your comment reminds me of a wonderful quote which makes me smile.
Why I Have Given Up on Coding Standards | Richard Rodger
Equal Opportunity Employer?
- Thread starter sharktale1212
- Start date
- Status
sharktale1212
Herald
Good questions.
There was no mention of "Excellent Communication and Interpersonal skills". When I talked to the HR first time, he was informed of my stuttering. So he was aware of it. If there was such a clause within the requirement given to HR, he should have stopped me.
As for my 1st round stuttering. In my technology we have many people showing fake experience. People claiming experience but knowing jack shit. So the first round was geared towards knwoing if I was genuine. Then to verify I was me, they called me to their offices. At their office I had to again go through telephonic interview (no f2f with anyone excpet HR) There again the same person from the first round called me up asking the same questions. After being officially verified, I had a round with the manager - "What issues I faced during dev?" "What issues I faced while handling the clients" etc. All of which I had answered and then the tech round was scheduled. The thing about my stuttering became an issue after this (most probably first they were desperate for a resource, then they found one which made me unwanted). So HR asked me to talk to this "senior guy". He dint turn up first time we scheduled, second time again he dint show up - I had to go through another tech round, third time again he dint show up - I had to call HR who then called him and got him on phone. The whole conversation lasted 2-3 mins. So no they might not have been giving me chance to improvegoing through the first 4 rounds - as each of them were iterative and different. Last tech round was completely unnecessary.
The cherry on top is: Opening is for an onsite opportunity (no offshore team) but I never had chance to go f2f. I think a better impression is made while doing f2f than on phone where we can just judge a voice.
Still improvment could be done if I actually was nervous and not have stuttering. Giving me more chances to improve my stuttering is like asking a lame person run 100 ms 5 times in hopes he can improve his running skills(ie if my stuttering is considering a disability)
sid_donnydarko
Contributor
Ok. One last question. Please be honest with yourself and don't feel ashamed to face the truth. Did you stutter noticeably during the next five rounds?
sharktale1212
Herald
Sid I am not sure what agenda you working on but there is nothing to be ashamed of from my side. So let me say this no I did not. There have beeen interviews where I have stuttered "noticeably" - Wipro and Zensar and they were kind enough to let me go after the first round.
Edit; I realised the mistake I made in the last post. Missed a no and not.
sid_donnydarko
Contributor
I do not have an agenda bro. I'm only trying to help you move on and focus on your new job at Infosys
I put myself in the shoes of a senior manager, a senior tech, a HR manager trying to interview/hire a prospective and technically competent candidate who has one problem(be it alarmingly obvious or completely harmless) - stuttering. Your posts have been completely one-sided and no one can blame you for that. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't give the interviewers the benefit of the doubt either. Right?
I can't understand why a professional would keep asking you to repeatedly attend the same interview with the same questions over and over. It just didn't feel right. Whose time are they wasting? Especially in today's fast paced world?
I do not have an agenda bro. I'm only trying to help you move on and focus on your new job at Infosys
I put myself in the shoes of a senior manager, a senior tech, a HR manager trying to interview/hire a prospective and technically competent candidate who has one problem(be it alarmingly obvious or completely harmless) - stuttering. Your posts have been completely one-sided and no one can blame you for that. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't give the interviewers the benefit of the doubt either. Right?
I can't understand why a professional would keep asking you to repeatedly attend the same interview with the same questions over and over. It just didn't feel right. Whose time are they wasting? Especially in today's fast paced world?
To be honest, your analysis is not making sense to me what so ever. You really do not need to put your self in the shoes of the Senior Tech/HR Manager. All they did: was to sideline the candidate cause of a different speaking style. Else they should have told him upfront in round 1: That we feel you will not fit due to your speaking style. Nothing more can be done about that. The bone-of-contention is: He was made to go through multiple rounds, and then rejected for a metric which would have been obvious in round 1. Is that so difficult to see. And no, they were not giving him opportunities to improve as the rounds progressed. Speech/communication is a soft skill. People are told outright of a deficiency here, and told to work on it. Companies really do no find these as trainable vs. hard-skils and prefer not to up skill people regarding this.
I think, you are not able to understand cause you really do not know how hiring and HR and line manager operate in India. My prior post had highlighted that. They wasted Sharktale's time, here. It is their
job to rifle through multiple candidates and pick a suitable one. Like it is the job of line managers to impart interviews.
sharktale1212
Herald
I am still not sure why you think there were multiple rounds of same questions over and over without rhyme or reason. Round 1 and 2 were similar because of infestation of fake people in my tech. Thats it, no other round was similar.I do not have an agenda bro. I'm only trying to help you move on and focus on your new job at Infosys
I put myself in the shoes of a senior manager, a senior tech, a HR manager trying to interview/hire a prospective and technically competent candidate who has one problem(be it alarmingly obvious or completely harmless) - stuttering. Your posts have been completely one-sided and no one can blame you for that. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't give the interviewers the benefit of the doubt either. Right?
I can't understand why a professional would keep asking you to repeatedly attend the same interview with the same questions over and over. It just didn't feel right. Whose time are they wasting? Especially in today's fast paced world?
Speaking is a portion of the process of (effective) communication, not everything. Even if you stutter (or don't or improve) still you can be an excellent communicator. So, get over the incident, treat this as an experience and move over. There will be better opportunities coming along your way.
Getting a job has quite a bit of luck factor involved. You could have been rejected / selected on any ground even after giving good / not-so-good interviews.
Getting a job has quite a bit of luck factor involved. You could have been rejected / selected on any ground even after giving good / not-so-good interviews.
"My impediment is no hindrance" - Winston Churchill (suffered from so called 'lisp', others called it stutter, but he worked through it).
They should have mentioned their issue in the first interview itself, if they had a problem.
Ignore whatever happened and go ahead with your life.
I frequently have to deal with OEM Support Team (one of the top Document Management Co.) located at USA, it is a pain to deal with them. Let alone the way they communicate over phone, even their emails needs to be rephrased for our MNC clients in India. Otherwise, our clients will not believe it is a direct email from OEM.
They blame it on lesser English speaking staff from Germany, Poland, etc.
Even an 'accent' is a big issue for a poor low end call center employee - whites will instantly mock at them, but if the same happens from their side...
They should have mentioned their issue in the first interview itself, if they had a problem.
Ignore whatever happened and go ahead with your life.
I frequently have to deal with OEM Support Team (one of the top Document Management Co.) located at USA, it is a pain to deal with them. Let alone the way they communicate over phone, even their emails needs to be rephrased for our MNC clients in India. Otherwise, our clients will not believe it is a direct email from OEM.
They blame it on lesser English speaking staff from Germany, Poland, etc.
Even an 'accent' is a big issue for a poor low end call center employee - whites will instantly mock at them, but if the same happens from their side...
Stuttering (and few other speech related abnormalities) are often perceived as a sign of low confidence levels. People who do not normally stutter in their every day life may stutter during interviews or when talking to new people or during presentations etc when they are low on self confidence.
Rejection for certain roles may indeed happen on such aspects when being able to speak clearly is a requirement for the role.
"Equal opportunity" employer means that the employer gives equal opportunity to every one fully capable of fulling a role regardless of race, color, region, religion, physical disabilities etc. It does not mean that people not capable of doing full justice to the requirements is also considered for the role(though the company would still grant them the opportunity to try). It all depends on the role and circumstances.
Just to explain things, lets take this scenario
Role1: Excellent in Skill-A and Excellent communication skills
Role2: Excellent in Skill-B, requires a lot of physical exertion like walking
There are 3 applicants
1. Candidate-1 : Excellent in Skill-A, average in Skill-B, Average Communication skills.
2. Candidate-2 (Physically challenged): Excellent in Skill-A and Skill-B, Excellent communication skills
3. Candidate-3 (Speech Disorder): Excellent in Skill-A and Skill-B
For Role1, Candidate-1 and Candidate-2 have equal opportunity of getting the job and Cadidate-2 is likely to be chosen due to his better communication skills despite being physically challenged. Candidate-3 may also apply for the role, but he does not have the same chance of landing the job since his speech disorder keeps him from fulfilling the requirement of the role.
For Role2, Candidate-1 and Candidate-3 have equal opportunity, but it Candidate-3 is likely to be chosen due him being better at the the core skill. Candidate-2 is also good at the core skill, but due to the other requirement he may not be able to fulfill the role which is why he does not have the same chance of getting the job.
Rejection for certain roles may indeed happen on such aspects when being able to speak clearly is a requirement for the role.
"Equal opportunity" employer means that the employer gives equal opportunity to every one fully capable of fulling a role regardless of race, color, region, religion, physical disabilities etc. It does not mean that people not capable of doing full justice to the requirements is also considered for the role(though the company would still grant them the opportunity to try). It all depends on the role and circumstances.
Just to explain things, lets take this scenario
Role1: Excellent in Skill-A and Excellent communication skills
Role2: Excellent in Skill-B, requires a lot of physical exertion like walking
There are 3 applicants
1. Candidate-1 : Excellent in Skill-A, average in Skill-B, Average Communication skills.
2. Candidate-2 (Physically challenged): Excellent in Skill-A and Skill-B, Excellent communication skills
3. Candidate-3 (Speech Disorder): Excellent in Skill-A and Skill-B
For Role1, Candidate-1 and Candidate-2 have equal opportunity of getting the job and Cadidate-2 is likely to be chosen due to his better communication skills despite being physically challenged. Candidate-3 may also apply for the role, but he does not have the same chance of landing the job since his speech disorder keeps him from fulfilling the requirement of the role.
For Role2, Candidate-1 and Candidate-3 have equal opportunity, but it Candidate-3 is likely to be chosen due him being better at the the core skill. Candidate-2 is also good at the core skill, but due to the other requirement he may not be able to fulfill the role which is why he does not have the same chance of getting the job.
sharktale1212
Herald
I am not really sure but did you go through all the posts? The question was raised assuming all your points - low confidence (not an issue here as I stutter from birth) and the role scenario were moot. Assuming HR is aware and willing, whats the point in having so many rounds? The only thing I can say is link to asingh's post here on this thread:
http://www.techenclave.com/community/threads/equal-opportunity-employer.146271/page-2#post-1798048
Edit: Guys who might be reading this thread. I missed one really asinine thing Satyam did. Forgive me I should I have included it before but anger really clouds one's thought process.
awestriker
Contributor
I think we should tweet this to mahindra_satyam and anandmahindra twitter handles. Let them and all others know what is happening in the garb of Equal Opportunity Employer.
I was clarifying on the general essence of "Equal opportunity employer" and not particularly on your specific experience of redundant multiple rounds. I do agree that the company should have rejected you and sent you off promptly (or not called you at all) if they assessed that you are unsuitable for the role, but then this is how lousy many of these IT services based companies tend to be. Don't be mistaken, you are not the only one who has been on the receiving end of HR laziness/arrogance at such companies.
In your case, ideally, the HR person should have had a chat with you as part of the screening process and only allowed the rest of the process to go on only if they are satisfied that you meet the basic requirements of the role. In all likelihood, they didn't even bothered to get the role requirements properly from the manager and the manager did not bother to provide them. It seems to me that you were put through the hassle of redundant tech rounds because they didn't plan well to have the right interviewers available and hence trying to buy time though the unnecessary rounds. Once the senior guy (who I assume is a manager) talked to you, he probably decided that you are not suitable for the role open in his team.
IBM does this sort of interview process mismanagement a lot too. They schedule interviews and the HR is totally unprepared for it. They often make the candidates (often senior level candidates as well) wait for unreasonable amounts of time or make them go through redundant rounds after calling them.You won't even believe the kind of things prospective candidates have had to hear from IBM HR. I am told that when one very senior candidate (10 years experience) questioned a 4+ hour wait time he was put through, one HR lady at IBM had the audacity to tell him that IBM being such a world class company, candidate should be ready to wait in order to seek interview at such a prestigious company. The HR person thought she was doing a favor by offering them an opportunity for interview. My sister who got cleared in the first round refused to go for the second round after she witnessed how unprofessional they were.
This is exactly one of the reasons why I don't even bother seeking employment at such companies. I have personally black listed all major IT services companies from my list of companies where I would ever like to seek employment.
I am a regular interviewer myself have done a lot of job interviews for the companies that I worked for. I don't like wasting the candidates time or my time if I find that the candidate i s not suitable for the role. At my current company, the resumes are screened by the interviewers before the candidate is even being called for an interview. The HR person may also decide not to call a candidate if they find that the candidate is unsuitable for any reason while taking to him/her. Even after being called, we often find that the candidate has either bloated/misrepresented his skill sets or levels in the resume or that he is unsuitable because of bad attitude or other issues. Even in such cases we don't waste time. If we deem that the candidate is unsuitable, we often send them off within 15~20 min of starting the process. We don't waste time doing an hour long interview just to make it look polite and then send them saying that HR person will get back to them about the result. It would be good if all companies adopt such a honest practice, but unfortunately that is often not the case.
sharktale1212
Herald
Oh my bad. Sorry abt that.
Well I have been on the receiving end of the same laziness/ignorance at many companies. I am on "hold" at Accenture for over a month with no one to follow up with. Even the HR from the HR round is oblivious - Someone will call you. WTF!!! This in spite of the manager himself initiating the interview process.
And dont even get me started on IBM. Its just surprising what kind of elitist bullshit they follow in the company. I was left hanging after being told there will be an f2f interview. When I checked with the HR, she says it my fault . She then proposed a telephonic round which then got rescheduled 3 more times. For my last schedule' I get a call 1 hr after the scheduled time. I flatly refused to talk.
Not only these, even Deloitte has not fared any better. They have called thrice - "Will you be able to take up interview tomorrow?" late night at 9pm; only to not bother with any tomorrow.
I am surprised what schools these HRs come from? Totally unprofessional, lazy and ignorant people.
sharktale1212
Herald
Bro I have thought about it but I doubt anything will happen. I posted on their FB page but it got deleted.
Yes, that is a standard practice in a lot of firms, irrespective if they are IT/Consulting/ITeS/BPO. There is absolutely no coordination between frontline and the HR which is the link in between the candidates. I remember going for an interview ~1.5 years back for one of the worlds biggest MNC involved with telecommunications (though that is not my domain); and I was made to wait for ~2.5H cause the"avp" was busy in an urgent meeting. Worst was, I could not get parking near the office, so my driver was extremely harassed outside the whole time. Poor dude even called me, and I told him to go take a drive-out and have tea/snacks while I was sitting inside reading magazines and newspapers for the 3-4th time. Anyways, when the Sr. VP arrived (and told me his background first) he showed me arrogance and absolutely no apology. I too was pissed off, and basically showed him the middle finger in 10-15 minutes and walked off. Before this happened, he realized, I was irritated at him, and tried to mock me, by asking my salary. I told him, does that mean I am hired. Anyways, he wanted to take me at a level lower then what I was told (some dumb assary between the external consultant and the firm; this happens a lot of the times), but he boasted our AMs...make more than you. I told him, then best of luck hiring an AM for this type of work, at this pay. Boy was he irritated. Idiot asked me some SQL schema questions, to which I purposely gave micky mouse answers to...! He, realized I was playing. And ended it. LOL.
I did make it a point to call up the external job consultant and politely gave my feedback. Like you, I have a black list and when I get calls from these places, I tell the consultant or firm HR; my reasons, and they are usually shocked. If a company is unprofessional for talent attraction, God knows what is happening inside. Just a cesspool of idiots and people earning money for doing nothing. I hate that environment, and likewise people.
sharktale1212
Herald
Its been a long time I visited this thread. Just wanted to let you all know - I have been hired at another bank. My new boss has been awesome and supportive.
We actually got off on the wrong foot. I was a bit exasperated(looking for job for 5mths) with the kind of response I got from the "desi" MNCs. So my first line out of the door was - "I have stammering so if that is an issue or you want to take a courtesy 10-15 mins interview, please don't waste my time or your time".
After my final confirmation he called me to congratulate and have a word. He said he was a bit taken aback by my candor - specially the "wasting time" part. He asked me not to feel bad about stammering; I had to tell him the scenario mentioned in the thread. He agreed on people/HR feeling too smart and thinking they can read body language/speech and what not. There was nothing wrong in people knowing what they lack and working towards it. I was even specifically told in case anyone from the team or even the company doesn't understand the "equal opportunity" aspect; an official complain can be lodged against the person.
We actually got off on the wrong foot. I was a bit exasperated(looking for job for 5mths) with the kind of response I got from the "desi" MNCs. So my first line out of the door was - "I have stammering so if that is an issue or you want to take a courtesy 10-15 mins interview, please don't waste my time or your time".
After my final confirmation he called me to congratulate and have a word. He said he was a bit taken aback by my candor - specially the "wasting time" part. He asked me not to feel bad about stammering; I had to tell him the scenario mentioned in the thread. He agreed on people/HR feeling too smart and thinking they can read body language/speech and what not. There was nothing wrong in people knowing what they lack and working towards it. I was even specifically told in case anyone from the team or even the company doesn't understand the "equal opportunity" aspect; an official complain can be lodged against the person.
@sharktale1212 Good to know that there are employers who do take "Equal Opportunity" seriously, and not just to appear so.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status