RE: The Results (Long)

Subject: RE: The Results (Long)
From: "Gene Kim-Eng" <techpubs -at- genek -dot- com>
To: trm -at- telusplanet -dot- net, techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Date: 19 Aug 2003 14:03:28 GMT

I'm wondering why you automatically assume that the good writing was
the result of the degree programs. Some of the worst candidates I've
ever interviewed were graduates of writing programs with certificates
in hand. The current economic situation has put a lot of high-quality
candidates in the "available" category, but there's also a lot of chaff
that got cut loose, and a lazy approach to hiring will just get you
buried or cause you to miss out on good opportunities. There are no
magic litmus tests for quality, and no shortcuts for doing the hard work
of screening candidates. The old reliable methods - evaluating work
samples, obtaining references from past employers or clients and spending
real time in face-to-face meetings - are still the best ways of hiring
writers -
or any employees.

Gene Kim-Eng

------- Original Message -------
Mon, 18 Aug 2003 16:22:40 -0700 Tamara Reyes-Muralles?wrote:

I may have become biased, or just smarter, but I decided I will only

interview people with writing courses and who are members of STC or a

writing association. I interviewed two people that just graduated from a

professional writing degree program, and I could see a huge positive

difference in their writing samples. They were great writing samples.

Previous by Author: RE: Re: So many jobs want CURRENT security clearances
Next by Author: RE: Projects available are getting shorter and shorter
Previous by Thread: Re: The Results (Long)
Next by Thread: RE: The Results (Long)

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads