RE: buzz words/resumes and call backs with recruiters

From: dgillettat_private
Date: Thu Jul 05 2001 - 13:31:19 PDT

  • Next message: Meritt James: "Re: "Peanut Gallery""

    On 3 Jul 2001, at 13:29, Jim Utkin wrote:
    
    > A few days later I learned from a recruiter that I was passed for the
    > position, because some of the "team members" found me too aggressive.
    > Since I know I didn't try to bite anyone and I was too tired to lunge
    > towards someone, it came down to a potential subordinate being
    > threatened by me for what ever reason.  I'm not claiming I was unjustly
    > judged, I am sharing this story, to maybe help others recognize clues
    > that they can use to avoid a bad interview.
    
    
      I've been in a situation that was almost the opposite.  My employer 
    was trying to hire a "Director of Engineering", a post that was 
    temporarily being filled by a contractor.  The consensus of those of 
    us reporting to said contractor was that he had no leverage with the 
    VP the position reported to, who in turn was willing to tell anyone 
    whatever he thought they wanted to hear, even if he'd told a slightly 
    different audience the exact opposite an hour ago.
    
      So anyway, we get this guy in to interview, and his last eight 
    positions have all been "Director of X" with various organizations.
      I'm not privy to what happened in his other interviews, but in the 
    meeting with "the team" of reports, one of my colleagues asked him, 
    looking at his string of "Director" positions, how much of what he 
    did was hands-on engineering and how much was "management".
      He told us that they had, collectively, been about 80% hands-on 
    engineering.  He *may* have expected that answer to ingratiate him 
    with a bunch of engineers, but in fact our consensus was that another 
    senior engineer was NOT what the team needed.
      As far as I know, the feedback from the "team" was uniformly 
    negative.
    
      Now as I say, I don't actually know what happened in his interviews 
    with peers and superiors.  However, the chain of subsequent events 
    was reported to have gone something like this:
    
    1.  Company offered him the job (despite negative reaction of team).
    
    2.  Candidatre went to current boss, used our company's offer to pry 
    loose some plums he'd been lobbying for for a while.
    
    3.  Candidate turned down offer, having got plums.
    
    4.  Company HR began to hear back from his references -- which were 
    NOT checking out....
    
      Conclusion:  There is more than one reason why subordinates might 
    judge a candidate negatively....
    
    Dave Gillett
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Jul 05 2001 - 17:06:29 PDT