TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
I can't recall anyone in the discussion, including John,
claiming it was "fair" to judge a candidate negatively
for having been outsourced; it was merely cited as a
possibile reaction. And I would count someone who
recognizes their tendency to react that way and warns
you about it in an effort to help you avoid it as
someone with a pretty high degree of "integrity." Most
interviewers (myself included) do not begin every
interview by providing candidates with a list of things
they should avoid saying.
Even an interviewer who doesn't react negatively to the
news that you were outsourced may react negatively to
the way you deliver that news. Many people (myself
included) have an awfully hard time discussing a job
loss experience without allowing their feelings to slip
through. Some people who post to this list are able to
virtually darken my monitor screen with the emotions
their posts on the subject project, and I can't even see
their faces or read their body language the way I could
in a face-to-face interview. Unless you know absolutely
that you can tackle such a discussion dispassionately,
it is always best to avoid it, and in a negotiation
(which any interview is from start to end), there's a
world of difference between providing false information
and simply not volunteering unnecessary information.
Gene Kim-Eng
------- Original Message -------
On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 16:01:10 -0400 Bonnie Granat wrote:
Nothing even remotely like these scenarios was being
discussed. We were not talking about blaming or whining.
We were talking about whether it's fair to judge someone
negatively because they say their job was outsourced.
That's all the discussion was about.
The issue being discussed was whether an applicant
should hide the fact that his job was offshored. That
was the subject. Just that.
I was using the first definition of integrity, Andrew:
1 : firm adherence to a code of especially moral or artistic values :
INCORRUPTIBILITY
2 : an unimpaired condition : SOUNDNESS
3 : the quality or state of being complete or undivided :
COMPLETENESS
synonyms see HONESTY
Integrity has everything to do with it.
Nobody's talking about doing anything like this, Andrew. We're talking
about whether to try to HIDE the facts or not.
We are not talking about whining or "going negative."
Have you tried the latest in Help Authoring from RoboHelp?
Try ROBOHELP X5 for Free - Now with Word 2003 support, Content
Management, Multi-Author support, PDF and XML support and much more!
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archiver -at- techwr-l -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
