Quadralemma

The New Year has kinda created a dent in my blogging frequency. I am kinda shocked myself, as being jobless wud have meant more, and not less, posts from me. Anywayz, I am officially jobless in a quadralemma. I got 4 choices from which to choose one. On a scale of 1-10, everything has been between 6-7 (yeah, rate yourself is one of the most FAQ in an interview), so its been kinda hard to choose.

Alright, now to the interviewee saga...

I realised that interviewees over a period of time tend to formulate a standard set of answers for the usual FAQ (strength, weakness, projects, challenges etc). I hate repeating things that I have said. My astrounding memory apart, I do tend to consciously avoid saying the same things over and over again (Rahul Dravid r u listening?). And a lot of interviewees tend to repeat the "magic formula" to get in, rather than give the interviewer a good perception of what the interviewee is. There is always a dilemma. Should I tell him what he wants to hear or what I really am? The more desperate u r for the job, the answer tends to slide towards the former. But in this race for the vacant seat, the interviewees who are true to themselves tend to lose out as well. Interviewers can best be described as a bridled horse, looking through a focussed lens. If you deviate, no matter how good u r, u lose.

But on the other hand, what if, the interviewee, like myself, decide I dont really need the job, if they want me, let them take me, else leave it. Even though some jobs can be simply "irresistable", which I can simply not say no, I havent got such a job yet, so I prefer to remain with the "dont care" attitude that is in direct contrast to my usual passive self.

Especially if you are in the place I am, you would definitely hear this statement "Are you prepared to work late to complete your job". Ofcourse, the truth is the worst possible answer. This is an implicit contract that u sign during ur interviews that increases your work load while reducing ur wage and demolishing ur health. Cost cutting technology at its best. Even though most guys would spend time in their offices late, checking emails and chatting, I hate to be in the office or anywhere near, if I am done with my work. I want my bonus to be a function of my job, not a function of my work hours. I would love to see it in a Human Rights Violations document. I think in about 1912 or so, they brought down the working hours to 8 hrs a day. Does any of the companies realise why they brought it down?

Some of the companies really get on my nerves during the interview process. Not only do they think too high of themselves, they tend to frustrate u with "i-have-lost-count" number of interviews. Worst still, they tend to repeat the same questions and i refuse to go into an infinite loop saying "im the smart amazing flawless dedicated guy that u want", complicating things. Interviewers have a valid point. They want to get the best person for a position. But how do they decide on whoz the best, if everyone repeats the same phrase over and over again? Technical, aptitude, business, people, aptitude, behavorial tests after... what more? And if any interviewee knows what he/she wants with their career, it acts like a warning symbol for them. Doubt creeps into their hawk like brains.. "If this guy knows what he wants, wont he become frustrated with this job soon?". Worse so, cos I have some constraints, like my concurrent masters degrees. Talks of commitment, implicit overtime agreements, explicit behavorial threats, lectures on company policies and regulations tend to dominate for the next hour.

The most hilarious part is when the interviewers at the end of the interview ask you "Do you have any questions for us". I thot it was nice of them during my first ever interview, but I soon found a pattern in this as well. They expect you to shoot only "certain" questions to them. They dont want to face questions they are not prepared for. If you ask them more about the role or the job or the growth, they have standard template answers for you. You should see the look on their faces when I ask them questions like "Whats the average age/experience of your Team Leaders, Managers". They take it intrusively, while I am just being practical. Equal opportunities, Meritocracy, Scholarly are buzz words for corporate communication officers to portray the company in a nice way. But are these really the case inside the organisation? These stats might help me validate those claims made on their website. Ofcourse, they avoid it by just saying "Confidential". In other words, they dont know.

So in essence, they end up recruiting guys who dont know what they want in their career, able to comfortably lie in/about their resume, able to work their ass off, not expect any kinda growth, infinite patience towards beaurocracies, do the job day in and day out with a wide smile on their face. And they end up losing them just as quick! As one company aptly put it.. "You know, you have comfortable chairs if you have to work late and we offer free coke". Thanks buddy! But its bad for my health!

Future interviewers, just think about the interviewee, just a little bit, and you will get a much better person to work with!

PS: Im taking a big risk in this post as some of these quotes are from my current offers. But I dont mind, cos I love to be transparent. I want to be able to work in the way I feel most comfortable in, in the organisation that I see the most fit for me, meeting my personal goals.

PPS: I still havent decided on where I want to be. Its decision time, so taking it rationally and slowly.

Random Access
The search has just begun !!!