Last post March 12, 2007 10:46 AM by archanahr. 1 repiles.
Incident 1 The big company having workforce of 2500 employees, listed company but traditional Indian company. The VP-HR is doctorate and new in company, earlier he was in public sector enterprise. One consultant calls Ramesh, young dynamic HR Manager working in one MNC. Ramesh is looking for a change. There is an opening in this company for Manager-HR. He is called for an interview. The Sr HR Manager is coordinating the interview. Ramesh reaches there 15 minutes early, goes to Sr HR Manager, Sr HR manager gives him application blank and ask him to sit in conference hall. After 1/2 hour, Ramesh is called by him, the formal interview is taken. Ramesh feels that he does not like the face of Ramesh. He told him that the VP-HR is expected to come in an office; you have to wait for him. He will also interview you. Ramesh again goes back. Meanwhile no water, tea are asked by anyone. Ramesh had traveelled 200 km to reach for an interview. Ramesh had taken a wash and breakfast in a Hotel; still he was expecting that anyone would ask him for a cup of tea. VP comes, takes a stress interview. He enquires Ramesh like police. Ramesh again feels that VP also does not like his face. VP was in confrontation mood; interview was like interrogation nature. Ramesh thinks, VP-HR who is a doctorate, should know the basic manners of interview. He is qualified HR professional, still he behaves like this. Ramesh decides not to join this company, though opportunity comes. Incident 2 The small-scale professional service company having 300 employees, VP-Technical is a in charge of HR also. This company is looking young HR Manager for heading the HR department. One consultant request Ramesh to attend an interview though Ramesh is not interested to go in service industry though he wants a change. Still to keep the word he attends an interview. One-hour aptitude test is taken. Ramesh thinks that is aptitude test for professional manager is necessary? After test VP calls him. VP is middle age technical professional. He welcomes Ramesh warmly. He asks Ramesh about lunch. Ramesh tells that he has taken a breakfast and directly come here. VP surprise and asks tea and snacks for Ramesh. Interview is held like professional discussion. VP-Tech impresses Ramesh by his attitude. Ramesh thinks that if offer is discussed properly, he would join this company. Ramesh evaluates both the situations, in one case there was a HR professional and in another non-HR professional. HR professional's attitude was totally non-HR while the attitude of Non-HR professional was as HR and was heading an organisation. Ramesh recalls his earlier experiences about the interviews, which he has given and taken. He surprised to know that he was most of the time was impress by the Non-HR professionals than HR professionals. Now the questions in his mind were. 1. Which company is good company to make a career? 2. Why HR professionals think superior than others? 3. Why the HR professional can't be a CEO and head the organisation like technical and commercial people? 4. Why the HR professionals can't win the people and unable to build the brand of the organisation? 5. Are traditional and so-called HR professionals who were earlier dealing with IR and Administration spoiling the HR profession? Have you answers of these questions?
Is that a realtime experience... just kidding. Iam not sure whether we could generalise the whole HR community as "ruthless" in handling interviews ,but iam sure there would be some stray incidents like this noted and since we guys are the first point contact for the general mass to reach across to any organisation(after the reception of course) we get highlighted too (in positive and negative terms both).
Since we may not be able to prevail upon the idea of having only trained interviewers in the panel we may end up creating "sour moments of truth" for many of the candidates. There would not be many a solution to this except for the fact that those who are not trained in behavioral interviews should not attempt to do so. And the mighty big stress interviews (sounds really crazy why we still use it) should never be closed without explaining to the candidate the logic behind it and apologising for any inconvenience caused to him/her. All this has no correlation to why HR guys donot become CEO's. We have quiet a few of them now... so dont worry..it will still grow in number:). Probably we are still high in ratio when we take the number of HR guys in an oragnisation compared to the line guys...
I think we are always most hardest on our own... and that translates into all things be it cultures, families, professional sector and organizations. However, I also want to know why does Ramesh feels that he is entitled to tea. Its a job interview, the only thing you are required to have is just that... an interview. Yes, tea a smile and light hearted conversation would be nice just as a courtesy, but we must not forget that at the end of the day... you aren't there to be jo schmoe my next buddy... your are there to be interviewed. This also speaks to Ramesh's and in a large part to a variety of employees across the globe who feel an automatic entitlement to everything under the sun. Especially with the Younger generation some who call them the hip hop generation.... they expect the world owes them everything. Well guess what, the earth owes you nothing, it was here first. Just my $.06