Re: interviewing and spotting "fibs"

[howard <pencil -at- WAVENET -dot- CO -dot- UK>]

>C Davis wrote:

>If you want to test people, find a copyediting test or "rewrite this
>paragraph" >test from an old college textbook. Run off 50 copies and
>include them with the >application form. Don't make the test over long or
>you might turn good >applicants off (about 10-20 minutes). Don't interview
>anyone that doesn't turn >it in. You can even give the test to the
>receptionist for the person to do >while they wait for the interview.

This appears to be a good test of writing and information structuring
abilities but, if you suspect people are lying about their abilities,
what's to stop them getting someone else to do the test?

Also, given the earlier posts' complaints of people not being able to use
the software, would it not be a good idea to also provide a computer to do
the test on - maybe even, if the interview structure allows it,
mid-interview; say between individual interviewing and a panel interview
(gives the panel 10-20 minutes to discuss their perceptions without leaving
candidates chewing themselves up with nerves)?

Provided it is made clear to the candidate that this is being done, you
could even use a keystroke/movement recorder - not so much to "catch them
out" but to assess their approach to the application, learning curve, and
general competence.

Perfectly acceptable user-testing techniques given last week's posts on
that subject - so, if they'll be using your computers and software, why not?

'twould allow those who can learn quickly to demonstrate their suitability
for a job even if they don't know the particular application.

If they can use the software quickly and well, then their ability to use
company- or site-specific macros and style sheets and suchlike shouldn't
(to my mind) be too much trouble.

And you also get your original required information - whether or not they
can write/structure/layout information.

I admit this approach may be unsuitable for idiosyncratic or
counter-intuitive applications, but in this situation at least you'll know
whether those that claim, upfront, they can use it actually can or not.

howard

--
*theabovemessagedoesnotnecessaril
managAr parChonmorliez? SilateezntelizSane...readRlips - deliriupS
"Olninezapa! telimuapan..." (stufftie gong-hall y8a9m) hint: Anagram
H Billington - BA Tech. Comm. Writing/Proofing/Editing/DTP...etc


 From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=