OT: Texting during job interview: not such a good idea
It seems like a slow news day, so here's my old man, Sunday afternoon rant to liven things up. Apparently not everyone realizes that during job interviews, texting and checking twitter are not exactly activities to give the candidate a leg up on getting hired, and according to some HR professionals, such behavior is increasing:
Human resource professionals say they've seen recent college grads text or take calls in interviews, dress inappropriately, use slang or overly casual language, and exhibit other oddball behavior....
[Jaime] Fall and other HR executives say such quirks have become more commonplace the past three years or so, and are displayed by about one in five recent grads. They're prompting recruiters to rule out otherwise qualified candidates for entry-level positions and delay hiring decisions.
Here's some advice, if you're going into a job interview and you think you might be tempted to check your messages or send a text, turn your damn phone off!
Geno Smith certainly seems to be part of this trend that HR executives are noticing. As Jason Cole reports on Yahoo Sports, texting and checking Twitter may be part of the reason Geno Smith dropped to the second round in the NFL Draft:
Two sources indicated that when Smith went on some visits to teams, rather than interact with coaches and front-office people, he would spend much of his time on his cell phone. Instead of being engaged with team officials, he would be texting friends or reading Twitter or a number of other distracting activities.
"All these other players who were in there were talking to the coaches, trying to get to know people and he was over there by himself," one of the sources said. "That's not what you want out of your quarterback."
I guess Geno's agents failed him for not telling him that that sort of thing was frowned upon.
Right, that seems to be the conventional wisdom. It's just been my experience that it doesn't really correlate, and my sample size is fairly significant. I admit that I'm in the minority (and in a particular field), so if you're trying to land a job, it's probably best to play the odds and stick to the traditional script. Especially in situations like yours which requires the splitting of split hairs to find the "best" candidate. Also, age may have something to do with my non-traditional stance (I'm early 30s). If I was Herm's age, I probably see phone use as a blatant disrespect to nonagenarians everywhere.
The first things you mention, yes, but not the last one. Really, though, all the first things you listed do is not hurt a candidate, rather than really help.
I believe the last one still matters. It's a formulaic response to a formulaic interview process (i.e behaviorial/STAR), so showing up unprepared for these questions is like showing up in a t-shirt. It's ritualistic, and if you don't do it, you get bounced.
Ok, maybe it's just a semantics thing. I meant canned in its definitional sense of "prepared in advance" not in some inauthentic, half-assed kind of way.
Considering I've been on interviews in which the interviewer was on his phone the whole time he was talking to me, missing key points of my responses, and generally being a goober, I'm not surprised that younger people on the other side of the table are still doing that. Mobile devices are great, but at some point they've turned into a "get out of human interaction" free card.
And it apparently wasn't because I had boring or bad answers, because I was offered the job. But to a degree there is a weird double standard in which anyone in the "higher" or "hire" position are allowed to be on their phones while talking to you, but the other is not.
I held off a very long time on getting a smart phone because I already spend so much time on a computer. I have one now, but I try to leave it at my desk whenever I step away to do things or talk to people. My biggest issue is when I'm trying to remember something, like a stat or an example, and I try to quickly google it on my phone. I'd be better off messing up the example a little, but have gotten too comfortable with my phone and others using their phone. It's difficult not to just pull it out sometimes around work or between interviews (back when I was doing that). I've had to resist doing that and keep it in the pocket in those instanses, only to see the person interviewing me or talking to me check their phone periodically, quickly "shoot back an e-mail" or something else.
Is this an insane thing to do? Yes. I'm 23 and wouldn't dream of this, regardless of which generation I'm a part of.
HOWEVER, fwiw, the "phone addiction" issue is a bit broader than "damn kids and their damn technology." As new communication technology has been introduced, there's been a gulf between generations in what the appropriate way to use it is. Some people thought talking on the phone, rather than letter-writing, was uncivilized. Now, people use e-mail for things that older generations would prefer to do by phone.
Not really defending someone stupid enough to CHECK THEIR PHONE during an interview (unless their wife was about to give birth), but it's not as simple as "get off my lawn."
To be clear, when I'm talking about people being addicted to their phones, I'm not just talking about young people, or people who use their phones for lots of different purposes.
I'm talking about people - of all ages - finding it literally impossible to put the thing away even when it's clearly not appropriate. I see this constantly. At every staff meeting at my job, there will be multiple employees on their phones. These are grown adults, and they know it's unprofessional, but they can't function without the damn thing on, and in their hands, all the time.
No offense, but that HR rep you know sounds like a bad HR rep and a bit of a dick. All three of those schools are good schools. They may not be as good as Michigan, but they do have some candidates that are better than the ones you'll get if you only look at Michigan grads.
The first thing I look at in the hiring process is what these people have accomplished, how much work experience they have, letters of rec, research, extracurriculars, and then maybe gpa and school. I'm not going to throw out someone who had a 3.7 at MSU and has already done research, had a couple internships, has great letters of rec, and look at a 3.2 student at UM who has only the fact that he was in a frat on his resume, because I've known too many good and great workers/employees from God-knows-where University to be arrogant enough to throw something out just because of school allegiance.
Maybe you were joking, but I just found that sentence baffling and terrible if true. If all else was equal, I'd hire the Michigan guy, if the OSU guy was better qualified, I'd hire him.
He's hiring for his own personal team of employees under him (about 10-20 ppl) that he does this for, so these would be the people he'd be working with on a daily basis.
When he told me this he was also laughing, so I couldn't tell if he was joking or not. He may have just been pulling my leg.
That's too bad that the HR rep you know conducts business that way. In fact, it's as unprofessional as texting during an interview, probably more so.
When I was graduating with my B.S. in Aero Engineering, I was turned down for job opportunities in the automotive industry because (in the words of one HR rep), my Aero degree meant that I "don't know anything about cars." She gave that reason despite lab work and design projects I conducted in powertrain engineering with one of the Big Three, and the endorsement of an Executive Engineer at that same company.
I have interviewed many MSU and a few tOSU grads for both entry-level and experienced hire positions in my company. The nature of the work I'm in - supply chain - strongly favors undergraduate degrees from those schools, though U-M's graduate-level SCM program at Ross is slightly higher-rated.
Not all of the candidates I have interviewed from MSU and tOSU have been qualified, but many have been, and were given offers. Most of those who accepted and joined us have become exceptional employees.
but it is always in between interviews when i've been left alone in a room waiting for 5-15 minutes for the next interview to start. It's either that or twiddle my thumbs. (Yes I got the job).
Is this also a no-no or just in an actual interview?
If I was still interviewing people for jobs, I would end the interview the minute they took a call or sent a text.
Being on the HR side of it, it makes things very, very easy for us. There might be no finer way for one to rule themselves right out of consideration.
Again from an HR perspective, and I am NOT defending the actions of these job applicants, but I have also noticed an increasing amount of "oddball" behavior on the part of business professionals. It's becoming increasingly common to terminate employees via email or phone call, which is simply ridiculous. Things are spiraling out of control from all ends it seems.
Hi there. Totally agree with you. During the interview you should be concentrated, do not distract on such things like mobile phone or something like this. This applies to both the candidate and the interviewer. By the way do you know something about interview rating sheets? If no, I recommend to read about this here [SPAM LINK DELETED] to be prepared. Nowadays almost all HR specialists use this tool.
August 20th, 2021 at 6:27 AM ^
I have always said that people simply do not know how to behave correctly at an interview. And this is not their problem, just no one told them about it, and besides, there is very little information about it on the Internet. I can say [SPAM LINK DELETED] I found a great website that helped me prepare for an interview and get a dream job.