Are people like me middle class?

Sublime_2

Going back to the OP. If you have to ask that question, then no you're not.

Pete111

vaporate wrote: »

lol In your opinion, not fact.

It is all psychology beyond minimum criteria for the job.

Your comment is tosh if anything.

Please don't tell me your a recruitment consultant lol.

Goodness no - I'm an HR Director.

Luck and exuding the right image (psychology if you like) play a part of course. However prior experience, qualifications, demonstrating your abilities at interview and cultural 'fit' are vital. Many employers also ask candidates to complete various tests (ie scenarios, presentations, role playing, psyhcometrics) to ensure they get the right person.

But hey, feel free to believe what you like. I'm the one with over a decades experience in this stuff - what do I know?

pocketrocket1

Sublime wrote: »

Going back to the OP. If you have to ask that question, then no you're not.

Quite right and who cares anyway - if you have worked hard be proud of what you have achieved but why judge yourself against others? why do you need to fit into a box and hope at some time to be 'promoted' to another box?

"People are often unreasonable and self-centered. Forgive them anyway.
If you are kind, people may accuse you of ulterior motives. Be kind anyway.
If you are honest, people may cheat you. Be honest anyway.
If you find happiness, people may be jealous. Be happy anyway.
The good you do today may be forgotten tomorrow. Do good anyway.
Give the world the best you have and it may never be enough. Give your best anyway.
For you see, in the end, it is between you and God. It was never between you and them anyway."
— Mother Teresa

This is how i try to live my life. I have mixed with people of 'high class' status and found some very wanting. I have mixed with people that would be considered very 'lowly' but let me tell you that is where i found many truly classy people

vaporate

Pete111 wrote: »

Goodness no - I'm an HR Director.

Luck and exuding the right image (psychology if you like) play a part of course. However prior experience, qualifications, demonstrating your abilities at interview and cultural 'fit' are vital. Many employers also ask candidates to complete various tests (ie scenarios, presentations, role playing, psyhcometrics) to ensure they get the right person.

But hey, feel free to believe what you like. I'm the one with over a decades experience in this stuff - what do I know?

Not much from your post.

When I was referring to psychology i meant on the employers/interviewers viewpoint while interviewing the candidate and offering the job.

Everything has to do with psychology.

Qualifications, personal attributes, image and experience is a given.

I hope you wasn't assuming I was not taking any of those qualities into account and saying it was ALL the toss of a coin? :0

Pete111

vaporate wrote: »

Not much from your post.

When I was referring to psychology i meant on the employers/interviewers viewpoint while interviewing the candidate and offering the job.

Everything has to do with psychology.

Qualifications, personal attributes, image and experience is a given.

I hope you wasn't assuming I was not taking any of those qualities into account and saying it was ALL the toss of a coin? :0

Well again I've probably only interviewed several hundred people so I'm obviously at a disadvantage here.

From what you have written, in your world people in my game have no real ability to objectively rate the ability of a candidate to (for example):

Coherently answer a set of questions giving pertinent examples that relate to their own experiences

Create and give a presentation after 1 hours prep

Intelligently state how they would deal with a given problematic situation

Debate a contempory change in legislation and list the potential impacts on a business as well as how to mitigate any problems.

It's all down to their ability to charm you right?

Once again - Tosh. It's ability and experience that underpins everything. I've rejected plenty of chancers who looked and sounded very good but actually came out with very little of true and relevant worth in an interview.

However, as I've said - you believe what you like.

vaporate

Pete111 wrote: »

Well again I've probably only interviewed several hundred people so I'm obviously at a disadvantage here.

From what you have written, in your world people in my game have no real ability to objectively rate the ability of a candidate to (for example):

Coherently answer a set of questions giving pertinent examples that relate to their own experiences

Create and give a presentation after 1 hours prep

Intelligently state how they would deal with a given problematic situation

Debate a contempory change in legislation and list the potential impacts on a business as well as how to mitigate any problems.

It's all down to their ability to charm you right?

Once again - Tosh. It's ability and experience that underpins everything. I've rejected plenty of chancers who looked and sounded very good but actually came out with very little of true and relevant worth in an interview.

However, as I've said - you believe what you like.

In bold, miles off the mark.

Since you don't understand what I'm saying...

I've seen countless people pass interviews only to be the wrong person for the job. The interview itself is a complete load of twoddle, or 'tosh'.

Passing simple or even complex tests doesn't mean they are right for the job either.

I stand my ground that it is still down to psychology on the employers viewpoint.

All candidates could be ideal for the job or pass the mickey mouse 'tests'. It still comes down to biased psychology my friend with regards to choosing 'one' from the rest.

Believe what you like. Psychology after all.

Pete111

vaporate wrote: »

In bold, miles off the mark.

Since you don't understand what I'm saying...

I've seen countless people pass interviews only to be the wrong person for the job. The interview itself is a complete load of twoddle, or 'tosh'.

Passing simple or even complex tests doesn't mean they are right for the job either.

I stand my ground that it is still down to psychology on the employers viewpoint.

All candidates could be ideal for the job or pass the mickey mouse 'tests'. It still comes down to biased psychology my friend with regards to choosing 'one' from the rest.

Believe what you like. Psychology after all.

Oh I shall old chap....mostly because my way keeps me in a big house drinking nice wine and booking skiing holidays. :cool:

Later.

vaporate

Pete111 wrote: »

Oh I shall old chap....mostly because my way keeps me in a big house drinking nice wine and booking skiing holidays. :cool:

Later.

lol Yes that's relevant...

Wouldn't be a tower block, drinking cheap wine with odd holidays skiiing for free like the odd big freeze last winter would it?

Eskimo12345

Pete111 wrote: »

Oh I shall old chap....mostly because my way keeps me in a big house drinking nice wine and booking skiing holidays. :cool:

I'll drink to that! :beer:
Interview processes may not be perfect but the trick is to learn from each one use this learning in the future.

vaporate

Eskimo12345 wrote: »

I'll drink to that! :beer:
Interview processes may not be perfect but the trick is to learn from each one use this learning in the future.

You would of course. Boaster for a boaster.

The trick is a psychological one, apart from the given criteria.