|
systran posted:There is usually a secretary, but he/she is usually busy and/or already helping someone, and the reception area is usually tiny with one or two chairs. Here is how I would approach that: "Hi, we'd like you to come in for an interview. Does 9am work for you? It does? Great. Just so you know, we don't have a comfortable waiting area, so we ask that you show up no sooner than 8:50. See you then!" If my potential employer can't clearly and effectively communicate their expectations of me in the interview stage, I doubt they'll be able to do so after I'm employed, and that's not the kind of work environment I want to be in.
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 17:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:35 |
|
|
If the employer can't effectively communicate beforehand that it's not OK to munch on buffalo wings during the interview, well sir, that's not a place I'd like to work anyways!
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 18:59
|
|
|
KING OF BLOGOSPHERE posted:If the employer can't effectively communicate beforehand that it's not OK to munch on buffalo wings during the interview, well sir, that's not a place I'd like to work anyways! Point well taken. It's much better to be secretly annoyed because people don't know your pet peeves. A more appropriate analogy would be: Hiring manager 1: I get annoyed if people eat 2-5 buffalo wings during the interview. Hiring manager 2: I get annoyed if people eat 10 buffalo wings during the interview. Hiring manager 3: I get annoyed if people eat 15 or more buffalo wings during the interview. Hiring manager 4: I get annoyed if people don't eat at least 15 buffalo wings during the interview, but 20 buffalo wings is just too much.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 19:07
|
|
|
KING OF BLOGOSPHERE posted:If the employer can't effectively communicate beforehand that it's not OK to munch on buffalo wings during the interview, well sir, that's not a place I'd like to work anyways! This is ridiculous. The interviewee is in a new area, and whenever I have an important engagement in an unknown place, I always travel super early to minimize the probability that unexpected traffic/circumstances would make me late. This is the responsible thing to do, and something I'd want someone I'm interviewing to do. The comparison is so out of whack. Usually I do tend to just hang out in a common space with central air and not enter into the actual office until 5-10 minutes prior unless requested otherwise. But if no such space is available, and the weather is unsuitable for waiting outside, I have no qualms with asking if there's someplace I can wait inside. On the other side, as the person holding the meeting, if you come really early and have to wait 30minutes outside my door, I don't give a gently caress that was a choice you made. Why would anyone feel bad for a choice someone made for themselves, that is at worst mildly inconveniencing? Isn't that kind of patronizing? I don't get the problem here. Rurutia fucked around with this message at 19:11 on Sep 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 19:07
|
|
|
Every situation is different. If you're going to visit a mom and pop shop, they're much more likely to tell the interviewer that the interviewee is there and the interviewer is probably more likely to drop something to see that person, if only because in smaller organizations, schedules are habitually more flexible. If you're going to interview at a large office or corporate office, for example, then it's much more likely that you'll just wait until the appointed time just because they're more likely to work strictly according to schedule. These are just generalizations but can we please stop debating the exact minute to arrive prior to the interview, before which you're a douchebag and after which you're fashionably early?
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 19:26
|
|
|
In grad school, we read studies in my management courses about HR. Apparently, interviews and pre-screening evaluations have basically no predictive power for the future performance of employees in any way you can measure it, performance metrics, tenure, teamwork, whatever. Roughly 80% of hiring managers perform worse than randomly selecting candidates, and the top 10% hiring managers perform only marginally better than randomly selecting candidates. There was one study, some huge MNC was staffing an entire dept. They had a dozen hiring managers interview 50 people, and then they hired all the people. One person was ranked #1 by one manager, #50 by another, but ended up being a reasonable performer. There was no correlation at all between who the hiring managers agreed would be good employees and who were actually good employees. I assume hiring managers come up with all these weird etiquette rules because there is no sane, objective basis to rule people out, but they have to winnow the list somehow.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 20:09
|
|
|
jromano posted:I finished updating my resume after taking the advice in this thread. I think it turned out pretty well. Would anyone be able to critique? Thanks It looks pretty good. A few suggestions: "possessing leadership experience and highly-recognized industry certifications" That sounds kind of weird. Maybe "demonstrating leadership" and if the certs are highly recognized, maybe just put list them there and the person reading your resume will know? If you have to explain them, maybe call them "prestigious industry certifications" or something? I think "highest level" should have a hyphen: "highest-level." The phrase modifies the noun. I think "Blackberry" should be capitalized, as should the "Cum" in "Cum Laude." And fix the typo here: "Maintaind Active Directory" and should Active Directory be capitalized? Is that a brand or proper name?
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 21:11
|
|
|
quote:Interviewed with a recruiter. 2 weeks later, had a double interview with the two managers. Two weeks later: Update: I waited all day. She didn't call me. I called her at 4:30pm and left a voicemail. What the gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 22:24
|
|
|
posh spaz posted:Hiring manager 1: I get annoyed if people eat 2-5 buffalo wings during the interview. posh spaz posted:...studies... This is terrifying for somebody who's about to go through a load of interviews. It has an odd symmetry with the idea that most investment fund managers (who are supposed to be discerning by profession) perform below the market benchmark most of the time and the excellent ones manage to get ahead for short periods at best. Likewise judges, arbiters of fate like no other, even unto death, are much more likely to not have you termitated for your crimes if they've had lunch. Sometimes the secret protocols can get downright awful.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 22:33
|
|
|
Tawd posted:It has an odd symmetry with the idea that most investment fund managers (who are supposed to be discerning by profession) perform below the market benchmark most of the time and the excellent ones manage to get ahead for short periods at best. I read these books about investing with ad-hoc multifactor models that made a pretty compelling case the market benchmark is the sum of lots of people making sub-optimal decisions. So even though the benchmark is far from the efficient frontier, professional traders still can't meet it. His name was Robert Haugen, he was a quant investment guy. His books were pretty good, short reads, if you're into that sort of thing. posh spaz fucked around with this message at 05:01 on Sep 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 04:10
|
|
|
quote:, interviews and pre-screening evaluations have basically no predictive power for the future performance of employees in any way you can measure it, performance metrics, tenure, teamwork, whatever.  Please cite one of these. This is not at all accurate. See Schmidt & Hunter, 1998. Structured interviews have one of the highest validities of any assessment method. re: arrival times, who gives a poo poo? I'm certainly not going to make a decision based on it, but it is going to annoy me and it's going to start us off on the wrong foot if you're more than 15 minutes or so early. There are only a few chairs and it is just awkward to me to picture somebody sitting out there for so long without any interaction. It makes me feel uncomfortable, but if you nail it, whatever, I'll forget. You wouldn't show up to a party 20 minutes before the time on the flyer and then whine when the host talked about you behind your back later for showing up early. That's what we're talking about. It's not going to disqualify you and was specifically presented as my personal opinion. Quit making GBS threads up this thread about it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 07:38
|
|
|
Bisty Q. posted:
Yes, agreed.. that sounds completely ridiculous. Perhaps it's applicable for people who have no idea how to conduct interviews (like the ones that ask you poo poo like "If you were a tree, what kind of tree would you be?"). They would probably be better off hiring people at random, sure. But if you can read body language and ask the right questions an in-person interview is probably the best tool to help you pick the right candidate for your team. Almost everyone gets at least a little nervous during interviews, for example, which is why I do my best to put them at ease, smile and take genuine interest in what they're saying. If I'm hiring for a quality technician position (largely independent repetitive work) and the person bombs a few questions or seems a little socially awkward that's probably fine. If I'm hiring for a quality leader and the person won't look me in the eye or smile and sits stiffly throughout the whole thing they're probably not the right person for a job which requires great motivational and communication skills. This is in addition to reference checks which are often even more useful. seacat fucked around with this message at 12:14 on Sep 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 12:09
|
|
|
posh spaz posted:In grad school, we read studies in my management courses about HR. Apparently, interviews and pre-screening evaluations have basically no predictive power for the future performance of employees in any way you can measure it, performance metrics, tenure, teamwork, whatever. Roughly 80% of hiring managers perform worse than randomly selecting candidates, and the top 10% hiring managers perform only marginally better than randomly selecting candidates. quote:I think that's just like, your personal deal. Most people don't mind when people are early. Asking them to wait until the scheduled time isn't being a jerk. Asking them to wait 30 minutes past when the appointment was scheduled to start is being a jerk. Also, interviews are a two-way street. I'm looking for the right candidate, but I'm also trying to convince that candidate that this is the right job for them. Making them wait nervously for 30 minutes while I tune the GC and make sure none of the remote customer reps have urgent demands is going to put them off.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 12:35
|
|
|
Bisty Q. posted:Please cite one of these. This is not at all accurate. See Schmidt & Hunter, 1998. Structured interviews have one of the highest validities of any assessment method. Have you read Schmidt & Hunter 1998? Structured interviews and GMA tests have a validity coefficient of .51. Since it was a meta-analysis, those coefficients were corrected for measurement error and range restrictions. There's also kind of a lot of correlation between GMA scores and interview scores (.32), with "little empirical evidence . . . as to what other traits they measure." Further, the size of the effects is modest, at best, typically predicting less than 30% of of the variability in job performance. A bigger problem with studies of pre-employment screening is survivorship bias. Most companies don't hire employees they think are unqualified, so they'll never know if their selection criteria are wrong. Sorry I don't remember all the studies we read in my classes a year ago. I don't have my course notes anymore. However, a cursory search found a newer meta-analysis by Berry, Sackett, & Landers, 2007 found a correlation coefficient of .27 for employment interviews. Others put the number around .40. Is it better than nothing? I suppose, but a 51% (at best) predictor of less than 30% of someone's performance is weak enough I still believe it's more of a winnowing tool than a useful predictor of future employment performance. Bisty Q. posted:Quit making GBS threads up this thread about it. Sorry, I didn't realize discussing the limitations of pre-employment screening was "making GBS threads up the thread."
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 16:38
|
|
|
jackpot posted:Who's to say if you get an offer, but if the guy makes you wait until Thursday's call to tell you you didn't get the job, I'm confident that whatever punishment you come up with, no jury will ever find you guilty. She made me wait until 5 minutes ago. To tell me. That. I didn't get the job. gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
Liam Emsa posted:She made me wait until 5 minutes ago. I'm in a similar situation... the hiring manager I interviewed with earlier this week just called and left a voicemail telling me to call back... I call back and no answer so I leave my own VM. Waiting to hear... if it's to tell me I didn't get the job...  Edit: Got an offer  that's ridiculous they made you wait like that though to hear back.
Jerome Louis fucked around with this message at 23:10 on Sep 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2014 22:42
|
|
|
posh spaz posted:Sorry I don't remember all the studies we read in my classes a year ago. I don't have my course notes anymore. However, a cursory search found a newer meta-analysis by Berry, Sackett, & Landers, 2007 found a correlation coefficient of .27 for employment interviews. Others put the number around .40. posh spaz posted:Apparently, interviews and pre-screening evaluations have basically no predictive power for the future performance of employees in any way you can measure it, performance metrics, tenure, teamwork, whatever. Seriously though, is all your experience academic? Have you ever hired anyone? For that matter, have you ever been on a job interview?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 14:24
|
|
|
Personally, I have never interviewed candidates for a position before, but it strikes me as odd that many of the people who are in positions to implement these procedures and hierarchies might not have been able to get their own jobs at the beginning of their careers; more than once I've heard stories of things that just wouldn't fly today.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 15:21
|
|
|
Dik Hz posted:So, which is it? I said I can't remember the studies we went over in my class. I found different ones. Do you seriously remember the citations for everything you learned in college? If you think Schmidt and Hunter was a slam dunk, well, I disagree. They also found a .10 validity coefficient between hobbies and job performance. I learned in my statistics course (no citation, sorry) that you can contort statistical data to fit pretty much any result you want. That's why I found it interesting that Berry, Sackett, & Landers, 2007 did a different statistical analysis and came up with a .27. I guess your reading comprehension isn't that great, because this whole argument started when I said I showed up 30 min early to a job interview, and I got the job. But point taken, since I've never been a hiring manager, I shouldn't be able to have an opinion about what they do. Just like I've never been an astrologer or a snake-oil salesman, so I should defer to their professional experience in all cases as well. I'll shut the hell up now, you're welcome.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 15:52
|
|
|
posh spaz posted:In grad school, we read studies in my management courses about HR. Apparently, interviews and pre-screening evaluations have basically no predictive power for the future performance of employees in any way you can measure it, performance metrics, tenure, teamwork, whatever. Roughly 80% of hiring managers perform worse than randomly selecting candidates, and the top 10% hiring managers perform only marginally better than randomly selecting candidates. It really depends on the type of interview. Unstructured interviews have no predictive validity, but different levels and types of structured interviews are much better for predicting success on a job.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 16:18
|
|
|
posh spaz posted:I said I can't remember the studies we went over in my class. I found different ones. Do you seriously remember the citations for everything you learned in college? This is primarily a thread where people come to for advice. Posting objectively wrong whiney bullshit in here defeats that purpose. Likewise, although it's possible to annoy the guy running the interview and still get an offer, it probably isn't recommended. Similarly, you're posting about poo poo you have learned about but never actually done. While you are entitled to your opinion, maybe you should learn from people with experience when you're challenged on that opinion rather than digging in and arguing on the internet.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2014 14:05
|
|
|
Dik Hz posted:words If you're looking for something to do, susical and jromano both asked for help with their resumes. I tried to help them the best I could, but I'm sure they'd appreciate it if an expert like you could take a look at them as well. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2014 17:33
|
|
|
Question about cover letters: did i screw myself mentioning that I've had good experiences with someone else in the company through my current position? I currently work in broadcast, and have worked with their advertising person to sell ad space with them, and mentioned in my cover letter that I would enjoy working with the company because I've had nothing but positive experiences with them? I also mentioned that I signed up to volunteer with a music school they opened in conjunction with the Boys&Girl's club in the area. Does that help or hurt my chances? Also they had PLEASE INCLUDE SALARY REQUIREMENTS in big bold letters on the posting, and my response was "Salary is negotiable based on benefits package" as I really have no clue what to ask for and really want them to toss a number out first so I don't ask for way more than what they're willing to pay, and really don't want to lowbll myself either. I mean, I'd be happy with 24k take-home with health insurance/401k/etc, but if they're offering 40k, i don't want to say that. Glassdoor hasn't really helped a lot either, just because everything with the title "staff accountant" is a lot of CPA type jobs, and "bookkeeper" has no jobs with salaries posted on glassdoor. The only jobs with salaries posted for the company in general are for the CSRs, who make 13.00/hr, so I know that saying 24k take home would be the same as a CSR and lowballing myself a lot. It's an entry level accounting position doing AP/AR and reconcilliation, and I'm still not used to figuring out how jobs work with the cheap cost-of-living out here.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2014 22:39
|
|
|
AA is for Quitters posted:Question about cover letters: did i screw myself mentioning that I've had good experiences with someone else in the company through my current position? I currently work in broadcast, and have worked with their advertising person to sell ad space with them, and mentioned in my cover letter that I would enjoy working with the company because I've had nothing but positive experiences with them? I also mentioned that I signed up to volunteer with a music school they opened in conjunction with the Boys&Girl's club in the area. Does that help or hurt my chances? If you said "Despite your advertising person being a gigantic slag, I am still interested in your company", THAT would hurt your chances. quote:Also they had PLEASE INCLUDE SALARY REQUIREMENTS in big bold letters on the posting, and my response was "Salary is negotiable based on benefits package" as I really have no clue what to ask for and really want them to toss a number out first so I don't ask for way more than what they're willing to pay, and really don't want to lowbll myself either. I mean, I'd be happy with 24k take-home with health insurance/401k/etc, but if they're offering 40k, i don't want to say that. Glassdoor hasn't really helped a lot either, just because everything with the title "staff accountant" is a lot of CPA type jobs, and "bookkeeper" has no jobs with salaries posted on glassdoor. The only jobs with salaries posted for the company in general are for the CSRs, who make 13.00/hr, so I know that saying 24k take home would be the same as a CSR and lowballing myself a lot. It's an entry level accounting position doing AP/AR and reconcilliation, and I'm still not used to figuring out how jobs work with the cheap cost-of-living out here. The best postings have it right in there: POSITION offers health, vision, dental, 401(k) with matching, FSA, whatever, after probation period. Don't panic right away though because some of the best companies can have some of the most horrendous postings.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2014 23:13
|
|
|
seacat posted:Typically asking to include salary requirements IS asking for a number (range), yes, but it's dumb of them to ask for this before you even have a phone screen because you don't even know what the benefits would be and those make a HUGE difference. Yes, it's asking for a number. That said, if they want you, the answer you (AA) put is fine. The only place where slavish obedience to this request helps is if you are borderline (and cheap) -- then they might consider you if they wouldn't have before. If you're good, they'll call. If you're bad, they won't. If you're borderline and expensive, they won't. If you're borderline and they don't know, they assume expensive.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2014 23:23
|
|
|
seacat posted:No, that's exactly the type of stuff cover letters are for - to explain why you want that position with that company (and that can be notoriously difficult, often impossible unless you've worked with someone on the inside). yeah, the posting had "COMPANY offers health vision dental, 401k and paid vacation and holidays", but I'd be willing to take a paycut if it means going from 0% match on 401k to full match on 401k, etc. I'd rather lose 2-3k a year off my salary now if it means i have full match on my 401k, or if it means that I have a lesser premium coming out of my paycheck for my insurance. And awesome about knowing mentioning that I like the company helps. I figured it wouldn't hurt, but I also wasn't sure about including a name that I hadn't talked to about first. I said "X in advertising has always been a pleasure to work with, and I have had nothing but positive experiences" (Which honestly, is the truth, and part of the reason I really hope I land this job, because everyone I have dealt with seems happy to work there, and it'd be nice to work for a company that's not underwater. The fact that the owner is friends with like all of hair metal and brings 'em out here all the time is another added bonus).
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 04:09
|
|
|
Kind of a stupid question, but how do informational interviews work? Someone put me in touch with a friend of theirs who works for a company I'm interested in. She said they didn't have any openings, but she'd be happy to talk. I guess my question is what's appropriate, obviously I'm not going in looking for a job at the company, but should I limit it to just looking for advice and information on the company/industry, or is it okay to ask for any connections they might have, etc?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 04:40
|
|
|
So I have 2 interviews tomorrow. One as a Car Dealership sales rep and the other is some ambiguous sales position as well. I had an interview last week in customer service and I think I didn't get hired for the job because of my answer to them asking me if I would eventually want to return to a career in teaching (I think). I have a bachelors degree in education and a bachelors in music and realistically yeah, I eventually see myself going to a teaching position. However, the job market in Ontario for teachers is so bad that it'll take a while for that to happen. How do I answer that question? If I lie and say I didn't like teaching or something, 1) it's a lie 2) I feel it makes me look bad as if I couldn't handle the gig which is not true at all as I love it. I really don't know lol. Same goes for where do you see yourself in 5 years? I was thinking that basically the best thing for me to say is that all I know about the future is that I'm looking for a challenging career with opportunities for growth surrounded by like minded people. It's ambiguous, but it can apply to either of those jobs. What do you guys think? I'm really excited about the car sales rep job because it would be a lot of fun for me and something I could make a good wage doing for a year or so. I just don't know how to swing it to get the job.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 18:27
|
|
|
Good Canadian Boy posted:I was thinking that basically the best thing for me to say is that all I know about the future is that I'm looking for a challenging career with opportunities for growth surrounded by like minded people. It's ambiguous, but it can apply to either of those jobs. What do you guys think? Sounds good to me! I know how you feel...you want to be honest and tell them you'll probably only be there until something better comes along, but obviously that's not going to get you hired. I think your answer does a good job of being honest while also answering the hiring manager's question.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 19:04
|
|
|
Xandu posted:Kind of a stupid question, but how do informational interviews work? Someone put me in touch with a friend of theirs who works for a company I'm interested in. She said they didn't have any openings, but she'd be happy to talk. I guess my question is what's appropriate, obviously I'm not going in looking for a job at the company, but should I limit it to just looking for advice and information on the company/industry, or is it okay to ask for any connections they might have, etc? I would view it at as a networking meeting. They'll tell you about the industry, and it can be a great way to ask tactical questions that are normally hard to answer like "what do you want to see on a resume?" If you impress them, they may pass you on to friends of theirs who are hiring. If you really impress them they might invite you to apply for a position they haven't advertised yet, but that's a long shot and you shouldn't expect it. Try to impress them but also get as much actionable information about the industry's hiring process as you can. Fake edit: My wife just said think of it as meeting a woman you share interests with for coffee at 10 am. You're going to talk about shared interests, they're not ruling out something more, but that's not what they're looking for you shouldn't expect it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 05:46
|
|
|
Question about applying online: some sites, like ZipRecruiter, only has one slot to attach a resume file to and no form field to put a cover letter into. Does that mean that they aren't expecting a cover letter or should I add it into the file for my resume?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 21:05
|
|
|
So I finally got a second round interview (actually the first 1st round interview too), and I'm wondering how many candidates a big defense contractor will pay to fly out and put up to do more interviews for any given position? Is there still significant weeding at this stage, or is it mostly just a check to make sure you're not super weird and can wear a suit and speak properly for a few hours.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 00:30
|
|
|
Gimnbo posted:Question about applying online: some sites, like ZipRecruiter, only has one slot to attach a resume file to and no form field to put a cover letter into. Does that mean that they aren't expecting a cover letter or should I add it into the file for my resume? If you can supply a cover letter it almost always be in your favor to do it! A well-written cover letter can really make you stand out in a positive way. Having said that a BAD cover letter is unlikely to help you and can hurt you (for example if all you do is rehash the resume, or show that you clearly didn't even read the job description and just resume-spamming, etc.). If you do not know what a cover letter is or how to write one research first. I as many others ITT recommend Alison Green's Ask A Manager blog for advice: http://www.askamanager.org/category/cover-letters It's totally possible to just submit your resume and get an interview -- I've done it before. But generally it's wise to take the time and effort to make yourself stand out
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 02:29
|
|
|
Hey goons, I just had my second phone interview with a company I'm actually really interested in. However, I don't have any contact information for the primary recruiter beyond his telephone number and his Linkedin profile (how I found the job). Are they any faux-pas associated with sending the interview followup via linkedIn Inmail? There is no company directory I can find on their website.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 03:41
|
|
|
I've been trying to get an accounting job for a while, and although I've gotten plenty of requests for interview, so far I haven't gotten an offer. I want to get interview coaching. Does anyone have recommendations for coaches in the Chicago area?
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 00:52
|
|
|
Have I mentioned I loving hate online application systems that require you to put in your educational info when my institution isn't even listed? gently caress off, morons.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 21:19
|
|
|
Gothmog1065 posted:Hey goons, I just had my second phone interview with a company I'm actually really interested in. However, I don't have any contact information for the primary recruiter beyond his telephone number and his Linkedin profile (how I found the job). Are they any faux-pas associated with sending the interview followup via linkedIn Inmail? If linkedIn is where you found the job and has been your primary mode of written communication with the recruiter, there's no reason not to keep using it. If you don't feel comfortable you can always ask in the linkedIn message if there's an email address he prefers to be contacted at.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 22:18
|
|
|
SirPhoebos posted:I've been trying to get an accounting job for a while, and although I've gotten plenty of requests for interview, so far I haven't gotten an offer. I want to get interview coaching. Does anyone have recommendations for coaches in the Chicago area? Before you do that, why don't you tell us about some of your interviews? What sort of questions were you asked, where did you stumble, where did you think you did well, etc.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
I have an interview in a company where I just realized one of my former co workers now works. We weren't close but got along pretty well and he seemed like a nice guy. Should I mention that I know that guy? I mean, he doesn't have a managing position (he is basically on the same level of the position I'm applying for), but maybe the interviewer could ask him about me and that could help or the interviewer could have a low opinion on the guy and being his acquaintance could harm my chances.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2014 17:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:35 |
|
|
radlum posted:I have an interview in a company where I just realized one of my former co workers now works. We weren't close but got along pretty well and he seemed like a nice guy. Should I mention that I know that guy? I mean, he doesn't have a managing position (he is basically on the same level of the position I'm applying for), but maybe the interviewer could ask him about me and that could help or the interviewer could have a low opinion on the guy and being his acquaintance could harm my chances. Unless you know for sure that he's going to have a positive effect on your application I wouldn't bother.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2014 21:58
|
|
