No, the selection at the end of the video was biased.
The human resources director happened to know Silvia´s father and because of the things she has heard about her from her dad and the connection that she has with him, the director immediately discarded Angel without even asking him a single question. We can also see a slight discrimination because Angel was evidently much older.
The director didnt perform the selection process correctly. She didnt ask questions that would help her make sure that Silvia was a suitable candidate for the job and that her qualities and habilities met the task requirements.
Yes and no. At the end it looks pretty simple, its not a selection process when the interviewer choses the candidate based on personal preferences, like this example, the male candidate its eliminated inmediately after learning that the female candidate has familiar links to the interviewer's doctor. And the second case, which is the first part of the video, could be a selection process of direct interview where the interviewer formulates direct and specific; hipotetic, provocative, malicious, probing or closed questions, that would help the interviewer know how would the candidate act in different laboral situations. Nevertheless, I think it couldn't be a real selection process because of all the impertinent questions, or at least it couldn't be a propper one because the interviewer became a hostile interrogant and failed by asking some questions that shouldn't be asked in an interwiew, such as if she would give sexual favors in exchange to sell something, or the pregnancy issue that shouldn't be a motive to not hire someone.
I don't think so, neither of the two scenarios seem right to me. The interview is the single most important step in the selection process, it is the opportunity for the employer and prospective employee to learn more about each.
In the first scenario the ''interviewer'' was being grotesque and unwise, putting the interviewed in a vulnerable state. On the other hand I can not put aside the fact that sometimes putting someone under pressure shows the genuine way they react on different laboral situations and the interviewer can get to know the interviewed better (just like they did in the heineken interview) but I still think it wasn't the right way to do it.
In the second scenario we all know it is unprofessional, unfair and antiethic to hire someone juts because personal preferences (just like family friends).
Definitely not, when the video was starting I thought there was a process because the sir was asking question to the woman, and he was reading the cv, but i think that kind of interview is aggressive, yelling each other, discrimination to the woman because she was pregnant, in a interview you have treat others with respect, and that interview was lacking of that, even if it was false.
The real “Interview” started the process because they had the needs of a employee and they were looking for applicants but they stopped in the interview. That was really unprofessional, you can’t hire someone only because you know them, and also she did it in front of the other applicant, terrible process.
at the beginning of the video I thought that man was the interviewer which saw rare because the questions and the way he expressed himself did not seem right however to continue watching the video I realized that the two were candidates but not I liked and did not find it appropriate to hire young to know his father and lord has not taken into account in Nicaragua .... unfortunately happens a lot these situations and we see in our daily day.
Wow, I was surprised with the end of the video, it got me and I thought that the first part was the interview and while I was watching I thought it was interesting to put the candidate into pressure to analysis how she reacts, if she gets scared or if she changes her mind about the job or the company but also I found it too rude and disrespectful, I think the man shouldn’t have done that and the only reason to do it was to make her feel anxious and nervous before the real interview.
The second part a selection process, there were not an interview either. The decision-making process should be transparent, fair, and objective not just because she had a connection with the interviewer's doctor. The man didn’t even have the opportunity to be interviewer and talk about his experience or studies, the organization should provide a non-discriminatory reason for not hiring him.
I don't think there's a real selection process since the person in charge of the recruitment already was blinded because of having some sort of connection to the woman which gave her a total advantage over the older man. I'm omitting the first part of the video since the older man has nothing to do with the company and is just another candidate and is not involved in the recruitment process.
There definately is not an appropiate selection process in this video. First of all I don't agree on the strategy of doing a double interview with the last two candidates, because they can influence or sabotage each other. If the human resources woman hadn't know the lady, she probably would have been extremely nervous at this point because of what the man did to her and her development on the interview would have been affected. On the other hand, it is clearly innapropiate for the human resources woman to base her decision on the fact that she knew the lady's dad, because she is not applying a right and truthful criteria on making the decision of the selection process.
First of all the selection process for a personnel is used to hire individuals they will bring all their knowledge and skills to the company, for that reason before to go to the interview we send via email our CV to present all our information to the employer. The first scenario was awful because he was very rude and try to get into the private life of the girl and do not take all their knowledge and experience of this girl and in the second scenario the woman that is interviewing had preferences for the girls because her father was her therapist, so it means the degree of familiarity influenced the final decision and there was discrimination on the other person. So, neither of the two had a good personnel selection process. The first was very rude and the second was very antithetical. I think always interviews need to be alone because the person that its going to select need to know the enough information of the person and observe how the person develops.
Not at all. -If we considered scenery 1 as a selection process: the man was really pushy and did not let her finish her sentences and develop herself in every question he asked, also many of the questions were really personal and not related to work at all, and at the end he was starting to be a typical sexist. But anyway this was never a selection process because he was not even working at the company yet. -About scenery 2, when the human resources manager arrives: it was not a selection process, I mean, she just stayed with her because she knew her father and that's absurd I mean, yes she could be very qualified for the job but she would have to know that by applying the same selection process as with any other person she didn't know.
So, I don't think there was any sign of a real selection process in the video.
I believe you could consider the first part a selection process, however it would be a uncorrect one since the "interviewer" presented himself rude. What we could rescue from that scenario is the idea of asking some questions based on what a person would do in certain situations. I understand that sometimes companies want to put you through some rough situations to see how would you react however i do believe its important to never cross the line where you are just being uncouth. On a second hand, when the real interwier appears, its also not a real seleccion process because she only got the job cause the lady knew her dad, there was no experience, knowledge or compenteces evaluated, she did not consider what was best for the company. Precisely to avoid that last scenario its recommeded to be a panel of various people the one that evaluates a candidate instead of just one person.
Definitely not, at the beginning of the video I thought the Sr. really was the interviewer and all he did was scare the girl. Then when appeared who was actually doing the interviewer and guided only by the fact that the girl was the daughter of her physical therapist left me more puzzledbecause even she asked a single question simply told the Sr. to retired and it is not how a job interview has to be like because there should not dominate friendship or any kind of relationship
No, the selection at the end of the video was biased.
ResponderBorrarThe human resources director happened to know Silvia´s father and because of the things she has heard about her from her dad and the connection that she has with him, the director immediately discarded Angel without even asking him a single question. We can also see a slight discrimination because Angel was evidently much older.
The director didnt perform the selection process correctly. She didnt ask questions that would help her make sure that Silvia was a suitable candidate for the job and that her qualities and habilities met the task requirements.
Exactly
BorrarYes and no.
ResponderBorrarAt the end it looks pretty simple, its not a selection process when the interviewer choses the candidate based on personal preferences, like this example, the male candidate its eliminated inmediately after learning that the female candidate has familiar links to the interviewer's doctor.
And the second case, which is the first part of the video, could be a selection process of direct interview where the interviewer formulates direct and specific; hipotetic, provocative, malicious, probing or closed questions, that would help the interviewer know how would the candidate act in different laboral situations. Nevertheless, I think it couldn't be a real selection process because of all the impertinent questions, or at least it couldn't be a propper one because the interviewer became a hostile interrogant and failed by asking some questions that shouldn't be asked in an interwiew, such as if she would give sexual favors in exchange to sell something, or the pregnancy issue that shouldn't be a motive to not hire someone.
Correct
BorrarI don't think so, neither of the two scenarios seem right to me. The interview is the single most important step in the selection process, it is the opportunity for the employer and prospective employee to learn more about each.
ResponderBorrarIn the first scenario the ''interviewer'' was being grotesque and unwise, putting the interviewed in a vulnerable state. On the other hand I can not put aside the fact that sometimes putting someone under pressure shows the genuine way they react on different laboral situations and the interviewer can get to know the interviewed better (just like they did in the heineken interview) but I still think it wasn't the right way to do it.
In the second scenario we all know it is unprofessional, unfair and antiethic to hire someone juts because personal preferences (just like family friends).
You are right!!
BorrarDefinitely not, when the video was starting I thought there was a process because the sir was asking question to the woman, and he was reading the cv, but i think that kind of interview is aggressive, yelling each other, discrimination to the woman because she was pregnant, in a interview you have treat others with respect, and that interview was lacking of that, even if it was false.
ResponderBorrarThe real “Interview” started the process because they had the needs of a employee and they were looking for applicants but they stopped in the interview. That was really unprofessional, you can’t hire someone only because you know them, and also she did it in front of the other applicant, terrible process.
Indeed I am glad you see this points, it matters to be a good professional.
Borrarat the beginning of the video I thought that man was the interviewer which saw rare because the questions and the way he expressed himself did not seem right however to continue watching the video I realized that the two were candidates but not I liked and did not find it appropriate to hire young to know his father and lord has not taken into account in Nicaragua .... unfortunately happens a lot these situations and we see in our daily day.
ResponderBorrarUnfortunately these are the situations we see in Nicaragua
BorrarWow, I was surprised with the end of the video, it got me and I thought that the first part was the interview and while I was watching I thought it was interesting to put the candidate into pressure to analysis how she reacts, if she gets scared or if she changes her mind about the job or the company but also I found it too rude and disrespectful, I think the man shouldn’t have done that and the only reason to do it was to make her feel anxious and nervous before the real interview.
ResponderBorrarThe second part a selection process, there were not an interview either. The decision-making process should be transparent, fair, and objective not just because she had a connection with the interviewer's doctor. The man didn’t even have the opportunity to be interviewer and talk about his experience or studies, the organization should provide a non-discriminatory reason for not hiring him.
You are right, it hwas rude !!
BorrarI don't think there's a real selection process since the person in charge of the recruitment already was blinded because of having some sort of connection to the woman which gave her a total advantage over the older man. I'm omitting the first part of the video since the older man has nothing to do with the company and is just another candidate and is not involved in the recruitment process.
ResponderBorrarYes he was blinded
BorrarThere definately is not an appropiate selection process in this video. First of all I don't agree on the strategy of doing a double interview with the last two candidates, because they can influence or sabotage each other. If the human resources woman hadn't know the lady, she probably would have been extremely nervous at this point because of what the man did to her and her development on the interview would have been affected. On the other hand, it is clearly innapropiate for the human resources woman to base her decision on the fact that she knew the lady's dad, because she is not applying a right and truthful criteria on making the decision of the selection process.
ResponderBorrarIndeed it was not an appropiate selection process
BorrarFirst of all the selection process for a personnel is used to hire individuals they will bring all their knowledge and skills to the company, for that reason before to go to the interview we send via email our CV to present all our information to the employer.
ResponderBorrarThe first scenario was awful because he was very rude and try to get into the private life of the girl and do not take all their knowledge and experience of this girl and in the second scenario the woman that is interviewing had preferences for the girls because her father was her therapist, so it means the degree of familiarity influenced the final decision and there was discrimination on the other person. So, neither of the two had a good personnel selection process. The first was very rude and the second was very antithetical.
I think always interviews need to be alone because the person that its going to select need to know the enough information of the person and observe how the person develops.
You are correct, unfortunately it happens
BorrarNot at all.
ResponderBorrar-If we considered scenery 1 as a selection process: the man was really pushy and did not let her finish her sentences and develop herself in every question he asked, also many of the questions were really personal and not related to work at all, and at the end he was starting to be a typical sexist. But anyway this was never a selection process because he was not even working at the company yet.
-About scenery 2, when the human resources manager arrives: it was not a selection process, I mean, she just stayed with her because she knew her father and that's absurd I mean, yes she could be very qualified for the job but she would have to know that by applying the same selection process as with any other person she didn't know.
So, I don't think there was any sign of a real selection process in the video.
Completely agreed with you
BorrarI believe you could consider the first part a selection process, however it would be a uncorrect one since the "interviewer" presented himself rude. What we could rescue from that scenario is the idea of asking some questions based on what a person would do in certain situations. I understand that sometimes companies want to put you through some rough situations to see how would you react however i do believe its important to never cross the line where you are just being uncouth. On a second hand, when the real interwier appears, its also not a real seleccion process because she only got the job cause the lady knew her dad, there was no experience, knowledge or compenteces evaluated, she did not consider what was best for the company. Precisely to avoid that last scenario its recommeded to be a panel of various people the one that evaluates a candidate instead of just one person.
ResponderBorrarYes he was very rude indeed
BorrarDefinitely not, at the beginning of the video I thought the Sr. really was the interviewer and all he did was scare the girl. Then when appeared who was actually doing the interviewer and guided only by the fact that the girl was the daughter of her physical therapist left me more puzzledbecause even she asked a single question simply told the Sr. to retired and it is not how a job interview has to be like because there should not dominate friendship or any kind of relationship
ResponderBorrarYou are right
Borrar