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.
Interviewing is a crap shoot. While I can well imagine (I think) what the OP has experienced with interviewees, I have also known of people who "shined" in interviews and proved to be disappointments when hired. Articulation is not a dead giveaway of a person's capabilities. In fact, if an interviewee sounds too good to be true then he/she could very well be.
Interviewers can do a bad job, too. I can't complain about most of the ones I've interviewed with, but I'll forever remember the one whose questions were all hypothetical questions, like "What would do you if . . ." About 90% of his questions were like that. And I know that I gave bad answers because I truly did not know what I would do in those situations. Over time I have, indeed, experienced some of those scenarios and ended up handling them a whole lot different than what I told him. I asked an HR person about this once and she said that it was a bad interview on his part.
blah blah blah is all I hear, Its the candidates fault, whatever! Today it comes down to who you know more then anything. And employers have way to many people to choose from and interview so even if you nail the interview you still don't get the job.
Interviewing is a crap shoot. While I can well imagine (I think) what the OP has experienced with interviewees, I have also known of people who "shined" in interviews and proved to be disappointments when hired. Articulation is not a dead giveaway of a person's capabilities. In fact, if an interviewee sounds too good to be true then he/she could very well be.
Interviewers can do a bad job, too. I can't complain about most of the ones I've interviewed with, but I'll forever remember the one whose questions were all hypothetical questions, like "What would do you if . . ." About 90% of his questions were like that. And I know that I gave bad answers because I truly did not know what I would do in those situations. Over time I have, indeed, experienced some of those scenarios and ended up handling them a whole lot different than what I told him. I asked an HR person about this once and she said that it was a bad interview on his part.
I have sat on both sides. I haven't met any interviewer who's as skilled yet. From my interviewing experience, I learned a lot. One big part is that I get the chance to sit in the discussion with my boss and HR to decide whom we should hire. It's very eye opening.
One thing that consistently comes up in the decision making is a comment about a candidate being "rounded." A rounded candidate always get hired.
Rounded means the candidate not only have good technical skills but, more importantly, has great social or customer service skills. More often than not, a rounded candidate beats the geek.
blah blah blah is all I hear, Its the candidates fault, whatever! Today it comes down to who you know more then anything. And employers have way to many people to choose from and interview so even if you nail the interview you still don't get the job.
Someone does. I got my job. Every employed person in the world was hired by someone. I hired 2 people last week.
But, that is all rhetoric when it is more dramatic to declare that no one is getting hired no matter how great they are.
No, sometimes you win and get hired. Sometimes you lose and you do not get hired. That is called life. Sometimes you are the best, sometimes another person is better. This is also called life. However, the way kids are raised now, everyone gets a trophy and when candidates are chosen over others, it is a disgrace.
blah blah blah is all I hear, Its the candidates fault, whatever! Today it comes down to who you know more then anything. And employers have way to many people to choose from and interview so even if you nail the interview you still don't get the job.
I wish that's true in my case. I have been struggling to find good candidates ever since June.
As good as I think I am with interview, I did recently fail a major opportunity with a large international corporation. I did my best through a series of long and grueling interviews stretched over 2 months but they didn't choose me. Oh, well, we can't win on every case, right?
I called up this candidate with the full intention to have her come in for an interview. She's been out of job for 8 months. I asked what she has been dong since she was laid off last year. Her answer:"Nothing. You know just doing a little traveling and family stuff."
Are you kidding me? I work in a highly technical world. 8 months out of touch would be a serious dent. It also shows how much initiative she takes when even facing the possibility of potentially being out of food.
You know what she was doing so why even ask that? How do you think her resume landed on your desk if she was doing nothing????
You know what she was doing so why even ask that? How do you think her resume landed on your desk if she was doing nothing????
Because it takes two hours at most a day to go through the new applicable job listings, quickly tailor your resumé (or cover letter or both) to fit the situation and get the information out. And once you get the hang of online applications, ditto. Moderator cut: deleted
Last edited by 7G9C4J2; 08-15-2012 at 05:08 PM..
Reason: deleted personal comment
I don't know why this is a divide between HR and potential employers. IMO really crazy. Everyone has one time or another that irritates them, so let people vent and don't take it personally.
I know when I am interviewing when I blow it, most of the time realize the job was not a good fit for me.
However, there are those times that annoy me where HR expects to much out of the initial interview process. Many people interviewing can't take a day off to go into the office to be screened by the department. I recently had to turn down an interview because of this. I was frustrated, because it was thirty minutes. To take a day off for a possibility isn't in the cards.
The other thing that frustrates me is when HR has you come in, spend a day interviewing as a finalist, but full well knows that you are not the one. This happened to me twice recently. Budget cuts and went with an internal candidate. It is a waste of both our times.
And, a lot of the drawn out process comes from the candidates themselves. If I have 4 top candidates, I am not going to make a decision until I have talked to all 4. So, if one of the candidates can not meet with me for 2 weeks, the decision is going to be delayed for those who were able to get to an interview the day after I call. And then I have references for the top ones out of that interview...people are a PAIN to contact for references. You practically have to stalk some of them, so that also causes a delay...nothing to do with HR and everything to do with candidate's schedules and references who were not told to expect a call.
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.
