Nice People Thread No. 15, a Cyber Summer

Masomnia

GDB2222 wrote: »

It's odd to test skills that can be learned in a few minutes or hours. That may say a lot about the person conducting the interview. Maybe, he or she finds the IT stuff hard?

Surely, if you have forgotten how to do a mail merge in real life, you'll look it up on the www. That'll add ten minutes to the job. Then you'll just do it.

That's basically what I did!

So I got there in the end. Seemed a bit daft, but there you go.

PasturesNew

GDB2222 wrote: »

It's odd to test skills that can be learned in a few minutes or hours. That may say a lot about the person conducting the interview. Maybe, he or she finds the IT stuff hard?

Surely, if you have forgotten how to do a mail merge in real life, you'll look it up on the www. That'll add ten minutes to the job. Then you'll just do it.

In past lives I was teaching all that stuff donkeys' years ago, to ECDL level. But I've no ECDL myself.

I've used/done/taught/supported that stuff in multiple jobs over many years.

Could I, in interview, say how it was done? Nope ... because I've done it all in Word 2003 ... and not used a more modern version. But, sit me down in front of a PC and I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to find.

All you need to know is that it can be done and be able to use the words to find it with Mr G .. then do it It's not rocket science. You need a basic document, insert where you want the merge fields to go ... and you need a data source that holds that information - and a way of connecting the merge field names to the data source field names. Bob's your uncle. Where is that in the hierarchy of commands available from the toolbar? No idea .. but it'll be somewhere fairly logical/findable.

Somebody who did know where the toolbar hid it would be stuffed if they simply didn't have the rights to the correct server/directory as they'd probably not have a clue if they've always just had access to things and mapped directories, without a clue how that all fits together. Nor a clue how to ask for what they need in a language that can get it resolved asap by picking up the phone to the Helpdesk.... hello ... profile ... map ... rights/access ... please... THX.

That's the trouble with "the modern world" and a lot of interviewing, they're no longer interested in if you can do the job, they've got some tick boxes that need ticking instead... thus ensuring that, a lot of the time, they'll end up with the wrong person.

GDB2222

PasturesNew wrote: »

In past lives I was teaching all that stuff donkeys' years ago, to ECDL level. But I've no ECDL myself.

I've used/done/taught/supported that stuff in multiple jobs over many years.

Could I, in interview, say how it was done? Nope ... because I've done it all in Word 2003 ... and not used a more modern version. But, sit me down in front of a PC and I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to find.

All you need to know is that it can be done and be able to use the words to find it with Mr G .. then do it It's not rocket science. You need a basic document, insert where you want the merge fields to go ... and you need a data source that holds that information - and a way of connecting the merge field names to the data source field names. Bob's your uncle. Where is that in the hierarchy of commands available from the toolbar? No idea .. but it'll be somewhere fairly logical/findable.

Somebody who did know where the toolbar hid it would be stuffed if they simply didn't have the rights to the correct server/directory as they'd probably not have a clue if they've always just had access to things and mapped directories, without a clue how that all fits together. Nor a clue how to ask for what they need in a language that can get it resolved asap by picking up the phone to the Helpdesk.... hello ... profile ... map ... rights/access ... please... THX.

That's the trouble with "the modern world" and a lot of interviewing, they're no longer interested in if you can do the job, they've got some tick boxes that need ticking instead... thus ensuring that, a lot of the time, they'll end up with the wrong person.

Microsoft went to a lot of trouble to change the interface to something users weren't familiar with and didn't much like. You can get add-ins that restore the old interface, more or less.

The box ticking may be to make the employer more bulletproof against charges of discrimination. It appears more objective than simply having an interview and deciding which candidate you like most.

chris_m

GDB2222 wrote: »

Surely, if you have forgotten how to do a mail merge in real life, you'll look it up on the www. That'll add ten minutes to the job. Then you'll just do it.

Indeed. When I was working, the boss always had to ask at annual review time if there was any training I felt I needed to which I always said no.
He'd ask why and I'd tell him that, for the sort of work I was doing (developing enormous linked Access databases with Excel outputs all driven by macros and VBA code), if there was something I needed to find out to solve and issue Google was my friend and that no training course could give me more than an insight into something, never mind the detail I required and could usually find in 5 minutes or so - and that a course wouldn't give me the info I needed at the time I needed it.

I said that if the company ever blocked Google I'd be screwed and would need courses, to which his reply was that if they ever did that most of our team, including him, would also be screwed.

chris_m

GDB2222 wrote: »

Microsoft went to a lot of trouble to change the interface to something users weren't familiar with and didn't much like. You can get add-ins that restore the old interface, more or less.

Oh yes, a right pain in the proverbial. Up to XP I always set the OS, particularly the start menu and Windows Explorer interface, to look and work like Windows 95/98/2000 but they dropped that facility in Windows 7.
It didn't take me long to find an add-in that gave me it back, and more
Unfortunately I could do it on the work PCs

PasturesNew

chris_m wrote: »

Up to XP

I'm still on that
This PC has XP and Office 2003.

Pyxis

Masomnia wrote: »

I did Not very :money:

Oh don't worry about it. It was necessary.
You were spending money in order to, hopefully, make money.

Couldn't be helped.





Besides which, with expenditure decisions, it's all relative.

When I was young, I thought nothing of roughing it, or walking for miles carrying heavy bags, etc., to save the bus fare.

Now though, due to my poorly wrists, it hurts to carry things for distances, so I prefer to drive to shops and to park as closely as possible to wherever it is, even though that usually means paying through the nose for parking.

Yet almost all my tops, loads of my books, and most of my crockery and glassware, (and even some furniture) comes from charity shops!

Jazee

Another one here who doesn't worry too much about stuff I can't do. At home I have a PC expert, at the paid stuff they pay other people to know things or as you all say, just Google.

And the company I work for will pay some travel costs for candidates, so maybe its always worth just asking.

vivatifosi

Masomnia wrote: »

That's basically what I did!

So I got there in the end. Seemed a bit daft, but there you go.

Thinking laterally, is there a chance that your mail merge wasn't what they were testing, rather what you would do and how you would react if chucked in the deep end?

So they chose something that a candidate was unlikely to know off the top of their head unless they used it recently and asked you that.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

We do a fair bit of that. Questions in interviews and tasks on assessment days designed to test candidate response to stress rather than their mastery of the subject or activity.