RE: put them to the test!

["Domaschuk, Rob" <Robd -at- datalogics -dot- com>]

> What would be the point in spelling out to candidates exactly what to
> expect in a test? 

Nothing - but there is a difference between being told that there will BE a test (common courtesy) and being told what is in the test. For example, if I were administering the test, I would tell the candidate that the test will be used to evaluate some basic editing and writing skills. I would not tell them the particulars.

In my own opinion (which is neither right nor wrong), springing a test on them as a surprise serves no purpose other than to intentionally throw the candidate off balance with not enough redeeming values to justify it. Misdirection (at best) or underhandedness (at worst) is no way to start a long-term working relationship. But that's just me.

> There's no BETTER way to find out how qualified and adaptable a
> candidate is, than by throwing them in the water and seeing how well
> they float. 

If your company is structured in such a way that all anyone does is "firefighting", then I suppose it's an accurate way to let the candidate know the environment he/she is getting into. It's also a great way to detect if the person is a witch!  :-)

> The last time we interviewed, most candidates WERE surprised when i told
> them they'd have to write a test, because the h.r. person booking the
> interviews neglected to let them know.

Oops! Bad h.r. person, bad! bad!! Even in this situation, there is a difference; intentionally not telling people that there is a test is one thing, but if the h.r. person neglected (i.e. 'forgot') then that is another issue. If I found out my h.r. person forgot to tell people and the candidate performed well, that would be a big plus in their favor. Again, I would never tell h.r. not to reveal that there is a test.

> So I tried to avert any panic by telling them that it was pretty basic
> stuff and i was sure that, as competent writers, they'd be able to
> handle it easily.  

Agreed - but you reassured the candidates that it wasn't intentional. If I walked into THAT situation, I'd feel a lot more at ease, knowing (or trusting for the moment) that a game wasn't being played. After all, we're all professionals - or supposed to be.

> It also don't think that candidates need to be told that they are also
> expected to be able to spot common language usage, punctuation, and
> grammatical errors. 

Why not? If editing is going to be part of their job, then why not let them know they're being evaluated on it? If they can't do it, they can't do it - irregardless (kidding, I know it's 'regardless') of knowing beforehand. What purpose does hiding information about how they're being evaluated serve? I say this because, although I do have decent editing skills, I have worked with some wonderful editors and value their abilities. 

> In a field where accuracy of content is vital and you're working to
> deadline, what's the point in hiring somebody, even at a junior level,
> who has no basic aptitude for getting the details right under pressure? 

True enough, but accurate content and spotting affect/effect in a surprise test are not the same thing. Yes, any writer needs to have the basic grasp of the English language (or whatever language they are working in) as well as have the ability to proof their own work or their peers'. I do question, though, how a SURPRISE test achieves this. 

I'm all for testing, but if the test is set up well, then knowing about it beforehand won't skew the results and goes a long way in starting to build the relationship needed to work as a team. 

Rob "I'm now up to three cents" Domaschuk




Rob Domaschuk                | 312.853.8337 (o)
Technical Writer             | 866.741.2677 (f)
Printable Technologies, inc. | www.printable.com


"The hard part about being a bartender is figuring
 out who is drunk and who is just stupid." 
	- Richard Braunstein 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

WEBWORKS FINALDRAFT - EDIT AND REVIEW, REDEFINED
Accelerate the document lifecycle with full online discussions and unique feedback-management capabilities. Unlimited, efficient reviews for Word
and FrameMaker authors. Live, online demo:
http://www.webworks.com/techwr-l

Your Ad Here! Have a product or service you'd like to get some attention for? Use this space to get the word out! Contact lisa -at- techwr-l -dot- com for more details.

---
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- techwr-l -dot- com
Send administrative questions to lisa -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-  Visit
http://www.techwr-l.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.