Conspirocy: if the bullshitting game isn't working for you, you're obviously not very good at it. A good bullshitter will make their bullshit sound genuine and truthful. That's basically how I got one of the few CommBank internships. I have no passion whatsoever about doing marketing with them, and want to work for a non-services company. However, based on all the answers I gave them, they thought that I loved service marketing> in fact, I even used facts and statistics to back up my responses as to why services is perfect for me.
The rejects (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Osvaldo
- Start date
Newbie
is a roflcopter
- Joined
- May 17, 2003
- Messages
- 3,670
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2003
how many people have had to hold back during group interviews?
ie restrain themselves from smacking the shit outta this guy who cant shutup with his shit ideas and instead smile and encourage the whole team to participate
....
ie restrain themselves from smacking the shit outta this guy who cant shutup with his shit ideas and instead smile and encourage the whole team to participate
....
Vagabond
Machine
I don't think its so much about making up 'bullshit', but showing general enthusiasm.
If you can't be enthusiastic about your work, hell, at least at recruitment, you're going to suffer down the track and they know it. Not sure what you mean about substance?
Even with 2 or 3 years of uni behind you you are somewhat useless in terms of work skills; they concentrate more on the impression you give and your potential to learn. If you're good enough to fake it then good luck to you!
From what I've seen buzz words hold nowhere near as much ground as confidence, communication skills and rapport.
If you can't be enthusiastic about your work, hell, at least at recruitment, you're going to suffer down the track and they know it. Not sure what you mean about substance?
Even with 2 or 3 years of uni behind you you are somewhat useless in terms of work skills; they concentrate more on the impression you give and your potential to learn. If you're good enough to fake it then good luck to you!
From what I've seen buzz words hold nowhere near as much ground as confidence, communication skills and rapport.
well said. but you do need to be able to answer any question thrown at you. for example, I was asked where I can envision myself working within ComBank in ten years time. Now, I have no fucking clue what jobs are even available in combank. I know there's brand management and different variations for fast moving consumer goods, but I didn't even know banks had internal marketing companies (i thought they outsourced). This was certainly something I didn't prepare for, but I was able to apply my knowledge and sound very confident in my response, plus demonstrate my desire to learnVagabond said:
Lol that definitely rings true...it took alot of strength not to just say SHUT UP when he was sitting right next to me and kept repeating the same stupid idea again and again just to sound like he was contributing.Newbie said:
Urgh I hope I'm not working with that moron this summer...
Omnidragon
Devil
Well nah my friend had some 90 or so average, obviously showed interest in what he was going for (stuff like quant, but not quite) and always gets hammered. Research knocked him back. So did M&A. Beats me really.
Conspirocy
Member
I think you what you said sums up what I was trying to point out. You admit yourself you have no 'passion' for a role with that firm, yet that didn't show up in the interview. Obviously there is a quaility about you that appeals to an employer, and good on you for using that to your advantage.stazi said:
But the fact of the matter is you did bullshit whoever was involved in the recruitment process. Or at least you think you did. I think I pointed out that you can do well bullshiting, I was just reflecting it doesn't really work for me. Whether I'm good at it or not isn't important, maybe I am, maybe I'm not. I could have ethical issues about blatantly lying to get a job etc etc (not that I do).
My main point is that the firms are totally aware that you are to an extent bullshitting them, and they look for that quality. They are all as you said services firms, eventually somewhere down the track in your work you will be dealing with people, and you will need to bullshit people, clients or prospective clients. I think that fits in well with these larger firms, they want someone with the gift of the gab, and a good personality (but that second criteria re personality is very subjective and in most cases will depend on the interviewer). Again, I point out to you that these firms back themselves to take a whole bunch of people who are decent, but have excellent bullshitting skills and then go and train you up. As far as im concerned most people leaving uni are useless or close to it, as has been pointed out by people on this thread, and on other threads.
As for a good bullshitter will convince people. You may think that is true, but even you one day will get caught out bullshitting (if you havent already), everyone does. I would say that okay fair enough early stages bullshitting can get you so far (it will definetly get you a job). Eventually there will a day when you need something more, there will be people you cannot bullshit.
I think there is a difference between bullshitting, and selling yourself.
For bullshitting people are obviously doing this for things like why this firm why this division, what can you bring to the firm, how do you deal with this or that.
Then you can always sell yourself as well when answering these questions; I think this is slightly different. Stazi I'd say you are selling yourself, and bullshitting a bit. Again, you saying you have no passion totally fits into what I said. You totally see it as just a job, probably even only holiday pay to beef up your CV and since you are still in the running for other jobs, probably a nice safety net. To you its just a job or a stepping stone, and thats the truth for most people. Obviously you can never let the firm you are applying for known this. There is a bullshit approach, which as someone mentioned earlier becomes very generic; and there is a selling yourslf approach, which I personally think is what you are doing.
Rorix
Active Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2003
- Messages
- 1,818
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2005
Whatever distinctions you want to draw, the point is simple: HOW can anyone hire a candadate who can't come up with a reason why they want the job?
It's just impossible. You're hiring someone who demonstrates that they were so unmotivated about working in the industry that they didn't bother to research and so lacking in industry knowledge that they cant spin something on the spot. Staz doesn't even know what growth solutions is (neither do I btw) and still came up with some crap on the spot.
How are they going to put someone in front of clients who can't even pretend that they have put some thought into a response??
The interview process is appropriate.
It's just impossible. You're hiring someone who demonstrates that they were so unmotivated about working in the industry that they didn't bother to research and so lacking in industry knowledge that they cant spin something on the spot. Staz doesn't even know what growth solutions is (neither do I btw) and still came up with some crap on the spot.
How are they going to put someone in front of clients who can't even pretend that they have put some thought into a response??
The interview process is appropriate.
I think it can be summed up like this: Uni is useless, and it's just an expensive day care centre for intelligent teenagers. What we learn means absolutely nothing, it gets forgotten in between semester breaks and holidays. The only thing need for getting a job are communication skills, and the ability to make things up on the spot, with none of these having been learnt at uni.
Conspirocy
Member
Please excuse my complete 'cry baby' post bellow.Rorix said:
my point is this. Every half decent candidate will:
1. Know the questions before they show up
2. Have prepared answers to these questions that are good
There are so many people at that stage who do have the right answers and can answer those questions, and who are very capable. So when they cut down the people with the same marks, the same uni, school blah blah blah all that stuff what are they really deciding on? You can't honestly say that after hearing 8 well prepared answers in a day an interviewer can go that person A is the right candidate and person B is not and have a valid reason - they are exactly the same on paper, have the same answers, etc. I think it's based on whether you get along with the person or not. You can answer the questions right and prepare all your bullshit (for lack of a better word) and it wont help you if for some reason the person you get doesn't like you.
That how I feel after interviewing recently. It only vacation work and it's not like I'm going to finish uni jobless, but at the same time it's frustrating to take the time to sit down learn a company, practice your bullshit scenarios to answer and get nothing out of it. On paper I'm perfect, in my interviews i've been good. I feel that maybe I don't stand out but I don't make mistakes and I come across as all those things people seem to want. I've tried it the way stazi and others have suggested and it's not working for me. I'm trying to be something I'm not. I think a lot of people stuff themselves up by trying to play that bullshit game, the only people it suits are the bullshitters. You can go down the wrong path playing that game and stuff up your chances a lot. So now I have one more interview next week and I plan to just mix it up and be honest and cut out this bullshit. I'll let you guys know how it goes.
Last edited:
I completely disagree. I find myself applying everything I've learned since first year, continuously. For example, in my ComBank interview, I was able to successfully apply Services Marketing, HRM and Psychological theory to the case study activity. I find myself constantly applying the things I learned a work environment.Osvaldo said:
A great example of this in action is watching people design 'mock' advertisements who have not studied marketing/advertising and comparing it to those who have. Those who haven't will have overly complicated messages, low branding, etc.
I don't know if I'm just the exception to get weirdo interviewers who refuse to follow the rules but occasionally you do get interviewed by someone at the firm who is fully aware of everything you just said. They know full well that the people who get to this stage are not total dumbasses and know what to say and when to say it.Conspirocy said:
I happened to get a few interviewers who just sat me down, threw away that stupid criteria sheet with the set questions and made me talk to them. You just have to adapt, I think. If you get someone who sticks by the rules reading out the criteria and asking set questions, then match their personality as best as you can. It's an hour, it won't kill you. If you get a person who just does not give a damn about the questions, then match them.
There is no way to guarantee a way to "get along" with a person. I found that the best trick is to just match their temperament and they'll see commonalities and even if you're radically different people, they will sense something is right.
I don't know what to say about this BS issue except that I did play that game to a certain extent but not nearly as much as you deem is necessary to land the job. For the record, I've got 2 offers so far with one interview to go for the 3rd firm I applied. If you don't like the work (I admit, I'm not exactly passionate about accounting...) then don't apply but if you have thrown yourself in, then you either play the game and win or do things your way and make the entire process a waste of time.
Last edited:
Yes, you certainly need to make the people who are interviewing you like you. So, you need lots of charisma, to be nice, have great social skills, etc. You need to make the interviewer feel good about being an interviewer.Conspirocy said:
Also, on paper it is rare that candidates will be exactly the same. Some people may have more work experience, others may have better marks. Some may have lots of community service, others will be fantastic at sport.
Again, bullshitting isn't working for you because you are not good at bullshitting. Or, if you are good, then you're simply bullshitting about the wrong things. If you are giving very generic responses that they have heard fifty times, hoping to appeal to them, then of course you won't get the position. If you are stimulating a unique insight, such as one that I will focus on when I go for my P&G interviews, then you will get jobs.
Similarly, a bit of exploratory research helps. Talk to people who have done the interviews in the past. Talk to people working for the company. The latter has helped me generate some fantastic responses. For example, I knew that CommBank are quite serious about education, and like their employees to study MBAs. So, during the question time of the interview, I casually mentioned that I believe in the power of education and that I aspire to complete an MBA at a prestigious university, so I was wondering if they would help me facilitate this goal.
I absolutely agree. To get along with a person, you need to have certain established personality traits, such as charisma, which I mentioned in the above post. If you are a likeable person, then you have an advantage. Also, if you can determine a lot about a person within the first few minutes, again, you are at an advantage. I have this skill; just by observing them, I can make a lot of inferences about their lifestyle, interests and personality. A lot of them turn out to be very correct.Sarah168 said:
Also, some interviewers like arrogance, whilst others hate . This is an important one to judge, as it can make or break you. If they prefer a candidate who is quite 'proud' of his achievements then talk extensively about how you are the best. If they don't, then rephrase your achievements, and how you do them in order to attain the best job and future for yourself; to make future employers proud of you.
I actually find that if you are confident, then it may be better not to overprepare for interviews. Coming up with generic responses won't please them, and they will be able to detect a change in tone as you start recalling things from memory, rather than thinking on your feet. Adapting to questions is far more effective than preparing for them, as Sarah mentioned (this is not to say that preparation should be completely ignored - compile a list of your experiences and what you learned).
I have never been rejected from a job requiring an interview.
Oh and another thing, research the company culture and HR recruitment attributes that they look for. These will be on the company website. Too many people go in there without researching these. Most people will go into every interview treating it the same way, especially for similar companies (e.g. E&Y, PWC, Deloitte). However, you will find that they differ greatly, in terms of the above factors. Whilst being achievement and reward oriented may be a great strength for one company, another may prefer teamwork and joint goals.
Conspirocy
Member
Yeah I totally get what you are saying. I have been doing something wrong in my interviews, I just can't pinpoint what it is. If anything I think its been what you said stazi about bullshitting about the wrong stuff. I probably haven't come across as that interested.
As for not giving it a go, I didn't mean it like that. I've just been thinking about what I have been doing wrong with my approach and I think I need to find a new way of selling myself in the interview.
As for not giving it a go, I didn't mean it like that. I've just been thinking about what I have been doing wrong with my approach and I think I need to find a new way of selling myself in the interview.
I didn't mean to imply that I thought you weren't giving it an honest go but you just sounded a little too disheartened.Conspirocy said:
Selling yourself is a little to obvious. Just be confident and match the interviewer's style. Is there anything glaringly wrong with your interview technique that even you can pick up? Or is it just consistent personality clashes with the interviewer?