Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The resume (education and work experience) will get you the interview.
The interview will get you the job.
The importance of chemistry depends a lot on the job. If the position is one where little interaction with others is required and the output is easily measureable, then it doesn't matter as much. For someone who is going to be working in a team everyday solving hard to quantify problems, the fit with the other team members in terms of both personality and skills is very important.
I don't think I've ever hired or recommended anyone I disliked, even if they could do the job. Why would you when there is another candidate who doesn't raise any red flags who can also do the job?
This is a really interesting thread. Glad I found it.
I like what you wrote shamrock847.
I do believe the interview is the format to impress or convince those with whom you're meeting you are their best candidate for the job.
What about team interviews where all potential co-workers are there asking questions as well? Should the manager have more or equal input to other team members? I've had some interesting team interviews...some flowed very smoothly. Some....well, they had to pick up their papers to read their assigned questions. To me, that isn't as smooth as spontaneous questions.
There are things I like about team interviews like meeting potential colleagues initially and seeing what their interaction with their boss is. For myself, I think team interviews potentially limit some questions I might ask of an supervisor/manager, but not many.
With team interviews, chemistry with the team is an immediate dynamic. Once again I'm interested in your thoughts....should the view of one team member count for more or less than the observations/gut feeling of the supervisor/manager who may not work with you side by side everyday?
Looking forward to your thoughts about team interviews and the continuing discussion about personal chemistry.
I think emotional intelligence and stability are quite important. So, yes, chemistry is important. Especially in small teams, where folks have to trust and collaborate with each other to do their jobs. In larger, technical organizations, you can get by with the geek hires who lack social skills, but rock at their specialty. Aggressively dominant, moody, or smarmy, sleazy folks are generally a bad hire in most situations. Who needs the drama?
At the company I work at we have lots of TYPE A Super Ego and incredibly poised and confident types who graduated from Ivy League Colleges with MBA's and STEM Degrees. These people are turning the world on fire.
On a personal basis they are jerks but they get the work done and in many roles we need someone who has level of stature to intimidate others and command authority. I understand that in certain positions and industries many unlikeable people need to be hired to keep the organization going. Don't you agree?
Are you a hiring manager? When you interview candidates who would work for you do you ever hire someone you don't like personally but see something in them that will get the job done?
I got Bs and Cs in chemistry but since I was EE, I got hired.
Seriously, the A students end up working for the C students.
This is a really interesting thread. Glad I found it.
I like what you wrote shamrock847.
I do believe the interview is the format to impress or convince those with whom you're meeting you are their best candidate for the job.
What about team interviews where all potential co-workers are there asking questions as well? Should the manager have more or equal input to other team members? I've had some interesting team interviews...some flowed very smoothly. Some....well, they had to pick up their papers to read their assigned questions. To me, that isn't as smooth as spontaneous questions.
There are things I like about team interviews like meeting potential colleagues initially and seeing what their interaction with their boss is. For myself, I think team interviews potentially limit some questions I might ask of an supervisor/manager, but not many.
With team interviews, chemistry with the team is an immediate dynamic. Once again I'm interested in your thoughts....should the view of one team member count for more or less than the observations/gut feeling of the supervisor/manager who may not work with you side by side everyday?
The way I've seen it done in team interviews is any of the team members can say "no" to the hire but only the manager can say "yes".
Normally, in my experience, the boss interviews the candidate seprately from the team members so there isn't an issue with people acting a certain way because the boss is in the room.
If people seemed ill at ease or unprepared (picking up their paper to read questions) I would be concerned as a candidate.
I think people that are professional should be able to work with everyone and all personality types. I also think professionals keep business as business. For those of us that do not date people at work, especially not our supervisors. The idea of chemistry with our boss being a job requirement is a little freaky and weird. I know someone that quit a job to take a job and then was let go because she didn't have the right chemistry or personality. She is very professional and has many years of experience and got along with everyone fine. It is wrong and unethical to do that to someone. Now they have to explain well my boss did not think I we had chemistry or that my personality was right and let me go. And it is not real smart legally.
I also think team interviews are ridiculous. Hiring managers should make those decisions and it should be clear that employees are expected to work with and be nice to whoever management hires.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,584 posts, read 81,186,228 times
Reputation: 57818
Not only do I have to work with the person, but so do my other direct reports, and people in other departments. Their personality is a big factor. I have passed on people that are otherwise very well qualified but that I determine to not be compatible with the rest of my staff and co-workers. There is a fine line between confidence and arrogance.
There is a fine line between confidence and arrogance.
Which is why I think it's crazy when they care if you have a low self perspective especially when people tell you you don't have to be perfect. I would basically have to be to hit that safe line.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suzy Lee
I also think team interviews are ridiculous. Hiring managers should make those decisions and it should be clear that employees are expected to work with and be nice to whoever management hires.
I often wonder if I would have done better if my last interview had not been a group interview. The thing I really hate about is they treat it so casually as if there are no such thing as wrong answers. We all know that's not true.
I am not a hiring manager, but here's my 2 cents. I think personal chemistry is extremely important. I have interviewed for many, many positions that I was highly qualified for, and only got 6-7 offers over the course of a 20-year career. I rarely feel any personal chemistry with people unless I get to know them well, and that takes a long time for me. I therefore conclude that the interviewers do not feel much chemistry with me either. I have to say that in my home country my success rate in getting job offers was much better (and I only worked 4 years out of 20 there), and I felt more personal chemistry too, which proves my point above.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
