Employer's Test, was Technical Writer Certification

[Stuart Burnfield]

Hi Nicholas -

I haven't had to do selections very often but when I have, even in a 
strong field, there's always been more important factors to separate the 
candidates. If I ignore the price tag hanging from the applicant's 
collar, it's not because I'm "focused more on personality than the job".

Putting myself in the shoes of the interviewer, I wouldn't be thinking 
"Gosh, how can I deal with this faux pas in a sensitive but 
proportionate way?" I'd be thinking it's irrelevant to the person's 
suitability for the job, therefore why mention it or give it a second's 
thought?

For all I know the guy could have had a seagull poop on his shirt ten 
minutes before the interview, and he's just sprinted back from the 
clothing store with seconds to spare. But, so what? Can he write? Is he 
well organised? Does he meet deadlines? Does he get on with people?

I've never had two candidates so evenly matched that the only way to 
separate them was that one said Pier St when he meant Plain St.

As long as the applicant we eventually choose does good work on time, I 
wouldn't mind if they turn up for work every second day with the price 
tag on their shirt. Or the seagull poop.

Cheers

Stuart

ps. I'm off on two weeks holiday! Yay!

Nicholas Russon wrote:

> As an interviewer, I'd avoid mentioning any of those things, but I could
> hardly avoid taking them into account when I'm deciding whether to go
> any further with that candidate. (And for me, each of those things would
> be negative modifiers, BTW.)