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.
I was going to let this one die, but after all the "Appalled" responses,
I wanted to clarify what appalled me (& only speaking for me) as I read
Andrew Plato's post.
If he had such a problem with the person's not following the requested
directions, it galled me that he would waste both his and the
candidate's time with interviewing them just so he could "browbeat" them
over not following directions and use it to low-ball them on salary. In
the market here in Atlanta, the Tech Writers have the luxury of having
more jobs available than we have Tech Writers, so his low-ball would
mean essentially that he had wasted both his & their time, because
someone else is going to offer the candidate top dollar. Which job do
you think the candidate will take? One that beat him up verbally during
the interview & as punishment offered a lowball salary, or another one
that pays top dollar?
In my case, I was more of the opinion that Susan Gallagher expressed so
well. If I went through an interview experience like that, I'd be
willing to bet that the future in that job position was very dark,
because I would be working for a controlling person who would tell me
what to do in every step of my job, rather than one that would delegate
a project & then let me run with it. As I perceived from Susan's post,
I don't win in a position where I compromise "me", so I'd be appalled
and wonder how the interviewer had so much time on their hands to waste.
By the way, as a stickler for detail, I comply with all the requirements
requested in the job posting to the best of my ability. I would tend
not to apply for any jobs that, without ever screening me, they request
"samples" of my work, since I think they should allow me to present my
samples in person. *I* am not a printed document (no matter "what" the
format - PDF, text, html - <grin>) and, as we TW's know so well, it
takes more than documents to do a TW's job - - it takes a person with a
personality that "works" in the particular job environment.
Technical Writer, Lead
Nextel Communications, Inc.
Lorrie -dot- Staples -at- nextel -dot- com
Strive for excellence, not perfection! You can achieve that goal!!
Meek, David wrote:
I guess I just don't get it, but I've always thought that being a
professional means being able to fulfill reasonable job requirements to
high degree of quality. If a job applicant can't follow basic
what does that say for that person's ability to complete an assignment
professional and timely manner?
This isn't mean; it's professionalism. It's meeting standards.
the individual sets personal standards that are higher than what the
Frankly, I'd be cautious about working for a company that *didn't*
professional standards for behaviour and quality.
Mr. Plato has the right idea. Maybe it's a sign of the times that
professionalism has become so lightly regarded. And that's not
(Any statements made above are mine, and mine alone.)