Job interview etiquette-for interviewers

[Lisbeth]

And if you don't mention that your business doesn't actually have a sign out front and shares a building with another business and I have to enter through a series of secret tunnels leading from the storm sewer on the corner and then be X-rayed and frisked and given a computer test on Excel before the interview, don't be upset if I end up a bit late :-)

But that's just the thing. I would be upset if you showed up late for that reason, because I would have expect you to ask "Is there anything I should know about getting to your location?" And then I would have expected you to plan accordingly. 

Now, if you asked, and someone didnt tell you, so you only planned for normal interference, then no, I wouldnt be upset at all. 

But tha'ts just me.

I think these days it's more useful for the interviewer to take the initiative and offer the information rather than expecting the applicant to ask for it.

Applicants are like guests-they are there because the interviewer invited them to visit them at their office and discuss the possibility of employment.  Just as a conscientious host would volunteer the information that the parking lot is for residents only at their home, so should an interviewer be proactive and offer this information to the applicant.

It's courteous.

[ShadesOfGrey]

I think these days it's more useful for the interviewer to take the initiative and offer the information rather than expecting the applicant to ask for it.

Applicants are like guests-they are there because the interviewer invited them to visit them at their office and discuss the possibility of employment.  Just as a conscientious host would volunteer the information that the parking lot is for residents only at their home, so should an interviewer be proactive and offer this information to the applicant.

It's courteous.

I can see that. I still disagree, but I can see that perspective.  Thanks for clarifying. 

[kareng57]

[I wouldn't have been surprised either.  But why wouldn't the applicant have researched this before she even contacted the company?  No matter how stellar her qualifications might have been, there'd have been no point in accepting the job if she couldn't easily get there by transit.  (In my metropolitan area, there are some suburb-to-suburb commutes that could easily take three hours or more one way). 

The company may have contacted her first.

In my post, when I suggested that the interviewer make sure the applicant has good directions, I meant that whoever speaks to the applicant, whether that's the interviewer, the receptionist, the admin. assistant, or the CEO make sure that the applicant has some basic idea of where the offices are, as in "We're on the corner of 5th Avenue and 34th Street, 86th floor" and can tell the applicant about parking if that's required. Whether or not the applicant drives, walks, takes the bus, or flies a helicopter is up to them to work out accordingly.  Sometimes it's not obvious where the office is from the mailing address that the applicant sent their resume to, especially if they faxed it or sent it to a post office box in response to a blind ad.

Also, I disagree with rdge that the applicant should then automatically turn around and call the receptionist for direction if they've been talking to someone else first.  Only if the person they've been talking to doesn't know this information should they be transferred to another party.

True, that's why I never like answering "blind" ads.  I'm really not willing to drive beyond about a 40-minute radius (there are a couple of bridges in my metropolitan area that I'd never cross on a daily commute) and transit is next to impossible in many cases.  So if a potential-employer called me for an interview and said "we're located in Smithtown" I'd have replied, "thank you for your interest, but that really is not a convenient location for me".

For the interviewer - basic directions regarding the actual intersection where they're located,  parking and how to get to the particular office (if it's a large building) are fine, but I think that's where his/her responsibility ends.  If I was interviewing, I'd expect the interviewee to be resourceful enough to find a map, use Mapquest (okay, I know it has a few glitches but it's usually pretty good) or look up her area's transit-system website.  If anyone needs more detailed information, it's really not the receptionist's responbility either.  I have to relieve on Reception every now and then, and I'm happy to provide the basic address/intersection/parking information.  Yes, there's a bus that comes near here fairly regularly but no, I don't have the route-number or connection-info, nor do I have time to look it up for anyone.

[NOVA Lady]

[I wouldn't have been surprised either.  But why wouldn't the applicant have researched this before she even contacted the company?  No matter how stellar her qualifications might have been, there'd have been no point in accepting the job if she couldn't easily get there by transit.  (In my metropolitan area, there are some suburb-to-suburb commutes that could easily take three hours or more one way). 

Also, I disagree with rdge that the applicant should then automatically turn around and call the receptionist for direction if they've been talking to someone else first.  Only if the person they've been talking to doesn't know this information should they be transferred to another party.

I am the interviewer and I don't have time to sit on the phone with people and give them directions. If they need directions they can speak with the receptionist. Most of the time applicants aren't having any sort of meaningful dialogue with the interviewer before the interview begins. I've usually set up a time (or had one set up for me) and I might have emailed them in response to a confirmation request. But, I would think it quite odd if an applicant called me and wanted to have a conversation about how to get to the office from their home. Just my opinion.

[NOVA Lady]

And if you don't mention that your business doesn't actually have a sign out front and shares a building with another business and I have to enter through a series of secret tunnels leading from the storm sewer on the corner and then be X-rayed and frisked and given a computer test on Excel before the interview, don't be upset if I end up a bit late :-)

But that's just the thing. I would be upset if you showed up late for that reason, because I would have expect you to ask "Is there anything I should know about getting to your location?" And then I would have expected you to plan accordingly. 

Now, if you asked, and someone didnt tell you, so you only planned for normal interference, then no, I wouldnt be upset at all. 

But tha'ts just me.

I think these days it's more useful for the interviewer to take the initiative and offer the information rather than expecting the applicant to ask for it.

Applicants are like guests-they are there because the interviewer invited them to visit them at their office and discuss the possibility of employment.  Just as a conscientious host would volunteer the information that the parking lot is for residents only at their home, so should an interviewer be proactive and offer this information to the applicant.

It's courteous.

I could not disagree more. if the person I am interviewing doesn't think ahead enough to ask basic questions and isn't able to read a map/find directions online to the office, or since I am in DC see the address and figure out the blocks, or ASK someone if confused, or even do a trial run driveby a day before or so....well then I don't know how much confidence I have in them anyhow. If they're hired theres not going to be someone there making sure they ask all the questions they should to get the information they need to do their work. Part of being a good employee is using your brain and asking the questions you need to in order to get where you're going/complete the task you're doing.

I do agree if there's soemthing weird about the location that should be mentioned. For example my building requires a security pod for people to go up to certain floor, our floor being one of them. We let the applicants know that they'll have to go to the security desk in the lobby and get them to swipe them in and that their name will be left with the desk. Other then that...its on the interviewer to make sure they know how to get there even if that includes asking someone at the company.

[Lisbeth]

[I wouldn't have been surprised either.  But why wouldn't the applicant have researched this before she even contacted the company?  No matter how stellar her qualifications might have been, there'd have been no point in accepting the job if she couldn't easily get there by transit.  (In my metropolitan area, there are some suburb-to-suburb commutes that could easily take three hours or more one way). 

Also, I disagree with rdge that the applicant should then automatically turn around and call the receptionist for direction if they've been talking to someone else first.  Only if the person they've been talking to doesn't know this information should they be transferred to another party.

I am the interviewer and I don't have time to sit on the phone with people and give them directions. If they need directions they can speak with the receptionist. Most of the time applicants aren't having any sort of meaningful dialogue with the interviewer before the interview begins. I've usually set up a time (or had one set up for me) and I might have emailed them in response to a confirmation request. But, I would think it quite odd if an applicant called me and wanted to have a conversation about how to get to the office from their home. Just my opinion.

And what if there is no receptionist?

And if you don't have the time to give directions to people you are inviting to meet with you, why should they bother to meet with you?

I don't have patience with "I don't have time" excuses not to give the people the interviewer is asking to take time out of their lives to meet with you to give them the information they need.  Remember, you're the one who called them.

If they called you first, then yes, they should ask.  But otherwise, sorry, I don't agree that they have to do all the work.

[ShadesOfGrey]

And what if there is no receptionist?

And if you don't have the time to give directions to people you are inviting to meet with you, why should they bother to meet with you?

I don't have patience with "I don't have time" excuses not to give the people the interviewer is asking to take time out of their lives to meet with you to give them the information they need.  Remember, you're the one who called them.

If they called you first, then yes, they should ask.  But otherwise, sorry, I don't agree that they have to do all the work.

I guess if there's no receptionist, it would fall to whomever takes care of the logistical details for the company. If that's the interviewer, that's fine.

It's not about not having time, it's about time well spent. I dont pay my executives/managers to give directions, I pay them to judge a candidates potential for working here. THAT's what I want them doing for me and when it comes down to it, that's what I want them spending their time on.  Individual actions aren't much, but over time, it adds up and it's principle.  Also I do pay the receptionist (or whoever) to handle the logistical details like that.

I called them probably because they submitted a resume, which means that the candidate initiated the direct conversation, so by your own logic, the cadidate should be doing the asking, anyway. 

If someone doesnt want to meet with me because I dont want to spend time giving them directions, then I probably wouldnt want them working for me. It's indicative of an attitude/perspective that I just dont want to deal with.  They may be the most skilled individual in the world, but if they aren't willing to take initiative for things, what good is it?

jmo

[Lisbeth]

The problem is, the applicant generally has no idea who gets paid to do what at your company if s/he has never dealt with you before.

Remember, this is their first interaction with you and your company.  They don't know any of the staff.  They might even be flying in from out of town.  If you keep shuffling them off to different people because of what you decide your staffers should do, what kind of impression does that leave to an applicant who keeps getting put on hold or given the sense that you're "too busy" or "too important" to answer basic questions?

I'd appreciate it if we could agree to disagree on this issue going forward.

[NOVA Lady]

And what if there is no receptionist?

And if you don't have the time to give directions to people you are inviting to meet with you, why should they bother to meet with you?

I don't have patience with "I don't have time" excuses not to give the people the interviewer is asking to take time out of their lives to meet with you to give them the information they need.  Remember, you're the one who called them.

If they called you first, then yes, they should ask.  But otherwise, sorry, I don't agree that they have to do all the work.

So if the CEO of the company is interviewing someone they must be the ones to have a 10 minute conversation with the applicant about where to park, how to get there, what bus lines run there? Thats not realistic. Luckily almost all of the people I interview do understand that I do NOT have the time (to sit on the phone with them) and they have no issues with either being an indipendant human and figuring out how to get there themselves or calling the company and speaking with the receptionist, or in a case where there isn't one whoever handles admin type tasks.

I don't usually set up my own interview slots, the receptionist does that. But if I did set the slot up....the applicant is the one who wants the job right? Why would they bug me with logistical stuff thats easy to find out elsewhere (like on their own)? Do they want me to think they don't know how to read a map, plan ahead, and generally think for themselves. The burden is definetly on the interviewee to figure out the logistics of how to get to the interview aside from any need to know info (like our security situation, or if the street in front of the office is closed).

[NOVA Lady]

The problem is, the applicant generally has no idea who gets paid to do what at your company if s/he has never dealt with you before.

Remember, this is their first interaction with you and your company.  They don't know any of the staff.  They might even be flying in from out of town.  If you keep shuffling them off to different people because of what you decide your staffers should do, what kind of impression does that leave to an applicant who keeps getting put on hold or given the sense that you're "too busy" or "too important" to answer basic questions?

I'd appreciate it if we could agree to disagree on this issue going forward.

Well sure they don't know the staff structure but when I was interviewing and needed directions or to ask a quesiton I used my common sense and instead of emailing/calling the President or CFO with whom my interview was scheduled I called the front desk and asked for help there, sometimes I was transferred to an assitant, sometimes the receptionist helped me. Its easy, you call and say, "Hi, my name is ____ I have an interview with ____ tommorrow, I was wondering if there is parking around you location."

[ccnumber4]

I agree with most of these.  Am partially agreed with KeenReader and partially with rdge on the directions thing.  Yes, it is the interview-ee's responsibility to make sure she can find her way to the interview location.  However, while I might think to say, "Is there security I will have to clear?" or "Where is the best place to park?", I don't think it would occur to me to say "Is there anything special I should know about your location?"  

I think if there is something out of the ordinary, it would be coureous for the hiring company to mention this.  That doesn't always mean that they will, however, so it is still the applicant's responsibility to drive the route, give herself extra time, whatever it takes to make sure she is comfortable with where she is going before the actual interview.  

When I was interviewing (in state) I would often drive the route during the hour I would be commuting to see if it was even a commute I would be willing to make.  

Regarding resumes: in a perfect world the interviewer will have your resume, coverletter and application in alphabetical order on her desk in front of her and ready to go.  However, an applicant has to remember that this interview is just a small portion of the day for the interviewer, who probably has a million and one other things going on that day.  

Especially in a fast-paced environment, you have to expect that the interviewer may not have been carrying your resume around with her all day in anticipation of your interview.  Having an extra copy with you so that she doesn't HAVE to dig one out and offering it before she wastes both of your time hunting for one is both courteous and professional.  

[ShadesOfGrey]

The problem is, the applicant generally has no idea who gets paid to do what at your company if s/he has never dealt with you before.

Remember, this is their first interaction with you and your company.  They don't know any of the staff.  They might even be flying in from out of town.  If you keep shuffling them off to different people because of what you decide your staffers should do, what kind of impression does that leave to an applicant who keeps getting put on hold or given the sense that you're "too busy" or "too important" to answer basic questions?

I'd appreciate it if we could agree to disagree on this issue going forward.

I think we disagree on what is normal - I would consider it normal to be sent to the logistical manner to handle logistics, and consider it, in fact, appropriate.  You would feel shuffled around or put off, as if that person were telling you he or she were to important to answer those questions.  

No problem, we can definitely agree to disagree.  

[White Dragon]

Another tip for interviewers: If you say you are going to call back within a certain time frame, then do so! It's frustrating, disappointing and unprofessional.

Last spring I interviewed for a job. I was told that the organization had undergone a reorganization since the job was posted and the terms of work might be altered from the ad, along with the contract length. They said the position might now be much longer term than originally believed.

At the conclusion of the interview, I was told they'd get back to me by x date, one way or another.
Fine, no problem.

A week after x date, I called back. Turns out the job no longer existed and she had "tried to call me."
I found out later that they found this out just before my interview, but since it was too late to cancel, went ahead with the interview. I can understand feeling they should go ahead, since they'd already asked for my time, but I feel they were misleading, especially about the terms and the call back time!

A month later, I was at the same office on personal business when I ran into the lady who interviewed me. She looked at me, said "Didn't you interview for the xxx job?" When I said I had she said "Are you still available? Do you want it?"
Apparently, the restructuring required that position again. She had "tried to call me and tell me."
(But I still wonder why, in all the vaguaries of electronics, that this lady is the only person who could call both my cell phone and answering machine twice and somehow fail to contact me. Hasn't happned before or since....)

I did take the job, and loved the work, although it did give me some EHell fodder from time to time!

So interviewers: Do what you say you're going to do!

St Monica

[supotco]

(But I still wonder why, in all the vaguaries of electronics, that this lady is the only person who could call both my cell phone and answering machine twice and somehow fail to contact me. Hasn't happned before or since....)

I have had recruiters in the past who appear to 'have been trying desperately to contact me' . They do not appear to have been using either of my phone numbers, my e-mail or the postal service. Telepathy?

[White Dragon]

I have had recruiters in the past who appear to 'have been trying desperately to contact me' . They do not appear to have been using either of my phone numbers, my e-mail or the postal service. Telepathy?

Definately telepathy.

Then they turn into those really great supervisors that expect you to read their minds! 

St Monica