Secret recruiters tricks: WHAT are we talking at the interview and WHAT is the employer going to know about us on this basis?
Greetings dear habrasoobschestvo!
Since recruiting is not only my job, but also my hobby, I want to share with you interesting, in my opinion, information. It will be a question, sorry for the tautology, about the speech itself - the words that you and I pick up by expressing our thoughts in a conversation with the personnel manager.
It would seem - what is there to pick? We call things by their names and everything. The work is boring - “uninteresting”, the leadership is unprofessional - “amateurs”, the salary is small - “funny”, every man for himself - “the team is not harmonious”.
But not everything is as simple as it seems at first glance.
It turns out that an experienced recruiter, in addition to evaluating the essence of your statement, also draws attention to the actual wording, that is, to the structure of the construction of phrases. The method of analyzing these formulations makes it possible to avoid socially desirable answers *, since the person practically cannot constantly control the form of speech.
')
* A socially desirable answer - simply speaking, the answer that puts us in the best light in front of another person, even if the answer itself is not honest. For example: “Do you often tell lies?” - “No, that you are never / rarely / only in exceptional cases” (underline the necessary). Or: “Are you a responsible person?” - “Of course, responsibility is my middle name,” etc.
It should be noted that often we give socially desirable answers without even thinking, as most of us, on a subconscious level, strive to “be good” or, at least, want to be “thought good” about them.
So. The use of similar methods in the selection of words, oddly enough, can tell the recruiter about you more than you think.
Let's dive a bit into theory. The easiest way to consider opposites, so do so.
“Aspiration, and, in contrast, avoidance” is a speech characteristic formally expressed in the appearance of negation (for example, the use of the word “non-conflict” instead of “friendly”, “sociable”), the words “normal”, “acceptable” (which indicates ) or positive wording (indicates aspiration). People who often use avoidance are more likely to be focused on finding bugs or negatives. Probably, each of us knows a person who is constantly not satisfied with something: an uncomfortable chair, uninteresting projects, a monitor is needed, a second month does not increase salary ...
Avoidance as the predominant characteristic of speech is absolutely unacceptable for employees who are constantly working with clients or in a changing environment: support, for example. If, in speech, avoidance occurs less frequently, then in most cases this indicates the presence of negative experiences in the past or increased criticality of this factor.
For example, if the recruiter hears in response to the question: “Describe the work that is optimal for you,“ Not far from home, there are no wage delays, no rework, ”then, given the frequent use of avoidance, he can make a preliminary conclusion about the possible conflict and intractability of the candidate .
The desire will manifest itself in the phrase: "An interesting job, well paid, in a pleasant team." This will demonstrate the positive attitude and motivation ** of the candidate.
** Motivation is what makes a person work. For some, salary is paramount, others are not lured by gold mountains, as long as the team is friendly, others still have the opportunity for professional and career growth, and so on.
“The process, and vice versa, the result” is what the applicant is focused on in the work.
I want to immediately emphasize that the lack of a focus on results, and the focus on the process is not as bad as we all have heard. This is a minus for workers associated, for example, with active sales, but for the tester, a plus, since this work has many processes and procedures that require detailed study and careful implementation. This is most relevant for a support project, where monotonous execution of instructions, “tinkering” of the code, search for bugs are required of it. The employee, motivated for the result, is obviously bored during such activities, and, most likely, will start looking for a new job.
On the other hand, when creating a startup just need a person focused on results. It requires a quick response to market changes and operational decisions.
To the question: “Describe your most successful project,” the result-oriented candidate will tell you what he has achieved, and the process-oriented candidate will tell how he did it.
“Well-established scheme - creative” . In general, this parameter is similar to the previous one, but it differs in the way a person goes to solve problems. People suitable for performing work are creative, focused on finding new solutions, on non-recurring actions, or on the possibility of using different approaches in solving typical problems. People accustomed to working according to a well-established scheme prefer to use a typical way to solve a problem or when performing similar tasks.
For example, a business coach needs to conduct 10 trainings per month. One will write the program from the beginning to the end and repeat it 10 times, the second will introduce slight variations, and the third will completely change the program each time, leaving the foundation unchanged. I draw your attention once again to the fact that it is impossible to evaluate each of the options as positive or negative.
We give specific examples. In the field of design, an important indicator is new ideas, and an accountant, as we understand, is creative in tax reporting for nothing, so a good accountant is a person of “procedures” working according to an established scheme.
This is not a complete list of characteristics by which speech is evaluated, but, in order not to overload with theory, while I stop. If the topic is interesting, I solemnly promise to give out all the other secret tricks of recruiters :)
It seems to me that this post will help not only during the interview, but also during introspection: maybe someone, having read it, will decide in what area to look for himself.
And my advice to everyone: when preparing for an interview, think over not only WHAT to say, but HOW to say it.
PS When writing the topic, materials from the book of Svetlana Ivanova “The Art of Recruiting Personnel: How to Evaluate a Person in an Hour” were used. - 3rd ed. - M .: Alpina Business Books, 2006. - 160 p.
P. P. S. Thank MYPABEU and Nepofigist for help with registration :)
Since recruiting is not only my job, but also my hobby, I want to share with you interesting, in my opinion, information. It will be a question, sorry for the tautology, about the speech itself - the words that you and I pick up by expressing our thoughts in a conversation with the personnel manager.
It would seem - what is there to pick? We call things by their names and everything. The work is boring - “uninteresting”, the leadership is unprofessional - “amateurs”, the salary is small - “funny”, every man for himself - “the team is not harmonious”.
But not everything is as simple as it seems at first glance.
It turns out that an experienced recruiter, in addition to evaluating the essence of your statement, also draws attention to the actual wording, that is, to the structure of the construction of phrases. The method of analyzing these formulations makes it possible to avoid socially desirable answers *, since the person practically cannot constantly control the form of speech.
')
* A socially desirable answer - simply speaking, the answer that puts us in the best light in front of another person, even if the answer itself is not honest. For example: “Do you often tell lies?” - “No, that you are never / rarely / only in exceptional cases” (underline the necessary). Or: “Are you a responsible person?” - “Of course, responsibility is my middle name,” etc.
It should be noted that often we give socially desirable answers without even thinking, as most of us, on a subconscious level, strive to “be good” or, at least, want to be “thought good” about them.
So. The use of similar methods in the selection of words, oddly enough, can tell the recruiter about you more than you think.
Let's dive a bit into theory. The easiest way to consider opposites, so do so.
“Aspiration, and, in contrast, avoidance” is a speech characteristic formally expressed in the appearance of negation (for example, the use of the word “non-conflict” instead of “friendly”, “sociable”), the words “normal”, “acceptable” (which indicates ) or positive wording (indicates aspiration). People who often use avoidance are more likely to be focused on finding bugs or negatives. Probably, each of us knows a person who is constantly not satisfied with something: an uncomfortable chair, uninteresting projects, a monitor is needed, a second month does not increase salary ...
Avoidance as the predominant characteristic of speech is absolutely unacceptable for employees who are constantly working with clients or in a changing environment: support, for example. If, in speech, avoidance occurs less frequently, then in most cases this indicates the presence of negative experiences in the past or increased criticality of this factor.
For example, if the recruiter hears in response to the question: “Describe the work that is optimal for you,“ Not far from home, there are no wage delays, no rework, ”then, given the frequent use of avoidance, he can make a preliminary conclusion about the possible conflict and intractability of the candidate .
The desire will manifest itself in the phrase: "An interesting job, well paid, in a pleasant team." This will demonstrate the positive attitude and motivation ** of the candidate.
** Motivation is what makes a person work. For some, salary is paramount, others are not lured by gold mountains, as long as the team is friendly, others still have the opportunity for professional and career growth, and so on.
“The process, and vice versa, the result” is what the applicant is focused on in the work.
I want to immediately emphasize that the lack of a focus on results, and the focus on the process is not as bad as we all have heard. This is a minus for workers associated, for example, with active sales, but for the tester, a plus, since this work has many processes and procedures that require detailed study and careful implementation. This is most relevant for a support project, where monotonous execution of instructions, “tinkering” of the code, search for bugs are required of it. The employee, motivated for the result, is obviously bored during such activities, and, most likely, will start looking for a new job.
On the other hand, when creating a startup just need a person focused on results. It requires a quick response to market changes and operational decisions.
To the question: “Describe your most successful project,” the result-oriented candidate will tell you what he has achieved, and the process-oriented candidate will tell how he did it.
“Well-established scheme - creative” . In general, this parameter is similar to the previous one, but it differs in the way a person goes to solve problems. People suitable for performing work are creative, focused on finding new solutions, on non-recurring actions, or on the possibility of using different approaches in solving typical problems. People accustomed to working according to a well-established scheme prefer to use a typical way to solve a problem or when performing similar tasks.
For example, a business coach needs to conduct 10 trainings per month. One will write the program from the beginning to the end and repeat it 10 times, the second will introduce slight variations, and the third will completely change the program each time, leaving the foundation unchanged. I draw your attention once again to the fact that it is impossible to evaluate each of the options as positive or negative.
We give specific examples. In the field of design, an important indicator is new ideas, and an accountant, as we understand, is creative in tax reporting for nothing, so a good accountant is a person of “procedures” working according to an established scheme.
This is not a complete list of characteristics by which speech is evaluated, but, in order not to overload with theory, while I stop. If the topic is interesting, I solemnly promise to give out all the other secret tricks of recruiters :)
It seems to me that this post will help not only during the interview, but also during introspection: maybe someone, having read it, will decide in what area to look for himself.
And my advice to everyone: when preparing for an interview, think over not only WHAT to say, but HOW to say it.
PS When writing the topic, materials from the book of Svetlana Ivanova “The Art of Recruiting Personnel: How to Evaluate a Person in an Hour” were used. - 3rd ed. - M .: Alpina Business Books, 2006. - 160 p.
P. P. S. Thank MYPABEU and Nepofigist for help with registration :)
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/285320/
All Articles