, permit specific modules
maybe take a trip to a project or plant and see what he knows

don't tell me what you can do, show me

you'ld be surprised how many degreed people can't do basic stuff

I had one interview where they gave me basically an exact copy of a free online IQ test.

Another interview I was given an, admittedly, easy exam (it was for an electrical engineer position). It was like circuits 102 stuff, and I just totally blanked and screwed up. All the questions were very similar, but I got a huge mental block and couldn't get any of them.
post #58 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by sinnedk View Post

you know the whole thank you email is overrated
Quote:
Originally Posted by idfnl View Post

+1. It will be deleted within seconds. Dont send me thank you emails. I dont think it has ever changed anyone's mind. In fact, I know within about 30 seconds of the interview starting whether this guy is a no. Once I decide no, the rest of the interview is just to be polite.

Not sure what industry you working for but I got responses to at least 75% of my thank you emails, and most of the rest I would get some other sort of acknowledgement at socialize / networking dinner / bar event later. The only time I knew it was no go would be when I wasn't given their card after interviewing and when I asked, they would say they didn't have it or to get their info from the campus recruiter.
post #59 of 75

For me, the 'thank you' email is a great way to show how much information you were able to soak in from the interviews and how well you were paying attention to the interviewers' answers (as opposed to just concentrating on further questions to ask, etc.).

 

I find most of the time I receive a thank you reply when I send insightful 'thank you's to show I was truly interested in the work and paid attention to the interviewer.

post #60 of 75
It doesn't hurt to send a thank you email so I send it to everyone I meet with during interviews. It takes 5 minutes to write a brief follow up.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Business, Careers & Education
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Business, Careers & Education › Idiots in job interviews