Poshmonkey said – Sat, 30 Aug 2008 21:05:35 -0000 ( Link )
Imagine the following scenario: You are a recruiter and you have to choose between two job candidates.
Candidate 1, his name is Carl, he finished his Master degree as a full-time student, has no experience but graduated with “distinction”. He got the financial means to complete his studies by his parents.
Candidate 2, his name is Mark, it took him two years longer to complete his studies (was a part-time student) since at the same time he had to work in order to afford to enroll in the degree course. He was not a first class student but still gained good results.
So, who would you hire for a managerial position?
- Actions
- Author
- Poshmonkey
-
Post Comments
Poshmonkey said – Thu, 18 Sep 2008 17:56:35 -0000 ( Flag Edit Link )
Well, I would also go for the best candidate. But my experience tells me that even the performance in an interview can be “great” just in that particular interview and when it comes to do the job the situation could look quite different….. What guarantee do you really have just based on that interview. My strategy therefore as a recruiter was usually to invite a person 2-3 times in different locations to see how the candidate behaves in various social settings.
If at the interview – let’s say – both candidates are performing similarly I would definitely choose the part-time student Mark, since he already got experience, and furthermore has proven to be able to manage a degree course and a job simultaneously. This shows me that the person can multitask, has learnt time management skills and is able to achieve his goals by working hard (due to the fact that he had to work for his degree). I would not be able to say that about Carl, candidate 1. He might have similar qualities but he couldn’t prove it so far.