Quote :

"Again, duh. I don't see how anyone would ever give a different response than that. (other than Solinari^. But I don't have a clue what he's talking about. When a deadline is pushed up, you blame your manager for having unrealistic expectations of you?)"

Solinari is talking about a directive coming down from above your immediate supervisor. Specifically, an unrealistic schedule or change in schedule.

I had this happen on several occasions when I had a job that involved projects which took several months to complete. Of course, it was broken up into smaller parts. But occasionally, an assignment or schedule change would come down from the person above my boss. A person who had no experience doing what we did and while she had an overall understanding of the process, she was not familiar with the nitty gritty part of it or what it took exactly to accomplish a task from start to finish. She also wanted the turn around to be extremely fast to impress much higher-ups (the political aspect that Solinari mentioned).

** note, the role I had was fairly new to the company I worked for. They had only gone through the process once before I came along. So some of it stemmed from the supervisor having limited experience with the type of projects we were completing. And over time, she (my boss' boss) got much better/realistic about her expectations.

In those situations, I worked with my immediate supervisor to figure out how to best deal with it while she tried to talk some sense into her supervisor.

Some deadlines just cannot be accomplished within a reasonable manner. And some supervisors are retarded and have very unrealistic expectations. I think it's relatively uncommon, but it does happen. I don't think it's unreasonable to acknowledge that in an interview. Of course, you do so eloquently and present it in a way that demonstrates how you were able to navigate work "politics" while keeping everyone happy and not causing waves.

[Edited on May 10, 2010 at 10:48 AM. Reason : .]

5/10/2010 10:47:34 AM

^ Exactly.

And keep in mind most employers want to hear specific examples of what you're talking about when possible, not vague "I worked my butt off" or "I delegated tasks." They'd much rather hear, "I had a team of four people working with me on a project, and when the deadline was pushed up we immediately had a meeting to decide where work tasks could be shuffled to provide enough time to get the task done. We had two people doing blah blah blah and another person doing blah while I worked on blah etc etc yaadaa yaadaa." This is going to give them much more insight into your thinking than, "I worked overtime. The end."

[Edited on May 10, 2010 at 11:06 AM. Reason : s]

5/10/2010 11:05:38 AM

ITT the difference between a class A and class B candidate is illustrated.

5/11/2010 12:07:32 AM

Now if only people would be kind enough to give me an interview

5/11/2010 2:31:59 AM

What do you do, wolfpackgrrr?

5/11/2010 12:32:16 PM

ITT the difference between a candidate with experience and a candidate with no experience is illustrated.

5/11/2010 2:42:04 PM

ITT the difference between the employed and the unemployed is illustrated

5/11/2010 4:08:36 PM

I realize this thread is about creating an innovative line of questioning for interviews....which I have not. Hear me out, maybe I can offer some insight.

I am in outside sales, which is currently salary+commission, but will move into straight commission starting at the beginning of July 2010. I have been in this position since July 2009. I have competition from several direct manufacturing sales reps, large distributors, and local distributors. Here are the advantages and disadvantages of each:

Direct Advantages: Immediate knowledge of new technology, no middle man mark up, one shipping bill (paid by manufacturer or buyer of goods), access to larger range of non-commodity items, control inventory, have access to many distributors that can effectively sell their goods which increases market share, and set prices of commodity they manufacture.

Direct disadvantages: Typically have 1-3 sales reps per region (i.e. southeast, mid-atlantic, northeast, etc.) limiting the number of accounts they can successfully manage/cold-call, lack physical customer service or physical technical service available to or affordable for smaller users or altogether, are sometimes not trustworthy because they will go in behind their distributors that sell their commodity to one account in large quantities (i.e. they missed a big account, and have found out about it through a distributor selling their particular product) which leads to the distributor not selling their product anymore, have too many distributors selling the product ultimately driving the set price down through deviations, possibly rely on distributors to actually sell the product, and competition from other direct sources.

Large distributor advantages: have access to other commodities that go hand in hand with other manufacturers (poor example- grocery stores sell milk as well as cereal), get direct pricing, many locations regionally or nationally easing the shipping burden of buyers with multiple locations, personal service either customer or technical, many sales reps that are able to cover a broader territory, access to multiple manufacturers of the same commodity allowing to keep prices in check, service programs that smaller companies can't offer and direct providers can't match in price or value, and experts of many many commodities as opposed to one or a few.

Large distributor disadvantages: smaller local distributors creating price wars (think Michael Scott Paper Co vs Dunder-Mifflin), direct mfg's going in behind and stealing business, limited access to all of the mfg's (you won't find Harris Teeter name brands in Food Lion and visa versa), can't truly set prices because it's based on both supply and demand, territory management, and tough growth prospects in slower economies (this is true for direct as well really)

Local distributor advantages: Typically a good ol' boy setting where the seller and the buyer know each other for years (this does happen at all levels, but mostly at the local level), local folks are right down the street and can be used in emergencies, if the local guy buys at high enough volumes then there is no shipping charge to the end user, and access to both direct mfg's and large distributors.

Local distributor disadvantages: easily beaten in price, array of commodities, array of technology, lack of trained staff, low cash flow, etc etc etc.

This is what I have noticed in my six months, I am sure there are plenty more that need mentioning. The way I am setting myself apart as a sales person is this: I go after the big accounts right now while I am new. The big accounts, if I land them, will take care of me while I am new and building a customer base. The money made off of those allows me to focus free time on smaller accounts that get me higher margins. I build up big accounts, I would like to have 5-10 of these, then get 20-30 medium accounts. If I lose 1 or 2 big accounts, the 20-30 medium accounts keep me afloat while I go after new big accounts. I don't really waste time on small accounts simply because they basically pay for breakfast or something really small.

I will say this, if you can't get a big account in the first 6-8 months (assuming you have cash flow that you can ride this long) you could be in a world of trouble. If you can get one, it will really make going after the others a lot more enjoyable and less stressful. It's simply just very exhausting wasting any time on anything other than big accounts in the very beginning. You work just as hard on the medium sized accounts and see 1/3 to 1/36 of the money in my situation.

If you have any other questions, you can PM me. I hope this helps in the slightest!

5/11/2010 4:45:29 PM

^Is in outside sales because he could not do well on interviews

5/11/2010 5:01:16 PM

Quote :

"What do you do, wolfpackgrrr?"

Currently I do program coordinating in addition to English teaching. When I move back to Raleigh my dream job would be study abroad coordination but I know that's a long shot in this economy so I'm broadening that out to other types of programs as well in my job search.

5/11/2010 7:45:02 PM

Quote :

"I also agree that those types of questions have dubious value in an interview. They are really just brain teasers and don't really give any indication as to how well an individual might perform in a job, unless the job they are interviewing for is to solve brain teasers. "

Forget the stupid brain teasers. Just ask them about projects they did. Talk about all aspects of it from working together in a team, overcoming problems, reasons behind technical decisions, what they liked, why, etc. You don't need to come up with a contrived problem -- just *listen* to what the person is saying and work with that.

They should know the material cold, and you get an idea of how they can convey a technical concept to an uninformed audience. If the person can do that well, they have pretty good communication skills. If you can't get a good conversation out of that, the person doesn't know the topic and their communication skills are bad -- even the most anti-social nerd will talk fairly eloquently about something he has done that he likes. If they fail achieve that standard, it's not worth trying to squeeze blood from a rock.

I also ask questions to learn how they have applied their technical interest to a hobby or something not required by a job or class. If they genuinely like the technical work, they will me a much better employee.

ALso, take them to lunch and talk about sports or something. If it's awkward, it's probably a no-go.

[Edited on May 11, 2010 at 11:11 PM. Reason : k]

5/11/2010 11:08:35 PM

^^^

5/11/2010 11:13:54 PM

^^ Have you ever run into a situation where you ask a person about a project they have worked on but they can't say anything for confidentiality reasons?

5/12/2010 1:01:21 AM

Any college grad should be able to come up with a project experience that doesn't violate any security clearances / confidentiality agreements. Often with these responses, its as much about how you say things as it is how you handled a project.

^ have you looked into any of the organizations locally that bring exchange students or au pairs to the region? I have a friend who coordinates all exchange students in north and south carolina that come through his company. Seems like a cool gig.

5/12/2010 1:29:17 AM

You know I hadn't thought about the au pair thing. I should look into that. Thanks

5/12/2010 2:30:31 AM

^ There are a few groups of au pairs that come into the bar i moonlight at, I'll ask them which organizations they work for.

5/12/2010 3:42:08 AM

Awesome thanks!

For some reason I've never thought of au pairs working in NC before. I always associated them with hoity-toity families in NYC

5/12/2010 5:31:40 AM

Might be slightly off topic but somewhat related.

What's the law on medical related gaps in your resume? Lets say you were out of work for significant time(year or so). If asked by the interviewer what the gap was for are you obligated to tell them what it was for or can you just give a generic "medical reasons"?

5/19/2010 9:58:30 PM

Hmm... that's a tricky one. I mean, they can't ask you to elaborate, but just saying "medical reasons" might be leaving them thinking "Oh God, he has cancer and is gonna drop dead when we hire him!" or something. It's really up to you which way you go with it.

5/19/2010 10:03:52 PM

Well the year gap ended 2 years ago and I've worked the 2 years since.


And it was cancer

5/19/2010 10:06:29 PM

You could always say something vague like "I was in physical rehabilitation for a medical condition."

Cancer patients get rehab don't they?

5/20/2010 12:54:09 AM

words --

Just say: "Oh, that year off? Well, that's how long it took me to beat cancer down like a punk bitch!"

or more seriously, you could always say something like: "i had cancer. I worked while in treatment for as long as I could. But I eventually had to leave work. It's been completely gone now for 2 years. And I know this may sound odd; but as grateful as I was to be completely healthy again, I've been just about as happy to be back at work the past 2 years. sitting around in doctor's offices and hospitals got old quick!" Chuckle, and move onto the next question.

that does a few things; A) it answers their question in a way that shows you had a very legit reason to be out of work for a full year. B) you point out that it's been 2yrs with no problem, and 2yrs of work since you were off for a yr. and C) you get to throw in that you enjoy working and that is something that's important to you. D) if you want, you can use it to demonstrate how you handled an EXTREMELY difficult obstacle. -- I don't mean to just say "hey, i beat cancer" and to cheapen in it any way or take it lightly. But when put in that situation, people can have very different reactions and deal with it in very different ways. Some of those coping methods/approaches are, at least perceived to be, better than others. If I feel you handled a situation I hope nobody is ever in with a clear head and a good (as can be) attitude, I would be very confident that you could handle the stresses of just about any job.


You could also not give them a chance to ask a follow up question which may get too personal (they may not, but they are human and not everyone is a super professional interviewing machine). Simply continue on with how great being back to work was and maybe talk about a specific project or something. - basically, answer the question in a way that gives them no room to speculate, preferably shine a good light on you, and immediately (but smoothly) change the topic into something that is important and not uncomfortable for you.


And no, you're not obligated to elaborate on anything in an interview as far as I know and could possibly imagine. What you divulge is up to you. But keep in mind that if you don't elaborate, they're free to speculate on why you were out for a year. And who knows what they'll come up with for possible reasons and what they'll think of those possible scenarios. And that could keep you from getting a job you would have if you were more open. They may wonder why you were out, and they may also wonder why you were so unwilling to talk about it. They may even perceive your unwillingness to discuss it as a sign that it's something that wouldn look bad for you.

if there is anything about you or your work record which could possibly be perceived as bad, I would take any opportunity to either A) give them a positive way to look at it or B) at least eliminate anything they could come up with that would be damaging. That's what you risk if you leave it open-ended.

The only thing I think I would be hesitant about is if you had to be out of work that long to be treated for a mental illness. People look at that a lot different than cancer, and many other illnesses.

that's my opinion anyhow

[Edited on May 20, 2010 at 4:13 AM. Reason : .]

5/20/2010 4:10:21 AM