TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
>I've had interviews that Ithought went great, but didn't get
the job, and I'd love to know why,
>especially if it's something I can correct.
On the other hand, I've had interviews that I thought were
disasters, but ended in an offer. Nowadays, I don't try to
analyze the reasons for success or failure. I just do the
interview as professionally as I can manage and try not to take
any result too personally.
For one thing, I've been on both sides of the table enough times
to know that hiring decisions often have very little to do with
the candidate.
For example, some common reasons I've heard for not hiring
include:
1.) The company is just collecting resumes, and has no intention
of hiring.
2.) Before a hiring is made, a budget decision or a change in
personnel makes hiring out of the question.
3.) There's a vague feeling that the candidate wouldn't fit in
(as if, in most cases, you could tell from a brief interview what
the person is like, or most people who conduct themselves
professionally wouldn't fit into most companies).
4.) The candidate is male/female, and wouldn't be suitable
because most of the staff is female/male (illegal, but it happens
all too often, both ways).
5.) The interviewer has misunderstood or written down a response
wrongly, and has a false impression of a candidate.
Similarly, some common reasons for hiring that I've heard:
1.) Someone else was offered the job, but turned it down.
2.) The interviewer finds the candidate attractive (sad, but
true).
3.) The candidate, intentionally or accidentally, has done some
minor thing that the interviewer thinks is a sign of a good hire
(for example, arriving exactly on time).
4.) The candidate has shown a greater knowledge of the position
than the interviewer.
5.) The interviewer is looking for an ally in office politics.
None of these reasons for hirng or not hiring are very
flattering, and you can't do a thing about them. So, why worry
about them?
--
Bruce Byfield, Outlaw Communications
3015 Aries Place, Burnaby, BC V37 7E8, Canada
bbyfield -at- axionet -dot- com 604.421.7189
"And you to whom adversity has dealt the final blow,
with smiling bastards lying 'bout you everywhere you go,
Stand tall and put forth all your strength of hand and heart and brain,
And like the 'Mary Ellen Carter' rise again."
- Stan Rogers "The 'Mary Ellen Carter'"
