Friday, November 12, 2004
How shocking can it be ?
Sometime back I had posted on a Linux User Group about a few vacancies being available at Red Hat. The mail was really simple and asked the interested candidate to follow a few simple rules:
- each position was designated a code and the mail subject line was to carry that code
- resumes would be required to be sensibly named
- resumes would preferably in ASCII/PDF/HTML/SXW format
The applications received all violated the above in one way or the other. Either they did not contain the code, resumes were named as Resume.doc and of course that last item was never clearly followed. To top it all, the resumes and in some cases the letters had typographical errors that would make one cringe.
I am not really blaming someone, but when clear instructions are provided as to how to send across the applications - why cannot one actually take the trouble of reading through them twice to see if they are being followed ? Before the actual interview takes place, the application says a lot of about the candidate. And a glitch, however minor, would bring it all crashing down.
I guess it is the same when people log on to Support Centers and expect the agents to know all about their failed transactions/software-hardware/white goods etc. Each transaction is logged and tracked by some unique mechanism that ensures a fair play in summarising the results. Why can't we just take it upon ourselves to learn a little bit more about the rules of the game and do what we need to do from our side ? In this age of increasing competition, no company wants (or desires) a bunch of customers dissatisfied with the service. It is a service industry after all.
I guess the same goes for application to jobs. At a very broad level, one is just branding oneself to make a favorable impression at the interview. Why can't we not spend 3 minutes more for those errors and wrinkles to be ironed out ?
I am not really blaming someone, but when clear instructions are provided as to how to send across the applications - why cannot one actually take the trouble of reading through them twice to see if they are being followed ? Before the actual interview takes place, the application says a lot of about the candidate. And a glitch, however minor, would bring it all crashing down.
I guess it is the same when people log on to Support Centers and expect the agents to know all about their failed transactions/software-hardware/white goods etc. Each transaction is logged and tracked by some unique mechanism that ensures a fair play in summarising the results. Why can't we just take it upon ourselves to learn a little bit more about the rules of the game and do what we need to do from our side ? In this age of increasing competition, no company wants (or desires) a bunch of customers dissatisfied with the service. It is a service industry after all.
I guess the same goes for application to jobs. At a very broad level, one is just branding oneself to make a favorable impression at the interview. Why can't we not spend 3 minutes more for those errors and wrinkles to be ironed out ?
- posted by sankarshan @ 11/12/2004 08:52:00 AM
