Job interview presentation question.

[Drago]

Much more of a gamble to ignore it.

If I were interviewing you as an internal candidate and you didn't tackle the reason for the vacancy and what you would do to solve any problems I would wonder whether I wanted you anywhere near my team.

It's a tricky call. Several pieces of research in Europe and the US shows that the interview process has roughly a 1 in 4 chance of selecting the optimum candidate. On top of that the interviewers are quite often not formally qualified, and those that are often hold qualifcations that are irrelevent to the reality of selecting the prime candidate. Logic doesn't always apply as one would hope.

Cynical as I am, I have seen some of the largest HR operations in the UK lumber into action, and the cynical side of me believes that for the large part the processes in systems involved exist only to keep those that live off such systems in a job. Certainly the processes often have little to do with genuinely selecting the most effective candidate, so there must be some other reasons for their proliferation.

Not wishing to put the OP off. I'm all for planning and preparation, but I'm also cautious of applying too much logic to a procedure that may not have much practical association with the concept of logic, likely only link with logic that exists on paper.

I've always approached such situations from the angle of "what are YOU going to do for ME?". I'm doing them the favour by showing an interest, not the other way around. I can go anywhere, seek anyone, do anything. Conversely, the organisation are stuck with the people that come to them (pro-active poaching aside) and bother to walk through their door on the day. I've never been rude, but firm and gently assertive, and it's never let me down yet. That said, my interviews have never been for traditional office roles.

the Feds used to be very big on presentations as part of the interview process, sometimes with topics that they gave you, but the Government departments dispensed with it about the turn of the century. It did nothing more than show how nervous someone was, and being nervous doesn't make a candidate bad. T'was a rather archaic Sixties concept, and I'm surprised it still goes on, but then the sort of companies that like to use PowerPoint a lot...

Tto sum up - don't over analyse it, because the logic the organisation is applying to the problem may be somewhat at odds with the reality of selecting the prime candidate. And good luck again.

 

[Slick]

It's a tricky call. Several pieces of research in Europe and the US shows that the interview process has roughly a 1 in 4 chance of selecting the optimum candidate. On top of that the interviewers are quite often not formally qualified, and those that are often hold qualifcations that are irrelevent to the reality of selecting the prime candidate. Logic doesn't always apply as one would hope.

Cynical as I am, I have seen some of the largest HR operations in the UK lumber into action, and the cynical side of me believes that for the large part the processes in systems involved exist only to keep those that live off such systems in a job. Certainly the processes often have little to do with genuinely selecting the most effective candidate, so there must be some other reasons for their proliferation.

Not wishing to put the OP off. I'm all for planning and preparation, but I'm also cautious of applying too much logic to a procedure that may not have much practical association with the concept of logic, likely only link with logic that exists on paper.

I've always approached such situations from the angle of "what are YOU going to do for ME?". I'm doing them the favour by showing an interest, not the other way around. I can go anywhere, seek anyone, do anything. Conversely, the organisation are stuck with the people that come to them (pro-active poaching aside) and bother to walk through their door on the day. I've never been rude, but firm and gently assertive, and it's never let me down yet. That said, my interviews have never been for traditional office roles.

the Feds used to be very big on presentations as part of the interview process, sometimes with topics that they gave you, but the Government departments dispensed with it about the turn of the century. It did nothing more than show how nervous someone was, and being nervous doesn't make a candidate bad. T'was a rather archaic Sixties concept, and I'm surprised it still goes on, but then the sort of companies that like to use PowerPoint a lot...

Tto sum up - don't over analyse it, because the logic the organisation is applying to the problem may be somewhat at odds with the reality of selecting the prime candidate. And good luck again.

Yeah, thanks. I can see a lot of truth in your post, although attacking this one as me doing them a favour would be a mistake (even though I would be).

When I originally went for the post I have now, I wasn't successful. When I contacted them for feedback, they gave me some guff and told me they were following their own criteria called first time every time (or some such). The guy who got the job lasted a few weeks and after my first year I was graded as a high achiever and the same guy who never gave me the job wrote on my score sheet that he knew when he interviewed me that I would be a great asset.

I don't have the best record at interview no matter the format but I've always been good at whatever I chose to do. I know it sounds both corny and obnoxious, but it's true.

 

[SpokeyDokey]

Cynical as I am, I have seen some of the largest HR operations in the UK lumber into action, and the cynical side of me believes that for the large part the processes in systems involved exist only to keep those that live off such systems in a job. Certainly the processes often have little to do with genuinely selecting the most effective candidate, so there must be some other reasons for their proliferation.

Not wishing to put the OP off. I'm all for planning and preparation, but I'm also cautious of applying too much logic to a procedure that may not have much practical association with the concept of logic, likely only link with logic that exists on paper.

I've always approached such situations from the angle of "what are YOU going to do for ME?".

Re first para's. I wouldn't be so rude as to doubt your own experiences but the content here is far removed from my own experience gained during working at senior level for four Blue Chips that most people would recognise. The intent of all involved in the selection process was always to select the best candidate for the role and the processes were tuned to achieving that goal. I operated predominantly in operations/marketing roles and was never a HR specialist but I always had the utmost respect for their capabilities as highly trained professionals.

Apologies to OP for slight digression in the above para'.

Re third para'. I sincerely hope the OP ignores the content. There is a time and place for the 'what about me' questions ie at appraisals/personal reviews etc but presenting for a next step job role isn't one of them. The primary focus will be around how the OP will fit into the role, add value to the role and generally help move the business in its intended direction.

 

[Tim Hall]

The patter is out as I don't do drugs. Lol

Some good points to ponder. I get that I should use my own knowledge of the job and I do have a fair bit but two points are quite controversial as one cost the previous boss his job. Should I broach that subject or leave well alone?

Can I suggest that if you do touch on the subject where the previous person lost their job, base your response on information gleaned from "official" sources - company newsletters, memos from head office, that sort of thing, rather than tittle tattle you've heard in the loo.

 

[bruce1530]

A piece of advice that someone once gave me: A good interviewer is not going to try to “catch you out”. There should be no trick questions. The interviewer’s prime task is to the the best person for the job, and that doesn’t necessarily mean the most polished candidate. A good interviewer will help every candidate to be as good as they can be.

Don’t lie, be honest, but remember that interviews are not the time for modesty.

And don’t (as one candidate did when I was interviewing) fall off the chair.

 

[Slick]

Re first para's. I wouldn't be so rude as to doubt your own experiences but the content here is far removed from my own experience gained during working at senior level for four Blue Chips that most people would recognise. The intent of all involved in the selection process was always to select the best candidate for the role and the processes were tuned to achieving that goal. I operated predominantly in operations/marketing roles and was never a HR specialist but I always had the utmost respect for their capabilities as highly trained professionals.

Apologies to OP for slight digression in the above para'.

Re third para'. I sincerely hope the OP ignores the content. There is a time and place for the 'what about me' questions ie at appraisals/personal reviews etc but presenting for a next step job role isn't one of them. The primary focus will be around how the OP will fit into the role, add value to the role and generally help move the business in its intended direction.

No apology required. Advice taken and gratefully received.

 

[Slick]

Can I suggest that if you do touch on the subject where the previous person lost their job, base your response on information gleaned from "official" sources - company newsletters, memos from head office, that sort of thing, rather than tittle tattle you've heard in the loo.

Yeah, no worries on that score. The tittle tattle is just something I can't abide.

 

[Slick]

A piece of advice that someone once gave me: A good interviewer is not going to try to “catch you out”. There should be no trick questions. The interviewer’s prime task is to the the best person for the job, and that doesn’t necessarily mean the most polished candidate. A good interviewer will help every candidate to be as good as they can be.

Don’t lie, be honest, but remember that interviews are not the time for modesty.

And don’t (as one candidate did when I was interviewing) fall off the chair.

I know most of the panel and they are all very professional and I think would match your description as encouraging.

 

[Slick]

Just a quick update as I was successful in securing this position. All advice as ever, gratefully received.

 

[vickster]

Just a quick update as I was successful in securing this position. All advice as ever, gratefully received.

New bike time then

 

[Slick]

New bike time then

Haha, I'm the talk of the steamie already with the speed my collection has grown. I was actually thinking of leaving it this year, but you never know.

 

[SpokeyDokey]

Just a quick update as I was successful in securing this position. All advice as ever, gratefully received.

Well done!

 

[Slick]

Well done!

Thanks. I really think this thread helped, including your own words of wisdom.