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.
Subject:Re: Giving a surprise test to interviewees? From:eric -dot- dunn -at- ca -dot- transport -dot- bombardier -dot- com To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com> Date:Thu, 17 Mar 2005 11:08:34 -0500
bounce-techwr-l-106467 -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com wrote on 03/17/2005 09:45:37 AM:
> I recently went to what I thought was going to be an interview but
> turned out to be an interview + writing test. The test was
> to write an overview and procedure for a fairly complex screen.
> They told me to take as long as I wanted and two hours later I turned
> in something that I felt was halfway reasonable. I could have gone
> longer, but it was 5:00 and everyone was leaving.
That kind of test I would strongly disagree to unless I was provided
background on where the "test" came from and had some means of getting a
guarantee of feedback afterwards whether I got the job or not. Sounds too
much like volunteer work and not a test otherwise.
Unless the writers in the company frequently work in a complete vacuum
with no contact with others and are often surprised with complex screens
for unknown applications, the value of such a test to determine how the
writer will perform under real working conditions is dubious at best.
All that being said, an interview IS a test. And either side should be
willing to back-up and show proof of anything said or claimed during the
interview.
Another post that struck me was mention of not getting a job after being
asked outright programming questions. IMO, the correct answer in such a
situation would have been to bluntly challenge the validity of the
question to the job requirements. And for that reason, I don't like the
general idea of isolated high school type, perform test > hand-in paper,
testing.
An interview should be expected to be a two way exchange. "Springing" a
surprise 'test' on the applicant gives them reasonable grounds to be
annoyed as a significant part of what they can legitimately expect to be a
two way exchange has been hijacked and turned into a one-way exercise.
Worse still, it's a one-way exercise that is likely to be of no use or
benefit to the candidate if they are not considered for the job.
When taking tests for credit or certificate courses you can walk away with
some feedback and lessons learned whether you pass the test or fail and
you can discuss results with those that administered the test.
While I have done blind tests in the past (please complete the test, we'll
get back to you if you are considered), I think that now I wouldn't agree
to a test unless guaranteed an interview to discuss the test and my
results or the employers impression.
This e-mail communication (and any attachment/s) may contain confidential
or privileged information and is intended only for the individual(s) or
entity named above and to others who have been specifically authorized to
receive it. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read,
copy, use or disclose the contents of this communication to others. Please
notify the sender that you have received this e-mail in error by reply
e-mail, and delete the e-mail subsequently.
Thank you.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Ce message (ainsi que le(s) fichier/s), transmis par courriel, peut
contenir des renseignements confidentiels ou protégés et est destiné à
l?usage exclusif du destinataire ci-dessus. Toute autre personne est par
les présentes avisée qu?il est strictement interdit de le diffuser, le
distribuer ou le reproduire. Si vous l?avez reçu par inadvertance,
veuillez nous en aviser et détruire ce message.
Merci.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
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.
