INTERVIEW-3

INTERVIEW-3 

   SOME DOs AND DON’Ts TO THE JOB-SEEKER          

Interviews are formal situations. So, the prospective employee should observe protocol in every act. Verbal communication requires being polite, parliamentary and ‘free’ of slang. Talking is an exercise conditioned by training; therefore, in all interaction, one has to cultivate right habits avoiding casual remarks. Persons lavishing in slangs would find the going tough on all formal contexts; often they fail to impress selectors. Let us train ourselves to speak in a tone that reflects decency and seriousness.

Another aspect revealing one’s personality is the dress. In dress, convenience matters but not convenience alone; yes, the dress we put on must evoke respect from its tidy and clean looks. The use of ‘casuals’ on formal occasions is not viewed with delight.

Polite and serious dispositions alone cannot win jobs. How does a candidate acquit self on the day of reckoning to draw the attention of the selectors? Apart from the physical presentation, the attitude to respond carries weight. Any candidate has to begin responding in quick time; [s]he cannot keep on seeking clarifications on the question. A common error is- the candidates show emotional gestures for questions they are comfortable with or otherwise. Outward enthusiasm in facing the questions must be uniform without suggesting personal preferences for questions.

Never cast vague looks of detachment to inconvenient questions; instead politely agree that you are not informed of all the important details.  State it a manner that your response appears genuine. It is here that ‘body language’ renders help. Body language is a convenient additive that enhances empathy in the listener. By trying to be extra careful on such occasions, the body language can betray by its obtrusive looks.

Answer only if ‘you’ are invited to respond. Never hurry through statements. Let the panelists grasp what you suggest.  Pacing the delivery takes the recipient to a comfort zone; it is vital to win their confidence.

Please avoid vulgar display of your credentials saying, ‘Sir, Sir have a look at these marks / certificates /medals’. For them medals are just metals. Permit them to have time for comparing different candidates. Always have a set of photocopies and updated Resume suggesting all your attainments; hand it over for their scrutiny. Do not wait at the corridor to collect your photocopy. Leave it with them and impress them of your state of preparedness.  The little money spent on this is a good investment and will pay back. Another unhealthy practice is trying to put pressure on selectors. Sometimes, it may work; nonetheless, it leaves the impression that the candidate is likely to bring pressure in future too if [s]he is selected. The employer should get convinced of the merits of the candidates. Certainly, ‘recommendation’ is no merit. If and when the ‘recommending agency’ has no stakes with the organization, candidates entertained to satisfy such agency would find the going tough and suffocating unless, they have proven efficiency in their work. Display of merit is more welcome than efforts to muster extraneous help. It stands to reason to accept that, on most occasions, employers feel secure to select candidates who do not muster the services of spokespersons. If we are in the position of a selector, would we not prefer personal choice over those of cases ‘recommended’ on considerations extraneous to the job?  Also, the genuine pride of selection by right efforts is far superior to ‘winning’ by influence. Always, efforts reward anyone who has the ingredients of intellect and timely wit to impress the authorities.       

EXERCISING RESTRAINT                                             

In an earlier piece, I have indicated the relevance for composure. At times, it is useful to dilate on how to sustain composure. Composure in general is the way a person stays cool during interaction. It is a vital element in silently displaying the undaunted state that one is in. Stated in a different way, it shows that [s]he cannot be provoked into disturbed display of anger. On the face of adversity, [s]he takes pointed questions and keeps replying well within the limits of decency. Though suggested in simple terms, it is not an easy exercise, as anger is an emotion- not ready to dissipate, proving hard to contain. Obviously, for staying cool, there must either have been an intense training or a genetic make-up unusual in general. A range of advisories occurs in writings of the knowledgeable, suggesting the value of containing anger. Anger does not require serious or persistent efforts of ignition. It gets sparked off by the way that one understands a statement. At times, persons imagine that a statement is a veiled reference to them; it irritates them and opens up outbursts. Therefore, one has to cultivate the habit of listening without responding unless invited to. One way of getting over the ominous prospect of anger is to consider if the utterance is worthy of a reply. Most often irresponsible statements have no value; let us not add value to them by responding. Should a reply be essential to clear the air of any suspicion, we need to wait for a proper moment to set the record straight and politely indicate the folly in the ‘provocative’ utterance already made by someone.  By attempting to interfere even on the first occasion, inadvertently, we confer credibility on to the observation. So, a rebuttal delivered at a later point invites greater attention than those of instant denials.   A set of carefully played words can show the critic in poor light. A certain degree of grooming can help in arming ourselves with both protective shields and destructive ammunition by way of clarifying exposition. Restraint provides time to react to a telling effect.