have become torture. Long and laborious, they frequently last for hours, and are often conducted by "panels." Many people have to come back multiple times. I knew somebody who went on six interviews for one job. There are also psychological tests, background checks, and endless reference checks
Another common strategy is to ask prospective applicants to complete a "project" as part of the application process. But what the employer really wants is to get "free" work from somebody they have no intention of hiring. This happened to me and two other people I met. The work of employees who are let go still has to be done. It is typically redistributed to other workers, but at some point they become overwhelmed. So any overflow is distributed to job applicants under the pretense that this is just part of the process of applying for the position in question.
tell the boss you checked out his wife on facebook
have become torture. Long and laborious, they frequently last for hours, and are often conducted by "panels." Many people have to come back multiple times. I knew somebody who went on six interviews for one job. There are also psychological tests, background checks, and endless reference checks
The first thing that came to mind was, does this sound like a place that you would want to work? It sounds to me that it would be more like a concentration camp.
I'd never allow a company to do that to me. I realize that the job market is still a bit rough and you gotta do what you gotta do, but would you even want to work at a place like that?
My current employer gave me a personality test and I thought that was pushing it (none of my previous employers gave one).
I've applicants asked to take skills tests, show non proprietary code samples, do White Boards, but I never had an applicant asked to complete a project
Also, I always approach interviews a ME interviewing THEM
Helps give an air of confidence. Do a little research on the company beforehand and come armed with some questions that will take up some time and shift the focus to them fighting to convince you to work there.
Something like "How has last year's aquisition of ABC Company shifted the corporate culture and employee morale?"
or
"Your major competitor, XYZ Company, is aggressively targeting other markets. What is your business strategy to ensure that you remain the premier provider in this arena?"
RE: tell the boss you checked out his wife on facebook
but put your phone away. I've interviewed people who would be casually checking out their cell phones during the interview.
and don't force questions, if you have them ask, but no one awards extra points or takes them away for those interviewees who ask or don't ask questions.
be confident and thorough, but don't ramble and use as many anecdotes in your responses as you can (seriously) it helps the interviewer relate and distinguish you among the other candidates (oh yeah that's the guy who helped uncover the Vioxx fiasco at Merck, for example).
And I'm not an expert, but I've had my awkward interview moments including splitting my suit pants in the ass in the lobby of the building before the interview. And asking a potential new boss what he (and or the company) does to reward employees who go "above and beyond" - when I felt I had to ask questions. His reply "with continued employment". I did not get that job, but the company (Siebel Systems) didn't last much longer anyway.
a little light, mutually consensual bondage, a red riding crop, an isolated wind swept beach, after; few words, just a few pieces of slightly stale baguette with some good fish eggs and maybe a short swim.
''A cultural problem with depression is that it's very poorly understood, but a lot of people feel qualified to have an opinion about it. (People don't claim to be experts on other diseases, but a lot of people have pet theories on depression.) Yes, getting more exercise and sleeping better will help a lot of people clear out the mild, annoying but usually not life-threatening, depression that normal people get if they get sloppy. People with actual, bona fide clinical depression need medical treatment, however. (If you're sleeping 18 hours per day and brutally lethargic for the other six, it's hard to get physical exercise in the first place, and getting to the grocery store to buy fruit is an ordeal. Think of depression as like a really bad flu that last weeks and you won't be far off.) They aren't "weak" in any moral sense; they're weakened by a horrible, largely physical, disease.
You run into the same thing if you talk about panic, because a lot of people think of the low-level anxiety attacks that everyone gets, not the intense kind that literally feel like you're drowning in air.
I think the problem is that our society (especially in white-collar workplaces) measures people based on a war of attrition. Most companies intentionally create unnecessary stress and promote the last people standing after the rest develop mental illnesses (usually the mild, situational kind) that cause them to be unable to perform. The losing competitors are the ones who experience stress-related, career-rupturing anxiety or depression. (Sometimes this is called "nervous breakdown", but I fucking hate that phrase.) The winners are the ones left over, who are taken to have "proven their loyalty" by out-surviving the rest. This is absurd given that, if a company's running well, it should never see anything remotely like the rightward tail of the decline curve. But this is how the corporate ladder game has been run for decades.
A lot of people won't admit this, but they feel the same way about therapy and mood-regulating medications that they do about doping in sports. They're indignant that "the weak" aren't dropping off as quick as they'd like, and that normal people have to compete harder as a result because the people who used to drop off around 30-35 hours per day can now go to the standard 40-50 or more. This is pure speculation, but I've often thought that the emergence of good anti-anxiety drugs and anti-depressants has been a contributing factor to the increasing hours expected in white-collar work (not to say that these drugs are bad-- they aren't, they're lifesaving-- or that people who need them shouldn't use them-- they should) as well as the increasing prevalence of open-plan office layouts where open-back visibility is the norm. Before benzodiazepines, the economics didn't favor open-back visibility. Now, they might. (I still think open-back visibility is a disaster. Not everyone can afford individual offices, but have some decency.)''
its SOP in the tv commercial acting biz for agencies to hold "auditions" for a spot that they are simply testing to see if its viable. They drag you in for something you can pretty much figure is a waste of time. If they go ahead with it they will hold a legit casting session and having done well in the initial session is meaningless.
I hate interviews where you are interviewed by potential peers
Then I interviewed with the potential manager. By her line of questioning, I realized that she must have conferenced into the interview with the peers, but nobody told me she was going to do so. Pretty sneaky
for ServiceMaster down in Memphis a few years back. They're the parent company for Terminix, American Home Shield, Furniture Medic, AmeriSpec, ServiceMaster Clean, and Merry Maids. They flew me down and I did about 8 interviews in one day and by the end of the day I was losing my mind. Some of them went better than others, but I hit it off with the General Counsel who I would be working for. He's from Chicago... me from New York... both big city guys who spoke the same language.
Long story short he wanted to hire me but they wouldn't meet my salary demands so I didn't take the job. I had relocated in my life once before and I did it for less than I should've. I wasn't doing that again, which he understood. However I realized something... because I was so exhausted I basically let my guard down and it worked. I showed my more human side, which I don't think often comes across in interviews. You're usually presenting this version of yourself that is watered down cause you don't want to mess up, but in reality you're doing more harm because it's easily transparent. I firmly believe that most companies hire a person for who they are not what they know.
its also always good to do a deep meaningful stare at any females
Then three in-person interviews (in the same day) for the job I currently have.
As Headhunter said, definitely stay alert. It's easy to get comfortable when you're interviewing for an entire day, but the last person you speak to deserves as much respect as the first. If you're lucky, he/she will be someone who understands it's mentally tiring to do what you're doing and will appreciate such an attitude even more so.
I don't know the circumstances of your interviews (meaning, if you're in a room with 20 people the entire time, disregard the following), but chances are, they are very interested in you if they are investing this amount of time in you, so you should continue to be confident in what you're doing/saying.
I had an interview a couple years ago at lunch - relaxed, had wine ... Completely nailed it because I hit it off with the VP so well.
No dowsing did not come up...
But I can see how letting things get to familiar can be a problem. Will try and be a pro
Don't overdress for this, you don't want to show up the Interviewer by out-styling him.
Go with the pair of jeans at the bottom of the hamper, and maybe a T-shirt with a witty saying on it.
...
Another common strategy is to ask prospective applicants to complete a "project" as part of the application process. But what the employer really wants is to get "free" work from somebody they have no intention of hiring. This happened to me and two other people I met. The work of employees who are let go still has to be done. It is typically redistributed to other workers, but at some point they become overwhelmed. So any overflow is distributed to job applicants under the pretense that this is just part of the process of applying for the position in question.
either you get hired and instantly promoted to a corner office or thrown out on your ass. less of a drag-on either way.
The first thing that came to mind was, does this sound like a place that you would want to work? It sounds to me that it would be more like a concentration camp.
My current employer gave me a personality test and I thought that was pushing it (none of my previous employers gave one).
Something like "How has last year's aquisition of ABC Company shifted the corporate culture and employee morale?"
or
"Your major competitor, XYZ Company, is aggressively targeting other markets. What is your business strategy to ensure that you remain the premier provider in this arena?"
either you get hired and instantly promoted to a corner office or thrown out on your ass. less of a drag-on either way.
This is awesome minus the chaps. Chaps are dumb.
and don't force questions, if you have them ask, but no one awards extra points or takes them away for those interviewees who ask or don't ask questions.
be confident and thorough, but don't ramble and use as many anecdotes in your responses as you can (seriously) it helps the interviewer relate and distinguish you among the other candidates (oh yeah that's the guy who helped uncover the Vioxx fiasco at Merck, for example).
And I'm not an expert, but I've had my awkward interview moments including splitting my suit pants in the ass in the lobby of the building before the interview. And asking a potential new boss what he (and or the company) does to reward employees who go "above and beyond" - when I felt I had to ask questions. His reply "with continued employment". I did not get that job, but the company (Siebel Systems) didn't last much longer anyway.
Riding crops are awesome, tho. They're not deep tissue so you don't get bruising, but you still raise some nice, satisfying welts.
a full day freaking interview? everyone in that office is probably on fucking zanax.
You run into the same thing if you talk about panic, because a lot of people think of the low-level anxiety attacks that everyone gets, not the intense kind that literally feel like you're drowning in air.
I think the problem is that our society (especially in white-collar workplaces) measures people based on a war of attrition. Most companies intentionally create unnecessary stress and promote the last people standing after the rest develop mental illnesses (usually the mild, situational kind) that cause them to be unable to perform. The losing competitors are the ones who experience stress-related, career-rupturing anxiety or depression. (Sometimes this is called "nervous breakdown", but I fucking hate that phrase.) The winners are the ones left over, who are taken to have "proven their loyalty" by out-surviving the rest. This is absurd given that, if a company's running well, it should never see anything remotely like the rightward tail of the decline curve. But this is how the corporate ladder game has been run for decades.
A lot of people won't admit this, but they feel the same way about therapy and mood-regulating medications that they do about doping in sports. They're indignant that "the weak" aren't dropping off as quick as they'd like, and that normal people have to compete harder as a result because the people who used to drop off around 30-35 hours per day can now go to the standard 40-50 or more. This is pure speculation, but I've often thought that the emergence of good anti-anxiety drugs and anti-depressants has been a contributing factor to the increasing hours expected in white-collar work (not to say that these drugs are bad-- they aren't, they're lifesaving-- or that people who need them shouldn't use them-- they should) as well as the increasing prevalence of open-plan office layouts where open-back visibility is the norm. Before benzodiazepines, the economics didn't favor open-back visibility. Now, they might. (I still think open-back visibility is a disaster. Not everyone can afford individual offices, but have some decency.)''
Long story short he wanted to hire me but they wouldn't meet my salary demands so I didn't take the job. I had relocated in my life once before and I did it for less than I should've. I wasn't doing that again, which he understood. However I realized something... because I was so exhausted I basically let my guard down and it worked. I showed my more human side, which I don't think often comes across in interviews. You're usually presenting this version of yourself that is watered down cause you don't want to mess up, but in reality you're doing more harm because it's easily transparent. I firmly believe that most companies hire a person for who they are not what they know.
but no
As Headhunter said, definitely stay alert. It's easy to get comfortable when you're interviewing for an entire day, but the last person you speak to deserves as much respect as the first. If you're lucky, he/she will be someone who understands it's mentally tiring to do what you're doing and will appreciate such an attitude even more so.
I don't know the circumstances of your interviews (meaning, if you're in a room with 20 people the entire time, disregard the following), but chances are, they are very interested in you if they are investing this amount of time in you, so you should continue to be confident in what you're doing/saying.
Best of luck.
Link - ( New Window )