That's what threw me for a loop. Usually the questions ask what you would do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jorick
Printable View
That's what threw me for a loop. Usually the questions ask what you would do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jorick
There were a lot of questions on that assessment that were similar. One was something to the affect of "Jim was rude and yelled at a customer. Why did he do it?" They were plain stupid. It's been almost a year since I have seen the assessment again, since the last one is still in the system. Hopefully when I can apply again, they'll have changed those questions to something more...well.. yeah.
In all honesty, I find the fact that nearly all job applications are online and nothing is personal to be pure bullshit. If someone is willing to take the time to ask to see the manager and personally ask them if they are hiring, then they are, more oft than not, genuinely interested in gaining a job at that location. Why, then, can't a manager or such conduct a interview on the spot or schedule one for a later date? Seeing as in the few interviews I have actually gotten, I still had to fill out a secondary application on site that asked for more detail than the online one and the manager gave me a spoken questionnaire that was more comprehensive than any I have filled out in the online applications.
Non discriminatory? I think not. The lack of personal interaction through the use of the online system give employers nothing but information without any personal impression or input from the applicant. Information is only half, taking away the personal aspect of it leaves people to be discriminated by logistics. So what if a guy is a high school drop out? He might be smart as a whip and a hard worker, but the lack of personal interaction will never show the employer that information.... In short, fuck online applications...*grumble grumble*five fucking years of my life spent looking for a job*grumble grumble*
Yup, those are ridiculous. I would guess the test was written by some HR manager who thought they were clever as fuck, but in actuality they're retarded and whoever was supposed to check their work was also retarded. You learn absolutely nothing about a potential employee by asking about hypothetical motives for fictional characters and giving them four bad answers to choose from.Quote:
Originally Posted by Squee
Walker, I agree. Meeting my manager face-to-face at Dollar General is what got me the job. Walked straight up to him, shook his hand, and introduced myself. He gave me an interview right there in the Produce section and I was called in the next day to do a small follow-up so they could get my tax info and tell me about the dress-code.
Would be nice to have a "Add Your Own Answer" option to those questions.
"Why did Mary do this?"
E) Other- She's a fucking moron.
I would e-mail the guy back and give him some constructive criticism about the test then if all the questions were like that. Say something like, "I would have no problem submitting to a test about my workplace morals, but the questions were phrased in a way that didn't make sense." Maybe he is unaware he is using a shitty test. I would also attempt to explain that given the way the questions were phrased I did my best to reflect my policy of being honest, competent, and reliable and that perhaps an interview would be better suited. If the man can't see you trying to be very reasonable then the place might not be worth working for.
Many of these tests are written in such a way that answers are assigned a point value and employers would not even be able to access tests below a certain % of maximum points. In reality its a pretty ridiculous way to weed out the bad ones, but there are far less effective and more time consuming methods which involve a more hands on approach in the application process.
That said I am sorry you are having a horrible time getting a job back that you were pretty much a shoe in for.
Over here, you are fucked unless you call the guys you wanna work with.
MY GOD MY LIPS ARE ON FISH!