Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Interview nervousness

Having been told yesterday that no, they weren't sending out confirmations for the interviews, just turn up ... guess what came in the post today?

A confirmation letter.

*shrug*

Apparently when I get there I have to ask for the person who is the "Talent Manager" ... I thought this was a job, not X Factor?
 
Ok so I survived the day.

Got there early, a few people also waiting, apparently around 100 were scheduled to appear during the day for one of the three presentations (I went for the middle session at noon).

Sat through the presentation, there wasn't much I didn't already know there about the company, but afterwards went to see Hayley the talent manager (as per the letter), and she asked me to just hang around until everyone else had gone. The others filled in application forms there and then, which will be sorted through later that day, or monday/tuesday, then the successful ones will be called for interviews.

After everyone else had gone, I was called for interview, which was in a small side room with two guys, which lasted about 35 minutes, roughly what I expected. The usual questions... what do you know about the company, can you tell us about your experience in (this) which is part of the job requirement, what would you do in this hypothetical scenario etc - nothing really too taxing.

At the very end, they asked to check that they had an up to date contact number for me - which may or may not have been a standard question, but I thought it was encouraging. As far as I can tell, in that middle session, I was the only one that got an interview.

So... all I have to do now is wait. I don't know about the other two sessions, but there were certainly a very mixed bunch there, some in suits, others in jeans with their arse hanging out. I guess whether or not I get called forward for the next stage depends very much how strong the other candidates were, and where I fall within that range. All I know is that I did the best I could on the day, and that's what really matters. If it's not good enough for them... then I guess it's their loss.
 
thank you, what sort of things were you going to describe just for future reference?

Well, they're not all exactly the same - there are different exercises depending on the type of position and skills/competences required.

The invitation to the assessment centre usually sets out what the format will be, and whether or not there will be psychometric tests and/or personality questionnaires. Plus whether or not there will also be a one to one interview (although sometimes those are done on different dates).

Usually all the candidates are in one room with a number of observers around the edge. The number of observers will depend on the number of candidates and the complexity of the exercises. To start with, there's usually a short briefing, introducing everyone and a quick run through of what to expect.

Then there's a number of exercises during which the observers score the candidates according to the criteria that they have. The exercises are timed.

There's often an in-tray exercise which is designed to test a candidate's ability to take in information under time pressure, then prioritise and delegate where appropriate. The in-tray itself might consist of a wadge of letters/papers/memos and emails to sort through ... often with an urgent one 2/3 of the way down the pile. So the trick is to quickly scan each document sorting them into piles as you go 'urgent' important' 'not important' sort of thing. Then deciding on what takes priority and who is going to do it. You get the idea.

So ... a variety of exercises like that. Some are designed to test problem analysis and solving, some to test team work etc etc.
 
Nope, letter came saturday, "thanks for coming but you have not been successful in securing appointment". Way to ruin my weekend.

Thankfully there is a name and number given of one of the interviewers who I may contact if I 'require feedback on my performance' so later today I will be ringing and finding out why I was unsuccessful. Then, if I am not happy with their explanations, I will be taking it up with higher authorities within the company.

Three possible things spring to mind.

1) That area has had a lot of redundancies lately, with many people available to start asap, whereas I have a standard one month notice period.

2) I'm not "local". Without 'the right connections' and funny handshakes, not much gets done in that area.

3) Although the issue was not raised, there would be sunday working involved. As a Christian, they might have thought this would have been an issue, but they didn't ask it, and surely as I knew this before applying, they should have realised it wouldn't be a problem? Perhaps I should have raised the point during the interview, but I didn't want to be seen to push it as I knew there had also been a lot of union problems about sunday working over the last 6 months and it might well have been a touchy issue (the two guys that interviewed were managers and quite likely in the union).

All options, if they are voiced, are clearly bang out of order, and not acceptable reasons not to proceed with my application.

Now, I know there were about 100 applicants, so it may be that others had what they considered "more relevant" experience. But once I call them to find out what's going on, I can then proceed with knowledge as to how to proceed.
 
No, I'm not joking, I want this job, it's something I've wanted to do for years and opportunities are few and far between, and I can't think of one good reason why they didn't offer it to me - thus I have to follow it up, for my own satisfaction, that I was treated fairly, and not discriminated against.

In a county that is ethnically 98.5% white, I need to be sure that there was none of this "positive discrimination" bullshit going on where minorities are given preference over otherwise better qualified, but white, applicants.
 
Shut up you tart. As far as I can tell you can have no indication that discrimination has taken place.

I can understand that you're disappointed in not getting the role, but the sheer fact that you're focusing on this issue and bandying around unsubstantiated bollocks about 'positive discrimination'/unfairness to whites suggests to me that you've got a number of chips on your shoulder that an employer would be wise to take note of. Maybe they already have.
 
Waste of breath tarannau. I've explained umpteen times to ajdown that positive discrimination is illegal, but to no avail. Also that his lack of success with job applications may be due in part to this kind of attitude coming across, he'd be a walking minefield for a decent employer. Ah well.
 
He's an unpleasant pillock, but I'm a bit shocked his prejudices and poor me syndrome come across even on a subject like this.
 
"Lack of success with job applications"... I've been in my current position for 11 years and haven't applied for many jobs in all that time - so with all due respect I'm not really sure that you know what you're talking about.

There has to be a very good reason why I wasn't successful - because my experience, knowledge and skills was a very good match for what they put out on their website as what the job involved. Which leads me to believe it is possibly something fishy.

Whilst 'positive discrimination may be illegal', it doesn't stop it being practiced does it? They just don't write it down on the reports.
 
There has to be a very good reason why I wasn't successful - because my experience, knowledge and skills was a very good match for what they put out on their website as what the job involved. Which leads me to believe it is possibly something fishy.

Whilst 'positive discrimination may be illegal', it doesn't stop it being practiced does it? They just don't write it down on the reports.

So when you ring up they're just going to cave in and suggest that they gave it to Halal eating non-english speaking type just to spite you then? Get real.

Skills and knowledge match aside, have you ever considered that they found you a dislikeable individual, with discriminatory and out of proportion opinions that would reflect badly on the professionalism of the firm?
 
When you first joined urban you were moaning about your lack of success with job applications, so I'm just going on what you told us at the time ajdown.

Employers should keep records for ethnic monitoring purposes at recruitment and selection stage - they have to be able to demonstrate why they selected candidates for shortlist and appointment. Illegal discrimination does take place, of course it does, but I wouldn't say it was the default position or an automatic assumption to make if you are white and don't get a job you applied for.
 
Skills and knowledge match aside, have you ever considered that they found you a dislikeable individual, with discriminatory and out of proportion opinions that would reflect badly on the professionalism of the firm?

There's absolutely no reason that they could have come to that conclusion in a brief half hour interview from anything that was on my application form, or discussed in that interview.

I have no "out of proportion opinions", merely ones that you - for whatever reason - choose to disagree with.
 
Interesting that your dream job should be working in public transport, ajdown.

Do you have a portrait of Dr. Beeching on your bedroom wall?

:hmm:
 
What an absurd thread! Shall I now conclude every unsuccessful job interview I've been to has been down to the fact I'm white?

:hmm:
 
Interesting that your dream job should be working in public transport, ajdown.

Do you have a portrait of Dr. Beeching on your bedroom wall?

:hmm:

Not at all, Beeching decimated the railways and made many very stupid decisions.

Mind you, he was Labour, wasn't he?
 
Not at all, Beeching decimated the railways and made many very stupid decisions.

Mind you, he was Labour, wasn't he?

He wasn't a politician, he was a businessman and had previously been the head of ICI.

And he was appointed by a conservative government.

So, no, he wasn't Labour. Not that I'm sure why it matters.
 
There has to be a very good reason why I wasn't successful - because my experience, knowledge and skills was a very good match for what they put out on their website as what the job involved. Which leads me to believe it is possibly something fishy..


Because there were, say, 6 interviewees and 1 job, so 5 people who were sufficiently qualified to get to interview didn't get it and 1 did?

Perhaps the 'very good reason' is that they chose the one who interviewed best, regardless of how well the the others did. A miss is as good as a mile. That's how the cookie crumbles etc.
 
Apparently there are 8 positions, and 50 people interviewed. But they haven't all been interviewed yet, only 5 (including me).

Somehow I didn't meet their 'criteria' which seems rather odd because they had my form/cv beforehand to know that I would have met the criteria, otherwise they wouldn't have called me for interview.

Be very interesting to see what 'feedback' I get as justification for not meeting whatever criteria they had.
 
Apparently there are 8 positions, and 50 people interviewed. But they haven't all been interviewed yet, only 5 (including me).

Somehow I didn't meet their 'criteria' which seems rather odd because they had my form/cv beforehand to know that I would have met the criteria, otherwise they wouldn't have called me for interview.

Be very interesting to see what 'feedback' I get as justification for not meeting whatever criteria they had.

You will have to post the "feedback" up here in full so we can all see how you have been wronged.
 
Back
Top Bottom