by PsyGuy » Mon Feb 19, 2018 4:12 pm
Too add to the list:
1) Interviewers who dont seem to understand how to do HR, interviews, or whose POV is entirely business corporate based. Essentially, recruiters who dont know anything about edu.
2) Recruiters who are rushed, which indicates to me a large amount of recruiting and thus a high level of attrition/maturation.
3) Recruiters who have uninspired questions that are little more then reading your resume back to them.
4) Recruiters that spend a disproportionate amount of time bragging about their IS and ownership and how awesome it is, when everyone knows its a third tier IS, and yet they have no problems, everything is perfect.
5) Recruiters that dont have my resume, or profile in front of them. It says they dont know anything about me and dont care, because any breathing body with a pulse could be in this seat and it wouldnt matter to them.
6) Recruiters who are not accepting of questions of the job or the IS.
7) Recruiters who have an answer to everything, especially when the answer is overly generic or not related to the question asked.
As for comments on the previous issues:
Fairs and recruiting can be hard and its exhausting, while its not the best sign of leadership in many cases the recruiter really isnt interested in answering questions, for them the interview process is entirely "pull" they need to reduce the applicant pool and make an appointment and if they offer you a position then they can reply in more depth, but if youre one of 30 people they are talking to they really havent prepped to answer questions because resolving their issues is the priority not engaging in a dialog. Its just one sided at that point for them.
Most recruiters and lesdership dont have a job description, as there really is only one job they are recruiting for and its being an IT. Descriptions dont generally change from department to department and if they do they are trivial changes in terminology. Stand in the front of the room do your song and monkey dance, complete your deliverables, show up on time, get along with others. Its not a fortune 100 company with hundreds of varrying job descriptions and differentiation in tasking.
Most leadership is pretty self absorbed and their is a clear power differential, while it may be a convention of the social contract the feeling is they are doing you a favor by interviewing you, and they dont owe you an apology. Some leadership actually use it as a test to determine how adaptive you are to adverse environments, an IT candidate that chafes at being late by a supervisor, is likely to be high maintenance.
Many leadership have something to prove, the difference between them and those they supervise is really very little if anything. Sure they ahve the power, but ITs and recruiting have a cost, replacing someone is expensive, and while everyone wants great super ITs there just arent anywhere close to enough, and many ITs have a very high opinion of themselves, it makes it difficult to manage. Managing ITs is a lot like managing computer scientist and engineers, they all think they are more indispensable and smarter than they are, but a lot more of them than average is closer to being right.
Yes some ISs just need warm bodies and to fill spaces on a schedule, they read your resume they know you can do some semblance of the job and their expectations are pretty low, any IT will basically do. Its just the reality of the situation sometimes.