Jan 22, 2018 in Critical


Job interviewing the process through which prospective employees are identified and evaluated for their suitability in various organizational vacancies. Therefore, the employer seeks to establish the suitability of the individual to a given post or task. This paper will particularly look into an instance of job interview exercise, make objective comments with regards to the events and relationships happening between the two (interviewee and the interviewer). In light of its global application and repeated use, research has established the constructs examined during the interview which in due course was discovered to encompass a wide range of interviewees attributes, skills and competences.

We shall analyze the job interview that Candy attended to make deductions on the effectiveness of that particular exercise. First and foremost she walks into the room late which is against the most basic rule of success during a job interview. To add insult into injury she offers the shoddiest form of apology (if any) to the interviewers. This is a key factor that leads to many failing the test as the first impression given to the interviewer determines the perspective in which the interviewee is viewed. First impressions are known to pose a great impact to the persons in terms relationship building. She is not dressed adequately for a job interview environment.

She ought to have worn more decent and presentable clothes to portray her credibility as their employee. Al through the interview exercise, she does not concentrate on the issue at hand and instead she keeps on answering her phone and reaching down to clean her trouser. Generally it is clear that she had not made ample preparations for the particular occasion. She totally messes up her chances of ever getting a call from the organization in future.

The interchanging roles in this particular interview are poorly done. Due to the informality of the situation, neither of the parties knows when to take up roles to avoid destructive interference. The panel of interviewers put particular emphasis on clarity of information forwarded from the interviewee who due to poor preparations gives narrow and sub-standard answers. The interviewers do not apply any non-directive approach to ensure that they are not biased or worse still push the interviewee to a corner. The questions they ask are openly irrelevant and are attributable to taking a specific direction. Directive questions do not avail room for the interviewer to juggle around with his other interests which may probably be to the advantage of the organization.

The comprehension of the interviewers and those of the interviewee in this case are vague and biased. Contrary to their expectations, the interviewers are shocked to encounter an individual who is out rightly not interested in the job. The channels used by the two parties are specifically informal and those that illustrate the use of vertical communication. Proper interviews involve risk taking and in the long run facilitate fully disclosure of all relevant material. On a second thought, in this one the interviewee does not portray any form of risk taking.

Face to face interviews such as this one, facilitate closer observation of most attitudes and subsequent reactions and the way the credentials are presented. In our case, the interviewee is unable to observe responses of each other through eye contact, gestures, posture and face. The change of patterns in interview places or otherwise will facilitate better acquisition of material information. This interview falls into many pit falls due to the inconsistencies and constant distractions experienced by the interviewee. Unfortunately, this interview is limited to a room conversation. As a result of lack of prior preparations, during the process of asking the questions, there are indications of possible mishaps in the acquisition of answers during response because they are neither structured nor double-barreled.


Related essays