Comment by Slouch on April 8, 2008 at 1:36pm

Comment by Joshua Letourneau on April 8, 2008 at 1:49pm

Anybody that thinks they can look me in the eye and explain the validity of the heinous question to me is a person I'd like to do a round of shots with. We could all use a crazy friend.

Comment by bill martineau on April 8, 2008 at 3:40pm

Just because people have poor interivewing skills and must stoop to this level to attempt to understand you as a person shouldn't send you running. Just think how much easier it will be to get promoted at this company than at one where they have intelligent people.

Comment by Joshua Letourneau on April 8, 2008 at 4:19pm

Bill, you bring up a good counter-point. I once had one of my Staff Sergeants in the Marine Infantry ask me why I wanted to run the indoc into SpecOps - he said, "What's wrong with being a Million-Dollar Player on a Five-And-Dime Team?" He had a point, and truthfully, that's what some aspire to. In a landfill-style cubicle-farm, it's easy to stand out! As for me, I wanted to be pushed outside my 'comfort zone' . . . to have my limits further tested, so to speak. I guess it's all relative and you do raise a very valid point.
P.S. I'm just playing about hitting the door - but it's fun to get a laugh out of people :)

Comment by bill martineau on April 8, 2008 at 4:24pm

Joshua, My tongue was firmly planted in my cheek, but you're right if you can reach some goals (get the low hanging fruti) and get some promotions because your competition isn't up to snuff why not take advantage of the situation and then move on when no more challenges exist.

Comment by Jan Simpson on April 9, 2008 at 9:54am

All of these are good points, however if the question is that lame, and it is coming from someone who is considered "spokesperson" for the company and that is as good as it gets, how is this person going to recognize that you are far superior to those already in the company or those who will arrive after you? I think the challenge would be not to stand out but rather would any of your strategies or talents be understood or even implemented? Yea, it seems worthy to gain a few promotions to get ahead of your competition, if you could stand the boredom in what seems like would a non-challenging environment, but would you as a person be challenged to continue your growth in that environment? So while your competitors are duking it out in challenging environments and you are just collecting really "unearned" promos, are your competitors towing the lines and learning more than you in real life experience and will pass you by in a blink of an eye. Just my humble opinion.

Comment by Joshua Letourneau on April 9, 2008 at 11:00am

Jan - awesome point. You bring up a very good discussion in regards to people who are granted what you termed "unearned" promotions, and then have a high-level title to put on their resume (and recruiters just love titles, right?) The next thing you know, a not-quite-as-savvy exec recruiter is calling their client and saying, "I just spoke with a Director over at XYZ Company and I think you need to meet him asap - I mean, he's a Director and those kind of candidates are really hard to find!" Personally, I have heard of this happening in the Automotive Sector - former employees of Ford and Chrysler now have a stigma associated with their personal brand (some would say that the higher up you are in a company that's been destroyed by competitors, the worse the stigma). Ironically, the CEO is often insulated from this stigma, however, which I don't understand. What is happening in the biz world when the one guy/girl most responsible for stock price, EPS, and market cap . . . is given a free lunch when those numbers tank? Here's a perfect example: Bob Nardelli (former CEO of Home Depot) creates zero shareholder value over a ~5 yr period, gets "let go" by the board (at which point he receives a 'golden parachute' of ~$250 Million USD), and then he's the new CEO of Chrysler less than 90 days later? I might not be the smartest guy around, but selling me on that would be pretty darn tough. Wow.

Comment by Slouch on April 9, 2008 at 11:10am

why is no one telling everyone what animal they would want to be.

Comment by bill martineau on April 9, 2008 at 11:50am

I know we're all recruiters and we love to make assumptions and leap to conclusions because we're the smartest bear in the woods (happy slouch), but just because a company has a poor hiring process (I dare you to name me two of your clients that couldn't significantly improve their process?) doesn't mean it's a bad company. In fact I think that the typical company is one that truly has average to slightly better than average talent, and that the difference from one to the next is getting the high level talent to come in and make their role players better. Like Jordan with the Bulls one superstar can take average talent and help elevate it to perform better, and if you have the opportunity to do that at a company your path is greased both there and anywhere else that you can showcase your proven track record. So yeah don't go to work at crappy companies, but hopefully the recruiters and candidates are doing their homework up front about the fit before an interview is set.

Rem

Comment by Joshua Letourneau on April 10, 2008 at 9:56pm

That's funny :) I read an 'expert answer' on the web (from an 'interviewing consultant') that said candidates should choose animals that are very good at what they do, and are simultaneously very busy . . . . like a Beaver!

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page