RE: Strange Interview Practices?

[Iggy <iggy_1996dp -at- yahoo -dot- com>]

> But where is it written that all interviews MUST
> follow some set of rules
> that the candidate is familiar and comfortable with?

It's not, and that's not my point. You should be told
ahead of time what to expect from an interview,
period. I've interviewed more times than I care to
share, but I can say that in every interview that took
me off guard, I found a company I did not want to work
for. Their interview practices reflect their work
environment to some degree, either directly or
indirectly. If you don't like the practice, chances
are you won't like other practices in the company
either. You never know... in this interview scenario,
maybe the company uses the same practice during
productivity reviews or yearly salary reviews. Not
saying they do, but it's not improbable.

> We're the ones that
> are trying to win jobs, so why are we entitled to so
> much advance warning
> and protocol briefings?

That's the wrong way to look at it. If you go
interviews trying to win jobs, then you're approaching
it all wrong, in my opinon. Yes, it's very nice to be
gainfully employed. It's also nice to be able to work
in a comfortable environment. If the interview does
not make you comfortable, what does that say about the
company? And why should you not confront it then when
the worst that could possibly happen is being told "I
don't think you'd work out here"? No, an interview is
not a game in which the winner scores a job. It's a
process by which a company tries to find the best
candidate to perform x function, and a process by
which a person tries to find the best environment in
which to use and grow their expertise.

> When I go into an interview, I try to be prepared
> for ANYTHING. I've been
> through writing tests, been interviewed by a
> committee of strangers all
> staring at me from their side of the table, and even
> been through one
> "stress" interview, where the interviewer tried to
> make me angry (and
> succeeded, I'll admit). In none of these cases was I
> told in advance what
> to expect.

And how did you handle it? Did you jump through the
hoops like a poodle in a circus act, or did you
approach them professionally? I've been asked to take
writing tests, I've been in a room of 5 or more
interviewers at a time, I've been through the stress
test, and many other hoops. But, I don't jump. I bend
them to the point they are comfortable to me. When
asked to perform a writing test, I ask the merit of
such a test. Will I be required to document how to
make lunch at this company if hired? Then why make me
document how to make a stupid sandwich? If you want to
lok at my writing skills, here are some samples of my
work. Not convinced it's my work? Then ask me about
the process I went through to write it. The multiple
interviewer situation is totally valid and can be an
extreme advantage for the interviewee, as you can play
their roles against them quite easily. While they are
playing good cop/bad cop, you can play chess. And in
the stress test, bounce it back. It's great to watch
them get mad!

> While I'll give some weight to the idea that the
> interview gives the
> candidate some idea of what it would be like to work
> at the company, I
> don't think the employer is under any obligation to
> hold the candidate's
> hand and ensure that the candidate is completely
> prepared for all aspects
> of the interview.

I don't want them to hold my hand, but I do want them
to be honest. Surprises and lies don't sit well with
me. Perhaps you're fine with them, but I'd rather do
without. In this scenario, the interviewee was
surprised by the addition of two other interviewees
there as well. Plus, the interviewee was inadvertantly
lied to when told there would be a half-hour interview
with each interviewer, when in fact it was much less
as you have to allow time for the other two
interviewees.

> Actually, the "firing squad" committee interview
> that I went through gave
> me a good idea of the various personalities I'd be
> encountering, and I
> LIKED them. I took the job, and was quite happy.

And it worked for you. Great! Being surprised with
other interviewees to compete with in real time, that
would not work for me. I have better things to do with
my time than brawl with others over a scrap of meat.

> Along the same lines, I also was surprised when I
> posted a query to the
> TECHWR-L list last year how VEHEMENTLY some people
> opposed the idea of
> taking a writing test, particularly if they were not
> warned in advance.

It's a smack in the face. Plain and simple. If you're
interviewing an entry level candidate, I can see the
usefulness in a writing test. But for an experienced
professional, it's a waste of time.

> Whatever happens, just go in and show them what you
> can do! 

Exactly! If something happens that I don't like, I
show them that "Homey don't play dat". I tell them
what I would be willing to do. If they accept, good.
If they decline, it's their loss.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find a job, post your resume.
http://careers.yahoo.com

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Be a published author!  iUniverse gives you: a high-quality paperback, a
custom cover design, and distribution to 25,00 retailers.  Join our almost
10,000 published authors today. http://www.iuniverse.com/publish/default.asp

  Your monthly sponsorship message here reaches more than
  5000 technical writers, providing 2,500,000+ monthly impressions.
  Contact Eric (ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com) for details and availability.

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot-  Visit 
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.