TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: Lying applicants and tests From:Bruce Ashley <bashley -at- CREATEPRINT -dot- COM -dot- AU> Date:Tue, 22 Sep 1998 09:40:49 +1000
It is non-discriminatory to have a standard test when you employ a TW.
It is simple to have them cut and past text from a range of input sources
in FrameMaker and then in Word.
Then have them type a half page explanation on how to wash a cup, tie their
shoelace or use a stapler.
Now have them create a basic graphic of a clowns head to see shape
manipulation and use of colo(u)r etc..
Now have them embed the graphics.
Total time = 1? - 2 hours.
The way they go about the tasks, the excuses they offer and the end result
will certainly tell you more than your 'gut' feeling. How would you like
your career to hinge on someone else's 'gut feeling'.
Gut feelings usually are an excuse for "Her perfume was bad" "I didn't like
his tie" "He sat in a funny way" "Those people are usually lazy" etc etc...
Remember, one persons 'gut feeling' is another's discrimination and yes, we
can be sued for this approach much more than when a candidate fails a
simple set of standard TW tasks.
I will concede, however, that a crystal ball wouldn't go astray :).
Re: finding out about a candidate's abilities:
Linda Sherman wrote:
> . . . ask specific technical questions about it.
And Leonard Porello wondered why hiring managers don't give "...a simple,
>five-minute test on revision.
As a former hiring manager, I can say that formal (or maybe even informal)
testing poses legal problems. HR has fits about this! An applicant could
sue if s/he could prove that the same test was not used for *all*
applicants...in other words, that the hiring manager was using
discriminatory practices. That is different from exercising judgment.
I agree with Linda that the way to deal with this issue is to ask the
applicant specific questions about his/her most recent relevant project.
Then follow your gut feelings. Red flags usually mean trouble down the
road. OTOH, some very good writers interview like dead fish. But if you get
them talking about their work, they come alive.
My favorite story in this vein is about a candidate who offered a writing
sample to a manager, who recognized it as her own work done a while back.
The candidate didn't even say it was a revision, but rather that it was
original work. Word got around the community pretty fast!