Feedback After Interviews

wapow

mattcanary wrote: »

Personally, I think Rover's answer is better. It is specific,down to earth and personal. I think it is a bloody good answer, really. Rather thann talking about a hypothetical situation.

I suppose it only goes to show that different interviewers will want different things, really

I like to hear feedback about such things. Its good to see other peoples perspective.


The way I saw Rovers as an interviewer is Rover talks about what she does to create a relationship. Open conversation, ask them about them and how they always come to her.


As an interviewer, I don't see how what she does benefits a business. Now, I know that its sense to see where it can lead, but this is why you'll find that im not a fan of old fashioned interviewers but theyre all like that. They have to follow a book and scorecard so what theyre looking for are things like does the candidate demonstrate they can turn a personal relationship into a sale and is the candidate able to maintain relationships etc.


This is where you need to pander to the interviewer. By using the words theyre looking for.


I would strongly suggest a revisit of interview questions and look for a similar question on building rapport etc.


You will not find an answer that is direct and to the point but you will find how to put that directness into a small speech which identifies you as an individual that will score highly on the interviewers scorecards.


I hope that explanation helps.

morganedge

Sadly, the trick seems to be to pretend you have a different personality to your real one. We're all supposed to be super-confident nowadays. But for some people, even pretending to be confident is very hard. Maybe some fairly unscented alcohol like vodka beforehand will do the trick!! Or pills.

rover2000

I did mention that my regular customers come back and spend lots of money. I also said I'm good at adding to sales.
Trouble is I find it hard to get into the mindset of the besuited orange manager types. I find their appearance distracting. I think I just didn't look right for their company.
Whatever I said wouldn't have worked because I wasn't one of them.
They wanted someone who was the right fit for their company. The person had to come up with their key buzz words and resemble them in appearance.
I can't be someone I'm not.

mattcanary

wapow wrote: »

I like to hear feedback about such things. Its good to see other peoples perspective.


The way I saw Rovers as an interviewer is Rover talks about what she does to create a relationship. Open conversation, ask them about them and how they always come to her.


As an interviewer, I don't see how what she does benefits a business. Now, I know that its sense to see where it can lead, but this is why you'll find that im not a fan of old fashioned interviewers but theyre all like that. They have to follow a book and scorecard so what theyre looking for are things like does the candidate demonstrate they can turn a personal relationship into a sale and is the candidate able to maintain relationships etc. Obviously, it links in to building personal relationships and creating a rapport, if you wih to use those words. I prefer to use and listen to plain English.


This is where you need to pander to the interviewer. By using the words theyre looking for.


I would strongly suggest a revisit of interview questions and look for a similar question on building rapport etc.


You will not find an answer that is direct and to the point but you will find how to put that directness into a small speech which identifies you as an individual that will score highly on the interviewers scorecards.


I hope that explanation helps.

Surely it does help the business?
It is an example of getting repeat business for the company, being prepared to help (always positive for a company), and helping improve the reputation of a company in a meaningful way (ie: through word of mouth). All very positive things

I'd have thought it comes across better if you try to be yourself and tell the interviewer about what you have done. Rather than how things work in theory.

Knowledge about the industry is obviously a good thing as you should have an idea of what you are talking about. But what you have said isn;t that - it's just meaningless management gobbledegook. If successful candidates talk about this in interviews, do they really understand what they are saying?

I don;t mean to be rude, but I don;t really understand your post - other than the point I've just answered.

mattcanary

rover2000 wrote: »

I did mention that my regular customers come back and spend lots of money. I also said I'm good at adding to sales.
Trouble is I find it hard to get into the mindset of the besuited orange manager types. I find their appearance distracting. I think I just didn't look right for their company.
Whatever I said wouldn't have worked because I wasn't one of them.
They wanted someone who was the right fit for their company. The person had to come up with their key buzz words and resemble them in appearance.
I can't be someone I'm not.

I agree with you.

If interviewers are looking for someone that can spend hours scouring the internet in order to look for words and phrases that will please them, rather than do their job well, then frankly they are likely to be appointing the wrong person for the job.

It shuld not be a closed shop. A form of prejudice that is not discussed - unlike gender, racial, age, disability, etc discrimination

mattcanary

As an aside, I had a test before a recent interview. It was apparently used to test my problem-solving skills.

I was given information in certain scenarios. For example, in one part of the test I was given a list of train stations and the time trains stop (or don;t stop, in some cases) at those stations. I then had several people wanting to get to a certain destination at a certain time or day of the week. I had to mark which trains each person could take, if any.

This was quite enjoyable to do and I got a good score in the test. I didn;t get the job sadly. I was rather less nervous than I often am in the interview though, that day.

However, my point is that I always thought employers wanted to see evidence of really good achievements or really difficult situations handled well, when they ask this question. In reality, perhaps they aren't looking for something so impressive, but just a basic ability to deal with straightforward situations you come across on a daily basis.
I don't know really, but perhaps the hurdle isn;t always really high.