YOU had, you think, prepared very well for the crucial interview. You
are likely to say it to yourself and others, “I left no stone unturned.”
Yet, the outcome was disappointing. You start cursing your “luck” or
you may, in a fit of bad temper, debunk those who decided against your
selection. You begin to nurse a grudge. This will eventually further
damage your future prospects. It is better to be rational, objective,
look for soft spots and convert them into plus points. That’s the only
way from rejection to selection.
Lots of factors can prevent you from getting a job. Many of them you have control over, while others you don’t. By controlling those you can and thinking reasonably
about those you can’t, your chances of taking a healthy perspective toward this whole job-research issue are better.
Rejection is part of the process; however, by keeping your self-esteem and not rejecting yourself, your opportunity for success in the next interview is that much greater.
Why do you (applicant) get only a stony silence from prospective employers after your interview?
Lack of proper preparation. This usually means misdirection or lopsided emphasis on non-essentials. Many aspirants, for example, plunge into the re-digging of the academic subjects they had studied in college or university. This is innocence (read ignorance)!
Those facing you at the interview have already formed a fair idea of your academic status and calibre. They have the record sheets with them. They have the degree certificates, too. Ditto your other achievements and their record.
They have probably conducted their own entrance, too. All in all, it means that they have a full picture of what you have achieved in the academic and theoretical sphere of your study.
Then, why this interview? You may ask. It is simple. They want to “see” the “man” behind the academic facade!
I illustrate this point from the life of a great literary figure—Dr Samuel Johnson. It was said of him that he made a “sad spectacle” in society. The reference was to his ugly physical appearance.
But anybody who “met” him and had a few minutes of conversation with him found that he was the most brilliant, wittiest conversationalist of his time. Those who came to scoff remained to listen to him. Such is the magic and power of personality. And this comes out in interview.
A girl candidate who had a string of degrees was asked the meaning of the phrase “literary coxcomb”. She flustered and fired offensive replies thinking that it was a hit at her academic status. Nothing of the sort. It was a question rather aimed at her area of interest and she could have cashed in on the opportunity.
The conclusion drawn was that the thick layer of academic had not permitted refinement of culture to seep into her mind. It was all on the surface. It also revealed that the candidate was highly conceited and the poise and confidence she exuded was shallow.
Thirdly, she unwittingly revealed that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Her approach was raw, unpolished. Because a girl who has several degrees in her bag is supposed to have rubbed into her personality some of what she has studied. It is like perfume. It naturally gets on to your skin or garment.
Many aspirants “show” scholarly pose, concealing their real personality. They wrongly think that the more learned you are, the more unkempt your personality. This is negative attribute and no amount of “scholarly sophistication” can compensate for it.
So, if you have been rejected, tell yourself that there are reasons for it, emanating mostly from your own self. Take stock of yourself. Groom yourself well. There is always another chance—somewhere.
The chance will be lost again if the candidate fumbles and fails on some vital points. The candidate should bear in mind that the prospective employer is a professional who neither gives nor takes concessions. He is somewhat of a perfectionist
with exacting standards. He looks upon his future employee in long-range as he is going to work with him for years.
Be sure you are communicating your positive, marketable points to him or her through the interview. We all have marketable characteristics or experiences, and before the interview ends the interviewer should hear about them.
Lots of factors can prevent you from getting a job. Many of them you have control over, while others you don’t. By controlling those you can and thinking reasonably
about those you can’t, your chances of taking a healthy perspective toward this whole job-research issue are better.
Rejection is part of the process; however, by keeping your self-esteem and not rejecting yourself, your opportunity for success in the next interview is that much greater.
Why do you (applicant) get only a stony silence from prospective employers after your interview?
Lack of proper preparation. This usually means misdirection or lopsided emphasis on non-essentials. Many aspirants, for example, plunge into the re-digging of the academic subjects they had studied in college or university. This is innocence (read ignorance)!
Those facing you at the interview have already formed a fair idea of your academic status and calibre. They have the record sheets with them. They have the degree certificates, too. Ditto your other achievements and their record.
They have probably conducted their own entrance, too. All in all, it means that they have a full picture of what you have achieved in the academic and theoretical sphere of your study.
Then, why this interview? You may ask. It is simple. They want to “see” the “man” behind the academic facade!
I illustrate this point from the life of a great literary figure—Dr Samuel Johnson. It was said of him that he made a “sad spectacle” in society. The reference was to his ugly physical appearance.
But anybody who “met” him and had a few minutes of conversation with him found that he was the most brilliant, wittiest conversationalist of his time. Those who came to scoff remained to listen to him. Such is the magic and power of personality. And this comes out in interview.
A girl candidate who had a string of degrees was asked the meaning of the phrase “literary coxcomb”. She flustered and fired offensive replies thinking that it was a hit at her academic status. Nothing of the sort. It was a question rather aimed at her area of interest and she could have cashed in on the opportunity.
The conclusion drawn was that the thick layer of academic had not permitted refinement of culture to seep into her mind. It was all on the surface. It also revealed that the candidate was highly conceited and the poise and confidence she exuded was shallow.
Thirdly, she unwittingly revealed that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Her approach was raw, unpolished. Because a girl who has several degrees in her bag is supposed to have rubbed into her personality some of what she has studied. It is like perfume. It naturally gets on to your skin or garment.
Many aspirants “show” scholarly pose, concealing their real personality. They wrongly think that the more learned you are, the more unkempt your personality. This is negative attribute and no amount of “scholarly sophistication” can compensate for it.
So, if you have been rejected, tell yourself that there are reasons for it, emanating mostly from your own self. Take stock of yourself. Groom yourself well. There is always another chance—somewhere.
The chance will be lost again if the candidate fumbles and fails on some vital points. The candidate should bear in mind that the prospective employer is a professional who neither gives nor takes concessions. He is somewhat of a perfectionist
with exacting standards. He looks upon his future employee in long-range as he is going to work with him for years.
Be sure you are communicating your positive, marketable points to him or her through the interview. We all have marketable characteristics or experiences, and before the interview ends the interviewer should hear about them.
No comments:
Post a Comment