News: IMPORTANT UPDATE REGARDING SITE IN FORUM ANNOUNCEMENT FOLDER.

  • May 23, 2018, 09:46:44 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74  (Read 4290049 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

goldilocks

  • Member
  • Posts: 865
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5370 on: February 28, 2014, 01:45:42 PM »
I just interviewed someone for a manager position.   He'd be roughly my equal, just over a different area of responsibility. 

During the interview he mentioned that he was "good friends" with one of our senior VP's.   

Okay, I like SVP, but do I really want one of his buddies around all the time?   I put a call into SVP for a recommendation, and depending on the outcome of that I may veto him.

Carotte

  • Member
  • Posts: 1744
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5371 on: February 28, 2014, 05:46:13 PM »
I just interviewed someone for a manager position.   He'd be roughly my equal, just over a different area of responsibility. 

During the interview he mentioned that he was "good friends" with one of our senior VP's.   

Okay, I like SVP, but do I really want one of his buddies around all the time?   I put a call into SVP for a recommendation, and depending on the outcome of that I may veto him.

And if SVP actually knows the guy! How many people have pullet the "I know the owner" trick? Maybe not in your specific situation, but "good friend" might mean they just frequent the same golf club and chatted once..

Delete My Account

  • Member
  • Posts: 211
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5372 on: February 28, 2014, 05:50:40 PM »
During the interview he mentioned that he was "good friends" with one of our senior VP's.

I'll bet a dozen donuts that he believed mentioning this would give him an edge on getting the position.

LazyDaisy

  • Member
  • Posts: 1154
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5373 on: February 28, 2014, 06:03:25 PM »
It is a good idea, however, to disclose any personal relationships with existing employees. My employer asks that question specifically on the job application, "Do you know, or are you related to any current or past University employees?", in addition to the more general "how did you hear about this job?" It doesn't automatically count for or against anyone as far as I know. We have lots of husband/wife, parent/child etc. people working around campus. They just can't report directly to each other.

It could be that he didn't want to appear deceitful.
"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." — Douglas Adams

shadowfox79

  • Member
  • Posts: 2957
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5374 on: March 01, 2014, 03:12:02 AM »
One of our lecturers may have dropped herself in it this week.

"Sirena" is a young, pretty lecturer who knows how to ingratiate herself with the students and also how to get herself out of trouble with management. When there is a deadline to be met she will never, ever meet it, no matter how hard you chase her, and when the Head of School finally pulls her in about all these unconfirmed minutes and missing exam papers she brings out the waterworks. We dread having to deal with her.

However, I was typing up student module evaluations this week for a module she teaches on. The other tutor on the module is an African man. I came to an abrupt halt when, on one of the evals, I found the comment "I believe Sirena is racist." Going through the rest of the evals I pulled out five which all stated that Sirena spends a lot of class time directing hostility towards the other tutor, even trying to incite the students against him.

I suspect there would have been many more comments had she actually said something specifically racist. However, clearly this is unprofessional, so I sent the copies over to the Head of School. He let me know he'll be investigating it. Hoo boy.

DollyPond

  • Member
  • Posts: 718
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5375 on: March 01, 2014, 10:46:03 AM »
Here's a ticking time bomb of PD...

New Hire's first day of work was yesterday.  In this first day he managed to accomplish the following:

 - ask to schedule several weeks of vacation time around major holidays because he's "used to" taking that time off
 - say to a group of co-workers (mostly women) "I guess I need to watch that I don't offend the LAY-DEES because there's a lot of women here."
 - spend time talking about his extensive knowledge of pron movies

All of this and more on Day One.  I'm getting some popcorn.

End of Week One update:

In addition to the above he has...

Said to one female co-worker: "I'm a tool - so use me."

Told a group of co-workers (both male and female) an "off color" joke where no one laughed and just stared at him.

Will post more as it occurs as I doubt the clue-by-four has yet to (or ever will) take effect.

FauxFoodist

  • Member
  • Posts: 5015
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5376 on: March 01, 2014, 12:38:33 PM »
One of the employees in my section is too blind to see she's committing PD.

She's currently a per diem employee who is in the process of finalizing her move to career.  When you're per diem, you're guaranteed nothing, including your job.  The department can simply not schedule you for four months (because there's no guarantee of hours) then terminate you for not working for four months (it's called a "per diem release").

Anyway, apparently, she doesn't understand office politics and how she's quickly going to lose the career offer if she doesn't quit being a prima donna.  Last year, she and another resident applied for the same career position and were equal as far as qualifications.  Ultimately, the other resident was offered the position because she (employee) has some personality issues.  As a "consolation," she was hired on as per diem (because we had no more career positions available at the time).

Fast forward a few months and the other person leaves for another job so the position is available again.  We are allowed to offer it to her since we're still within the hiring deadline and then won't need to recruit for the position again.  She says she needs to think about it.  She spends a few weeks thinking about it then says she'll take it.  Great.  I submit the necessary info to hire her into the position.  She changes her mind.  Great, I just wasted about 30-45 minutes of work because now I have to cancel the request and start over, which I do.  Guest what?  She changes her mind AGAIN and decides to apply.   :o  >:(  I'm peeved because, now, she's just wasting everyone's time.

She then withdraws because she decides she wants to hold out for one of the other career positions that has the hours she wants...sort of.  The other career positions are "fill-in" positions to boost the staffing during our low-staffing times -- evenings and weekends.  She also, apparently, goes round and round with the recruiter claiming that a University policy states that, as a per diem employee, she does not have to do the six-month probation period when being hired into a career position.  The recruiter points out that, yes, that is a University policy...that doesn't apply to her position! (it's for a non-represented, meaning non-union, group; her union contract stipulates that she undergoes a six-month probation period).

Okay, you think she'd learn at this point.  Nope!  She argues with the person who will be her supervisor about the hours she will be expected to work and asks how those hours are equitable with the other staff.  Well, her position was specifically created to cover evenings and weekends; otherwise, it wouldn't exist.  To make sure this is in writing and very clear, her supervisor adds that stipulation into her job description (it was in the ad for the position).  The assistant manager (who is her supervisor's supervisor) has already e-mailed the employee that this is her last opportunity and if she does not want to take this career position, then she may remain per diem (which actually means she'll be on her way out the door).

I'm not looking at my employer through rose-colored glasses; it is an excellent place to work and there are lots of opportunities for career advancement.  We also earn a pension for once we retire.  This employee has not learned the dynamics of choosing her battles (I have; while I'm not thrilled about having to "play the game," I like my job and know to assess the atmosphere before deciding when to address things or not to address them at all).  The impression I get is she thinks she's looking out for her best interest and is being really savvy in asking all these questions.  What she doesn't get is she has painted herself as a prima donna (even the recruiter told the supervisor that all these demands set up a huge red flag of problems to come).  I have a feeling that she's either not going to make it through probation or she's going to find a career position elsewhere (we knew she'd been looking; I'm guessing no one else was offering exactly what she wanted or else she would've left months ago).  Once she goes out that door, though, I know without question that she won't be welcome back (won't even make it past the application screening process; fortunately, we can screen out for those with proven personality/behavior issues, despite the skill-set and/or experience).

Giraffe, Esq

  • Member
  • Posts: 453
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5377 on: March 01, 2014, 05:09:19 PM »
I just realized I have a story for here!  I am now the coordinator of the summer associate program for my small, non-profit law firm.  We placed the job listing at multiple schools and it explicitly stated that we prefer 2Ls (students finishing their second year of law school), but 1Ls may apply.

10 days before the application deadline, a 1L emails our generic "info" email to say that he loves our mission, is "keenly interested" in the position...but has a few questions about us before he applies.  Goes on to say he can be reached best by phone and gives his phone number.

Note, he does not ask if someone could please call him.  Just states that he can be reached by phone.  Also...he's a 1L.  Applying for a paid summer position.  Those are HARD to find.  He claims to love our mission, so what other info does he need?  He loves our mission, it's paid -- APPLY!

I responded to give him our website and say that any questions he still has can be brought up in an interview "if he gets one."

He did apply and ended up getting a preliminary interview, whereupon we found out what his question was...

"What jobs have your prior summer associates gone on to do?"

Seriously?!?!  That tells me that he's got SUCH an ego that he will only take a job that will offer a great stepping stone to the bigger and better things he will do someday and we're just SO lucky to get him!

Yeah, no.  He did not get a second interview.

#borecore

  • Member
  • Posts: 5280
  • Extreme normcore
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5378 on: March 01, 2014, 05:29:19 PM »
I just realized I have a story for here!  I am now the coordinator of the summer associate program for my small, non-profit law firm.  We placed the job listing at multiple schools and it explicitly stated that we prefer 2Ls (students finishing their second year of law school), but 1Ls may apply.

10 days before the application deadline, a 1L emails our generic "info" email to say that he loves our mission, is "keenly interested" in the position...but has a few questions about us before he applies.  Goes on to say he can be reached best by phone and gives his phone number.

Note, he does not ask if someone could please call him.  Just states that he can be reached by phone.  Also...he's a 1L.  Applying for a paid summer position.  Those are HARD to find.  He claims to love our mission, so what other info does he need?  He loves our mission, it's paid -- APPLY!

I responded to give him our website and say that any questions he still has can be brought up in an interview "if he gets one."

He did apply and ended up getting a preliminary interview, whereupon we found out what his question was...

"What jobs have your prior summer associates gone on to do?"

Seriously?!?!  That tells me that he's got SUCH an ego that he will only take a job that will offer a great stepping stone to the bigger and better things he will do someday and we're just SO lucky to get him!

Yeah, no.  He did not get a second interview.

Lowly 1L here. I know not to do what your applicant did, but I can see many of my peers doing exactly the same thing.

I'm really excited about my nonprofit summer work, and I smiled when they told me it was unpaid and started doing my own funding research immediately. It's practically a given (and reinforced by our school at every turn) that 1L summers are unpaid.

I am curious, though, if that question is bad in general, or if it's just bad in context. I would really like to know whether firms or nonprofits are hiring their past interns, but I don't know how to get that information without asking.

BB-VA

  • Member
  • Posts: 847
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5379 on: March 01, 2014, 05:39:36 PM »
Managers for many years saw "working the computer" as a lower-level secretarial function.  Computers were looked on simultaneously as just improved typewriters AND as mysterious, complicated contraptions that one could blow up simply by clicking on the wrong button.   Just as managers didn't need to learn how to use a typewriter, so they didn't need to learn how to use a computer.  And it would be better if they didn't, because they were certain to press that wrong button.  ::)


I worked for one company (in the floppy disk days) where it was a status symbol for a manager to have a computer on his desk.  It was not, however, a status symbol for the manager to actually know how to use it. 

I was the payroll clerk for that company, and the HR manager was supposed to give me the data for the weekly raises before I did payroll.  AND every week, I had to go to his office to show him how to insert the floppy into the drive so he could give me the data. 

Considering that it was a family owned company, and the reason the HR manager had the job was that he was a son-in-law, it probably could have been worse.
"The Universe puts us in places where we can learn. They are never easy places, but they are right. Wherever we are, it's the right place and the right time. Pain that sometimes comes is part of the process of constantly being born."
- Delenn to Sheridan: "Babylon 5 - Distant Star"

Jocelyn

  • Member
  • Posts: 2013
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5380 on: March 01, 2014, 05:58:09 PM »
 

I am curious, though, if that question is bad in general, or if it's just bad in context. I would really like to know whether firms or nonprofits are hiring their past interns, but I don't know how to get that information without asking.

I think that is a question that might be best asked of someone at your school (is there a placement office?) or AFTER you have established a reputation for being a good intern at the internship. :) At the interview, I think it is good to focus on the ways in which you can be a solution to their problems, rather than how they can be a solution to yours. That covers all sorts of things like asking about salary and vacation days, too. Perhaps you could ask about the partners and associates at the firm: have they been with the firm long? What sort of internships did they do prior to joining the firm? What are the job qualifications that the firm looks for in associates? If they hire their own interns, surely they'd mention that in response to those questions, and it makes the point that you're interested in their firm for the long-run, and you're interested in preparing to meet their needs, rather than just focusing on what they can do for you. :)

Giraffe, Esq

  • Member
  • Posts: 453
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5381 on: March 01, 2014, 07:17:55 PM »
 

I am curious, though, if that question is bad in general, or if it's just bad in context. I would really like to know whether firms or nonprofits are hiring their past interns, but I don't know how to get that information without asking.

I think that is a question that might be best asked of someone at your school (is there a placement office?) or AFTER you have established a reputation for being a good intern at the internship. :) At the interview, I think it is good to focus on the ways in which you can be a solution to their problems, rather than how they can be a solution to yours. That covers all sorts of things like asking about salary and vacation days, too. Perhaps you could ask about the partners and associates at the firm: have they been with the firm long? What sort of internships did they do prior to joining the firm? What are the job qualifications that the firm looks for in associates? If they hire their own interns, surely they'd mention that in response to those questions, and it makes the point that you're interested in their firm for the long-run, and you're interested in preparing to meet their needs, rather than just focusing on what they can do for you. :)

Actually, it's not even that horrible of a question to ask at the interview.  It's that he contacted us before applying to ask it.  If you're asking that question before even applying, the implication is that the answer is necessary for you to even decide to apply.

As a 1L--actually, as a law student--I can't think of any question that's necessary to ask the employer before even deciding to apply.  Not to be callous, but in the current legal market, you need me way more than I need you.  Especially when I'm offering to pay you.  You should be able to decide whether to apply based on the employer's website, job listing, and "gossip" from other students and career office.  If you really can't decide if you want to work for the place, then apply and ask more questions in your interview so that you can know whether to accept.

After all, we're a small not-for-profit.  Everyone in the firm wears more than one hat and has too much work to do.  I'm in charge of the summer program, but I'm also an attorney with other assignments to do.  I have scheduled time for reviewing applications, setting up interviews, conducting interviews, etc.  I do not have time to give a live "pre-interview" to someone just so that he can make himself stand out on my radar.  Actually, he certainly did stand out -- just not in a good way.

Ceallach

  • Member
  • Posts: 4493
    • This Is It
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5382 on: March 01, 2014, 08:42:20 PM »
 

I am curious, though, if that question is bad in general, or if it's just bad in context. I would really like to know whether firms or nonprofits are hiring their past interns, but I don't know how to get that information without asking.

I think that is a question that might be best asked of someone at your school (is there a placement office?) or AFTER you have established a reputation for being a good intern at the internship. :) At the interview, I think it is good to focus on the ways in which you can be a solution to their problems, rather than how they can be a solution to yours. That covers all sorts of things like asking about salary and vacation days, too. Perhaps you could ask about the partners and associates at the firm: have they been with the firm long? What sort of internships did they do prior to joining the firm? What are the job qualifications that the firm looks for in associates? If they hire their own interns, surely they'd mention that in response to those questions, and it makes the point that you're interested in their firm for the long-run, and you're interested in preparing to meet their needs, rather than just focusing on what they can do for you. :)

Actually, it's not even that horrible of a question to ask at the interview.  It's that he contacted us before applying to ask it.  If you're asking that question before even applying, the implication is that the answer is necessary for you to even decide to apply.

As a 1L--actually, as a law student--I can't think of any question that's necessary to ask the employer before even deciding to apply.  Not to be callous, but in the current legal market, you need me way more than I need you.  Especially when I'm offering to pay you.  You should be able to decide whether to apply based on the employer's website, job listing, and "gossip" from other students and career office.  If you really can't decide if you want to work for the place, then apply and ask more questions in your interview so that you can know whether to accept.

After all, we're a small not-for-profit.  Everyone in the firm wears more than one hat and has too much work to do.  I'm in charge of the summer program, but I'm also an attorney with other assignments to do.  I have scheduled time for reviewing applications, setting up interviews, conducting interviews, etc.  I do not have time to give a live "pre-interview" to someone just so that he can make himself stand out on my radar.  Actually, he certainly did stand out -- just not in a good way.

This exactly.  It's not the question itself that makes him SS, it's trying to get special treatment in the recruitment process that makes him SS.   The initial stage isn't a "Q&A session" for the applicant, the initial stage is to send in your application and the employers decides if they are interested in pursuing it further.   Then when you're interviewed that's your opportunity to ask some questions.      I have posted in the past how I pretty much ignore applicants who instead of actually applying either call or email with lists of questions for me.  I'm too busy to deal with that.  If it was a reasonable question based on crucial information missing from the advertisement I would completely understand, but it never is, it's always SS who think they are standing out by getting personal attention.   But it's exactly as you say above - they stand out, just not in a good way!
"Nobody can do everything, but everybody can do something"


Winterlight

  • On the internet, no one can tell you're a dog- arf.
  • Member
  • Posts: 10229
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5383 on: March 04, 2014, 10:35:40 AM »
Managers for many years saw "working the computer" as a lower-level secretarial function.  Computers were looked on simultaneously as just improved typewriters AND as mysterious, complicated contraptions that one could blow up simply by clicking on the wrong button.   Just as managers didn't need to learn how to use a typewriter, so they didn't need to learn how to use a computer.  And it would be better if they didn't, because they were certain to press that wrong button.  ::)

I worked with one of those a while back. He was a semi-retired law firm partner who insisted that his secretary print out his emails and give him hard copies, then he'd dictate his answers.

If wisdom’s ways you wisely seek,
Five things observe with care,
To whom you speak,
Of whom you speak,
And how, and when, and where.
Caroline Lake Ingalls

TeamBhakta

  • Member
  • Posts: 1167
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5384 on: March 04, 2014, 10:37:28 AM »
I had a job interview today. It turned out to be the kind of interview where you sit with one hiring manager, then get sent to a second manager if you do okay in the first one.

First PD: I was filling out an application with a pen I brought. Mr PD comes up and says "Excuse me can I have that pen when you're done ?" "Pardon ?" "Can I have that pen when you're done ?" "Oh. No, sorry, this is my pen I brought. They probably have pens at the front counter, though, if you ask them. I'm sure they'll give you one." At which point he rolled his eyes, sighed and stomped his feet so loud everyone turned around. At least one of the hiring managers saw this. Someone did offer him a pen, although I didn't see him get interviewed (Which was a requirement. They weren't taking applications unless you sat down for an interview)

The second PD: A whole bunch of people who dropped inappropriate information during the interviews. There are certain things employers here cannot ask you about (age, marital status, religion, etc), and thus you should not mention. And yet people kept throwing that information out. Also lots of people bringing up things like "*angry tone* I'm so mad at my current job. They never promote me whenever I apply for it. I've had it with them" and "(List of current life mistakes & character flaws)...But I'm gonna work on that and fix it. I'm gonna just focus on planning my wedding and getting married -- and working here!" As you can guess, those people were not sent to the second interview.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2014, 10:39:43 AM by TeamBhakta »