Don't fall into the same trap as Apprentices

Article from the Edinburgh Evening News - Jane Wylie-Roberts, MD of Stafffinders recruitment agency

Sir Alan Sugar, in his preamble to the 12 hopefuls on BBC2's The Apprentice professed to have no time for ‘arse-lickers and bullshitters', and the penultimate show was an object lesson, exposing one of the favourites as relying far too much on vague and ill-prepared generalisms.  The challenge set was a series of interviews conducted by 3 of Sir Alan's fiercest pitbulls who were tasked with getting to the very essence of the candidates' strengths, and weaknesses.  Unlike the preceding tasks, the spotlight shone hard and unforgivingly ... no flannel or specious babble was tolerated and it pointed up some major failings in terms of interview preparation and techniques that are commonplace in recruitment. 

A survey conducted by Stafffinders recruitment agency with catering employers on the most common interview failings highlighted the perennial bugbears of poor timekeeping, untidiness, and misplaced overconfidence, but by far the most crucial weakness lay in the lack of preparation and research by candidates on the firms they aspire to join.  The man on the street could tell you that Amstrad's main business was computer systems, and that such systems were made up of keyboards and monitors, but in an interview for an apprenticeship with a reputed salary of ‘six figures', that's just not enough.  Incredibly, that was about all the hopefuls could muster!!

There is no excuse in this internet age with the corresponding mass dissemination of facts, figures and PR fluff for any candidate to be ill-prepared on background information about their suitor.  The survey concluded that a mere 6% of employers felt that candidates were well prepared for interview.  No employer is going to expect a detailed presentation on the company's financial performance or a breakdown of what markets it plans to target over the next ten years, but an awareness of size, core business, and market share should not be beyond the ken of any applicant.

Closely allied to this is the negative impression given by a blank expression and muttered ‘no nothing really' when given the opportunity to ask questions of the interviewer.  Such indifference to a company's structure, ethos, training regime suggests the candidate is not fully committed to the role.

Candidates viewed positively by employers present themselves well, listen carefully to questions and answer honestly, and do not bowl in with salary demands, negative statements about current employers or overblown assessments of their own value. One can only hope that viewers benefit from the Apprentice hopefuls' public humiliation by being better briefed for their next interview. 

View other news from January 2008