# Ignoring instructions on a job advert



## Me76 (Mar 10, 2010)

Why??  

I have put an advert out that very clearly states we do not accept CVs and gives the website of where to download application forms.  Yet I have received over 35 e-mails in a day with people sending their CVs!

Do people Just not look?  Are they just banging out their CV to everything?

At the moment I am being nice and replying with a cut and pasted 'as per our advert we do not accept CVs, download an application form here' but I know I will get very bored of that soon. 

Please explain the mentality?  When I am looking for work I try my best to follow instructions given.  I see it as the first test...


----------



## boohoo (Mar 10, 2010)

I would just delete their CVs. I'm sure you have much better things to do with your time.

 However, I hate filling in forms and would love someone who had asked not to see CVs make an exception to me because they like the sound of my name and had a look and then thought wow, isn't here CV great... (this isn't going to happen!!)


----------



## kyser_soze (Mar 11, 2010)

Many of them will be working on the 'It looks like I'm showing initiative' idea, whereas all it does is provide you with a load of people who won't be getting an interview


----------



## Badgers (Mar 11, 2010)

Do any of the CVs state 'attention to detail' as a skill?


----------



## scifisam (Mar 11, 2010)

Some of them might be people on jobseeking courses making up their quota of job applications. Some of them are probably just chancing it, like boohoo describes. And some of them are just thick. Even if they notice the line about no CVs, they might decide you can't _really_ mean it.


----------



## Kanda (Mar 11, 2010)

I'd reply: As  per our advert, we do not accept CV's, I regret to inform you that you have failed in this application


----------



## skyscraper101 (Mar 11, 2010)

What about people filling out the application form *and* sending in their CV? That's what I'd do. Plus send a hard copy of both. Got to exhaust the options eh?

The recipient can always just delete the CV if they _really_ don't want to look at it.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 11, 2010)

Job-tracker websites that auto-send CVs might be the culprit


----------



## Biddlybee (Mar 11, 2010)

skyscraper101 said:


> What about people filling out the application form *and* sending in their CV? That's what I'd do. Plus send a hard copy of both. Got to exhaust the options eh?


Really? Even if they say we don't accept CVs... if you then send one there's all the chance that it would reflect negatively on you? (although it will probably have been removed and thrown away before it gets to the people who shortlist).


----------



## fredfelt (Mar 11, 2010)

It's rare that I'll apply for a job that requires an application form in the first instance - and I have never completed a handwritten only application form.  They take too much time to complete and to me show a sign that the post, or at least the person recruiting is overly bureaucratic.  If a potential employer wants to use a hand written application form as a way to analyse my hand writing they can fuck off - there is no way I'll work for a company that uses graphology as a selection method.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Mar 11, 2010)

BiddlyBee said:


> Really? Even if they say we don't accept CVs... if you then send one there's all the chance that it would reflect negatively on you? (although it will probably have been removed and thrown away before it gets to the people who shortlist).



Yep. Not that I can ever recall applying for a job by application form. As BigPhil said, they take too much time to complete and to me show a sign that the company recruiting is overly bureaucratic.

Nonetheless. The more options you can get your CV in their face the better. Which is why I attach it to all correspondence, and I track down the name of the recruiting person and mail them a hard copy. It means they have to physically throw it away - rather than just press delete.


----------



## Onket (Mar 11, 2010)

Kanda said:


> I'd reply: As  per our advert, we do not accept CV's, I regret to inform you that you have failed in this application



This^


----------



## Onket (Mar 11, 2010)

skyscraper101 said:


> The more options you can get your CV in their face the better. Which is why I attach it to all correspondence, and I track down the name of the recruiting person and mail them a hard copy. It means they have to physically throw it away - rather than just press delete.



Not sure irritating someone that much will result in them giving you a job. Has it worked much in the past for you?


----------



## innit (Mar 11, 2010)

Onket said:


> This^



Thirded... if they can't read simple instructions -> game over.


----------



## EastEnder (Mar 11, 2010)

BigPhil said:


> there is no way I'll work for a company that uses graphology as a selection method.


We use phrenology as a selection method - every applicant has to send in a cast of their head. Lumpy skulls are rejected outright, it's a clear sign of moral indigence.


----------



## Biddlybee (Mar 11, 2010)

skyscraper101 said:


> Yep. Not that I can ever recall applying for a job by application form. As BigPhil said, they take too much time to complete and to me show a sign that the company recruiting is overly bureaucratic.


Pretty much every job in the third sector you have to apply with an application form  I wouldn't hand write one though - fuck that.


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

Kanda said:


> I'd reply: As  per our advert, we do not accept CV's, I regret to inform you that you have failed in this application



Yep


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2010)

If a company can afford to ignore potentially good candidates just because they insist on _this_ rather than _that_ application process then they are obviously more rich in human resource capital than any other firm I've ever seen.

Really, what's the big deal about the application form?  Are you *really* going to ignore your perfect candidate just because they thought that they'd obey the spirit rather than the letter of the advert?

As to why -- well, why do you think?  If you are applying to a dozen firms and each of them has their own bespoke application form then that is an awful lot of investment of time just for the off chance that you might want a single one of the positions.  It makes far more sense to put your effort into producing a really high quality CV that should answer any questions posed to hurdle the initial application process and then use that for every application.

The way I see it: there's a thousand companies out there and only one of me.  If a company is so bureaucratic or HR-dominated that it can't cope with a CV as an application then that's a useful way of weeding out that company as being one I don't want to work for.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2010)

And as the employer and as somebody who has been heavily involved in recruitment, I don't view the initial application as anything other than a basic hurdle to be overcome to meet the far more important next stages of the process.  I don't care if I get the information to decide on that hurdle by application form, CV, carrier pigeon or telepathy, frankly.


----------



## gamma globulins (Mar 11, 2010)

Set up an autoreply.


----------



## Onket (Mar 11, 2010)

Why bother with any guidelines then? Why not invite candidates to just send in an application form they have recently completed for any other job. Or get them to scribble why they think the job suits them on the back of a cereal packet or something.

It's not like no-one is applying for jobs these days.


----------



## innit (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> If a company can afford to ignore potentially good candidates just because they insist on _this_ rather than _that_ application process then they are obviously more rich in human resource capital than any other firm I've ever seen.
> 
> Really, what's the big deal about the application form?  Are you *really* going to ignore your perfect candidate just because they thought that they'd obey the spirit rather than the letter of the advert?
> 
> ...


you've obviously never worked in the public or voluntary sector - and never will if you're not willing to spend 2 hours filling out a form.

if a candidate doesn't want the job enough to spend an evening on their application then they don't want it very much, imo.  and a CV won't get you shortlisted for those jobs - no CV has enough detail in it to tick all the boxes on the person specification.

most public and voluntary orgs will, for equal opps reasons, measure all candidates against their completion of the application form so if people included their CV as well, I always ignored it completely - straight in the bin.


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> And as the employer and as somebody who has been heavily involved in recruitment, I don't view the initial application as anything other than a basic hurdle to be overcome to meet the far more important next stages of the process.  I don't care if I get the information to decide on that hurdle by application form, CV, carrier pigeon or telepathy, frankly.



It's not about bureaucracy. It's about making sure you shortlist according to standard criteria which may or may not be included in a personal CV.


----------



## Biddlybee (Mar 11, 2010)

cesare said:


> It's not about bureaucracy. It's about making sure you shortlist according to standard criteria which may or may not be included in a personal CV.


...and more often than not they are places which aren't HR-dominated - so this is an easier way to shortlist.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2010)

Onket said:


> Why bother with any guidelines then? Why not invite candidates to just send in an application form they have recently completed for any other job. Or get them to scribble why they think the job suits them on the back of a cereal packet or something.
> 
> It's not like no-one is applying for jobs these days.


I never have required anybody to fill in an application form.

Application forms are a sign that the process is running the show rather than the actual needs of the business.  What is it that you actually require in your candidate?  Only the most basic requirements are going to be able to assessed on initial application.  So why can you not decide whether these basic requirements are being met or not based on a CV?  What can an application form possibly tell you that a structured interview will not tell you much, much better?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2010)

innit said:


> you've obviously never worked in the public or voluntary sector - and never will if you're not willing to spend 2 hours filling out a form.
> 
> if a candidate doesn't want the job enough to spend an evening on their application then they don't want it very much, imo.  and a CV won't get you shortlisted for those jobs - no CV has enough detail in it to tick all the boxes on the person specification.
> 
> most public and voluntary orgs will, for equal opps reasons, measure all candidates against their completion of the application form so if people included their CV as well, I always ignored it completely - straight in the bin.


I was just offered a job in the government sector, actually.  They went straight for me based on a piece of work I have recently done.  They asked me to fill out all kinds of forms, but when I told them I wasn't interested in that kind of process they ended up just offering me the job anyway.

I don't think I'm going to take it though (I have to decide by tomorrow).  At the end of the day, I think I'd find working in the public sector just too annoying.

Oh -- and the point is that I* don't know* whether I want the job or not when I apply for it.  I'll only know after talking extensively with the people offering the position and finding out much more about it.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2010)

cesare said:


> It's not about bureaucracy. It's about making sure you shortlist according to standard criteria which may or may not be included in a personal CV.



What standard criteria can you assess on an application form that you cannot assess on a CV?

Do you mean "Tell me about a time that you..."?  Because I think application forms are a TERRIBLE way of assessing that kind of skillset.


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

BiddlyBee said:


> ...and more often than not they are places which aren't HR-dominated - so this is an easier way to shortlist.



And people also forget that unintended bias can occur at shortlist stage, if you're assessing according to what people decide to write in their cv rather than the information required across the board in an a/f.


----------



## innit (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> I was just offered a job in the government sector, actually.  They went straight for me based on a piece of work I have recently done.  They asked me to fill out all kinds of forms, but when I told them I wasn't interested in that kind of process they ended up just offering me the job anyway.
> 
> I don't think I'm going to take it though (I have to decide by tomorrow).  At the end of the day, I think I'd find working in the public sector just too annoying.



when I worked for a government department I didn't fill out a form either, come to think of it 

but the rest of my post still stands - I think it's reasonable to expect a candidate to make a time investment in their application instead of sending the same old CV they bombard everyone with.

E2A - if they've always worked in the public and voluntary sectors they probably won't even have a CV - I didn't until I changed career, and it was a bit weird starting one at the ripe old age of about 29.


----------



## _angel_ (Mar 11, 2010)

Why would people ignore the specific request of the advert and then still expect to get the job - bizarre.


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> What standard criteria can you assess on an application form that you cannot assess on a CV?
> 
> Do you mean "Tell me about a time that you..."?  Because I think application forms are a TERRIBLE way of assessing that kind of skillset.



No, I don't mean "tell me about a time that you ..." type interview questions. I mean "Do you have any criminal convictions not yet spent under the Rehabilitation Of Offenders Act' type information.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2010)

innit said:


> when I worked for a government department I didn't fill out a form either, come to think of it
> 
> but the rest of my post still stands - I think it's reasonable to expect a candidate to make a time investment in their application instead of sending the same old CV they bombard everyone with.
> 
> E2A - if they've always worked in the public and voluntary sectors they probably won't even have a CV - I didn't until I changed career, and it was a bit weird starting one at the ripe old age of about 29.


There's no reason why you can't produce a high quality CV that can answer every initial hurdle that should reasonably be placed in front of you for shortlisting purposes.  "Same old CV" already implies that this isn't the case.

And your "investment of time" is all very well for one form.  But multiply that by a dozen firms and you start to get a different story.  It's just going to end up being the same old answers going on every form -- it's not going to end up being tailored any more than a CV is.


----------



## Ted Striker (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> I never have required anybody to fill in an application form.
> 
> Application forms are a sign that the process is running the show rather than the actual needs of the business



This.

It's de-skills the selection process, potentially restrict the pool from which you will be selecting your labour (i.e. the time poor of this world) - unless you and see the ability to have the necessary 20 minutes spare to fill out an online form as an attractive quality in a candidate 

Not to mention the restrictions a form can have on the process, people not being able to elucidate themselves as well as what they could writing 'on their terms' and the threat of the system fucking up...

And I can't see anyone winning put of all of this in the long run, other than the IT firm who sold you this amazing timesaver and/or the HR boss that takes work efficiency a touch too seriously.

Potentially a wiser option would be a "If you can answer yes to the following questions, then please send your CV, otherwise it will not be considered for this position"


----------



## Onket (Mar 11, 2010)

_angel_ said:


> Why would people ignore the specific request of the advert and then still expect to get the job - bizarre.



I think it all boils down to this really^

Deciding you are better than the people advertising the job and ignoring their request just can't be a good way of succeeding. Even if you are better than them, sometimes you need to keep that under wraps til you've passed your probation.


----------



## innit (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> There's no reason why you can't produce a high quality CV that can answer every initial hurdle that should reasonably be placed in front of you for shortlisting purposes.  "Same old CV" already implies that this isn't the case.
> 
> And your "investment of time" is all very well for one form.  But multiply that by a dozen firms and you start to get a different story.  It's just going to end up being the same old answers going on every form -- it's not going to end up being tailored any more than a CV is.



Having filled out shitloads of the things over 8 years in the sector, and shortlisted hundreds, I think I know a bit more about it than you - and I always tailored my applications.  There would be standard bits that could be c+p'd (IT skills) but there would always be something new and the old stuff could always be updated and made more relevant to the application at hand.  It always took me an evening to do.

Yeah, you would see some tired applications just like I'm sure there are some tired CVs out there, but the good ones would have stacks of information about the person's experience and attitudes that you just couldn't put into a CV.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

I agree with Kabbes.

I'd be very unlikely to apply for a job which insisted on filling out endless stupid application forms. Luckily in my line of work it would be very unlikely that any job I'd be interested in would be recruited in that way.

But I have watched friends who do work in those kinds of sectors, have to fill out these kinds of forms. It's a massive amount of time to invest in something which you don't really know much about at that stage anyway. And as far as I can see, the process of filling out the forms is more about saying the right things to allow the right boxes to be ticked, rather than actually providing any real information about the applicant. Other than "this applicant can fill out tedious forms".


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2010)

There is no reason why you shouldn't put all the same experience and attitudes into a CV as an application form.


----------



## Ted Striker (Mar 11, 2010)

Plus with form you can't randomly rip up half the CV's purely to "filter out unlucky people"


----------



## innit (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> There is no reason why you shouldn't put all the same experience and attitudes into a CV as an application form.



I'd be amazed.


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> There is no reason why you shouldn't put all the same experience and attitudes into a CV as an application form.



Except that people don't. They pick and choose what they put on a CV, and the gaps in information aren't always as immediately obvious as gaps in an a/f.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> I agree with Kabbes.
> 
> I'd be very unlikely to apply for a job which insisted on filling out endless stupid application forms. Luckily in my line of work it would be very unlikely that any job I'd be interested in would be recruited in that way.
> 
> But I have watched friends who do work in those kinds of sectors, have to fill out these kinds of forms. It's a massive amount of time to invest in something which you don't really know much about at that stage anyway. And as far as I can see, the process of filling out the forms is more about saying the right things to allow the right boxes to be ticked, rather than actually providing any real information about the applicant. Other than "this applicant can fill out tedious forms".


Indeed.

So, in short, I might send my CV to a company that said "application forms only" on the off-chance that they are not as bureaucratic and process-driven that the advert makes them appear and that they do actually have people who are empowered to consider the full range of options that are open to them.  If this turns out not to be the case... well, then consider that my own little hurdle that the employer has failed to pass.  After all, recruitment is supposed to be a two-way process, not a one-way test.


----------



## Onket (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> There is no reason why you shouldn't put all the same experience and attitudes into a CV as an application form.



But if the advert specifies 'no CVs' then it'd be foolish to send one. This has been proven by what the OP says.


----------



## Onket (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> Indeed.
> 
> So, in short, I might send my CV to a company that said "application forms only" on the off-chance that they are not as bureaucratic and process-driven that the advert makes them appear and that they do actually have people who are empowered to consider the full range of options that are open to them.  If this turns out not to be the case... well, then consider that my own little hurdle that the employer has failed to pass.  After all, recruitment is supposed to be a two-way process, not a one-way test.



 I do like that though.

I spose it depends if you _need _the job, or _want _the job.

If I need the job, I will follow the instructions.


----------



## Kanda (Mar 11, 2010)

Also, if it's a particularly large company that needs to record recruitment data and stats (equal opportunities etc etc) an application form is a much easier way to go to gather that information.

I think it also depends on the sort of role. I wouldn't expect to hand a CV in to McDonalds or Starbucks..


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2010)

cesare said:


> Except that people don't. They pick and choose what they put on a CV, and the gaps in information aren't always as immediately obvious as gaps in an a/f.



Then that tells you something about their ability to frame information.

However, I'm still waiting to hear something *specific* that is required from an application form that won't be in the CV.  My strong suspicion is that it will turn out to be something that will be far better tested during a structured interview, but I wait to be convinced.


----------



## scifisam (Mar 11, 2010)

Mainstream teaching has paper application forms too (for permanent jobs). They have to be completed by hand. They also have long 'tell us why you're the bestest evah' sections and take way, way longer than 20 minutes to fill in. I always thought it was because they could then scan the information and log it automatically, or something like that. Otherwise it does seem a daft way of weeding out applicants. 

If a job advert requests that you _don't_ send a CV, then you'd be an idiot to ignore that.


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> Then that tells you something about their ability to frame information.
> 
> However, I'm still waiting to hear something *specific* that is required from an application form that won't be in the CV.  My strong suspicion is that it will turn out to be something that will be far better tested during a structured interview, but I wait to be convinced.



I've given you one example already. Do you include that information, for example, in your CV?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2010)

Onket said:


> I spose it depends if you _need _the job, or _want _the job.
> 
> If I need the job, I will follow the instructions.


Yes, that's true.  But I can only talk about why I might send a CV even if the advert requested an application form, and I come at it from the position of "want" rather than "need".

And I think the company has to ask itself whether it really wants to restrict itself only to candidates that *need* rather than *want* that role...


----------



## trashpony (Mar 11, 2010)

Application forms are much better if you are likely to have hundreds of applicants, then at least you're shortlisting sensibly. We had two hundred applications once for a computer graphics trainee position in the company I used to work in. Me and my mate threw out any CVs that had a covering letter written in biro because we had to find some way of cutting them down and that seemed as good a way as any


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2010)

cesare said:


> I've given you one example already. Do you include that information, for example, in your CV?


Sorry, I had completely missed that reply.

Right, I can see that.  But there is very little factual information along those lines -- why not send applicants a one-page "yes/no" form with those kind of questions in it, and take a CV for the rest?

That way people can use the very simple application form with CV attached, or they can send a CV and receive the simple application form in reply.

I don't think you need the full-on application form process just for the sake of a view basic checks.


----------



## innit (Mar 11, 2010)

This is a person specification (not a very good one as it goes, but there's a limit to how long I'm going to spend to prove a point) for the kind of job I used to do.  They will be scoring the application against each point.  I can't imagine the kind of CV which would cover enough points in enough detail to get an interview when competing against applicants who have filled out the form and addressed the points in detail.



> Skills
> 
> Team working
> Report writing
> ...


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2010)

trashpony said:


> Application forms are much better if you are likely to have hundreds of applicants, then at least you're shortlisting sensibly. We had two hundred applications once for a computer graphics trainee position in the company I used to work in. Me and my mate threw out any CVs that had a covering letter written in biro because we had to find some way of cutting them down and that seemed as good a way as any


Like the joke that Ted Striker earlier referred to -- "Who wants to employ someone that unlucky?"


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

cesare said:


> Except that people don't. They pick and choose what they put on a CV, and the gaps in information aren't always as immediately obvious as gaps in an a/f.



The kind of application forms I've seen others have to fill out have questions like "Do you consider yourself effective working as a team player" to which you basically have to answer "yes I do" except in loads more words than that to fill up the box. It's not as if anyone's going to write "well to be honest it depends on who I have to work with and sometimes I get ratty if I have to work with idiots" or something like that.

All that an answer to that kind of question reveals is that the person can string out a bit of spin about themselves. It doesn't actually tell you anything about how they _actually_ perform working as a part of a team.

Fair enough if the forms are just asking for simple facts like what qualifications you have, but the ones I've seen are full of the kind of stupid questions like the one above.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2010)

innit said:


> This is a person specification (not a very good one as it goes, but there's a limit to how long I'm going to spend to prove a point) for the kind of job I used to do.  They will be scoring the application against each point.  I can't imagine the kind of CV which would cover enough points in enough detail to get an interview when competing against applicants who have filled out the form and addressed the points in detail.


But as suspected, those are all the kinds of things considerably better assessed in ways other than a written application form.

_ETA_: And actually, my CV does offer specific, measurable evidence of those kind of attributes anyway.


----------



## innit (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> But as suspected, those are all the kinds of things considerably better assessed in ways other than a written application form.



Oh yeah, but bad recruitment is so endemic.  Pretty much all of these organisations will use some kind of testing at the interview stage, which is a significant improvement on lots of the organisations which accept CVs.


----------



## EastEnder (Mar 11, 2010)

Kanda said:


> I think it also depends on the sort of role. I wouldn't expect to hand a CV in to McDonalds or Starbucks..


I doubt they'd hire you at McDonalds anyway, they've got standards to maintain, you're more of a Burger King sort of bloke.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

innit said:


> This is a person specification (not a very good one as it goes, but there's a limit to how long I'm going to spend to prove a point) for the kind of job I used to do.  They will be scoring the application against each point.  I can't imagine the kind of CV which would cover enough points in enough detail to get an interview when competing against applicants who have filled out the form and addressed the points in detail.



Yeah, that's exactly the kind of stupid list, that if I knew someone was going to try and score me against on the basis of my answers to standard questions on a form, I really wouldn't want to work for them.


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> Sorry, I had completely missed that reply.
> 
> Right, I can see that.  But there is very little factual information along those lines -- why not send applicants a one-page "yes/no" form with those kind of questions in it, and take a CV for the rest?
> 
> ...



On an a/f you've got (a) personal/contact details, education/qualifications, work experience, interests (b) basic checks (c) health questions and (d) equal opps monitoring form. On a CV people will deal with (a) but not (b) (c) or (d) usually. It makes information gathering a lot quicker and easier, and helps minimise the risk of unintended bias when screening.


----------



## Kanda (Mar 11, 2010)

EastEnder said:


> I doubt they'd hire you at McDonalds anyway, they've got standards to maintain, you're more of a Burger King sort of bloke.



I've worked at McDonalds, got turned down by Burger King... true story! Ha!


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> The kind of application forms I've seen others have to fill out have questions like "Do you consider yourself effective working as a team player" to which you basically have to answer "yes I do" except in loads more words than that to fill up the box. It's not as if anyone's going to write "well to be honest it depends on who I have to work with and sometimes I get ratty if I have to work with idiots" or something like that.
> 
> All that an answer to that kind of question reveals is that the person can string out a bit of spin about themselves. It doesn't actually tell you anything about how they _actually_ perform working as a part of a team.
> 
> Fair enough if the forms are just asking for simple facts like what qualifications you have, but the ones I've seen are full of the kind of stupid questions like the one above.



Yeah, well you get bad a/fs too, don't dispute that at all.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2010)

At least this thread has, I think, made it clear why some people will be sending CVs rather than filling in the form.

What you do with this information as a recruiter is up to you.  Personally, it seems pretty clear to me that by insisting on the form, you will be missing out on a LOT of good candidates.  Possibly even the pool of candidates that you should be most interested in.  So you have to decide what is more important to you -- the process or finding the right person.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

cesare said:


> On an a/f you've got (a) personal/contact details, education/qualifications, work experience, interests (b) basic checks (c) health questions and (d) equal opps monitoring form. On a CV people will deal with (a) but not (b) (c) or (d) usually. It makes information gathering a lot quicker and easier, and helps minimise the risk of unintended bias when screening.



b), c) and d) can be covered on a single side of A4 or less. I've seen loads of application forms that are much longer than that.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

I think the OP should post the form up here and we can all fill it in and see who can give the best answers.


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> At least this thread has, I think, made it clear why some people will be sending CVs rather than filling in the form.
> 
> What you do with this information as a recruiter is up to you.  Personally, it seems pretty clear to me that by insisting on the form, you will be missing out on a LOT of good candidates.  Possibly even the pool of candidates that you should be most interested in.  So you have to decide what is more important to you -- the process or finding the right person.



I think you're still missing the point about why the process is there *remembers the days when line managers used to shortlist according to photograph*


----------



## innit (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> Yeah, that's exactly the kind of stupid list, that if I knew someone was going to try and score me against on the basis of my answers to standard questions on a form, I really wouldn't want to work for them.



It wasn't meant to be an example of a good set of criteria, it was an example of how a person who did want the job would be at a serious disadvantage if they sent in a CV - they just wouldn't be able to cover enough of the ground to get an interview.

Anyway, my other experience of recruitment is of applying to large City organisations who invest tens of thousands of pounds in their graduate recruitment and use state of the art testing.  They all use application forms too.


----------



## trashpony (Mar 11, 2010)

Kanda said:


> I've worked at McDonalds, got turned down by Burger King... true story! Ha!



I got turned down by B&Q - you have to complete a personality questionnaire when you apply and I came out as too insubordinate


----------



## Biddlybee (Mar 11, 2010)

innit said:


> This is a person specification (not a very good one as it goes, but there's a limit to how long I'm going to spend to prove a point) for the kind of job I used to do.


What did you used to do? 



cesare said:


> I think you're still missing the point about why the process is there *remembers the days when line managers used to shortlist according to photograph*


Lol... you used to be asked to attach a photo to applications didn't you? I've still seen some CVs that have photos on.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2010)

How do you weed out the fuglies if you don't request a photo??


----------



## scifisam (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> Indeed.
> 
> So, in short, I might send my CV to a company that said "application forms only" on the off-chance that they are not as bureaucratic and process-driven that the advert makes them appear and that they do actually have people who are empowered to consider the full range of options that are open to them.  If this turns out not to be the case... well, then consider that my own little hurdle that the employer has failed to pass.  After all, recruitment is supposed to be a two-way process, not a one-way test.



I have to say, that would make me think that the applicant was either an idiot who can't follow simple instructions or an arrogant bastard who will do things completely his own way, thinking that he knows best; unpleasant to work with and more likely to make serious mistakes.


----------



## innit (Mar 11, 2010)

BiddlyBee said:


> What did you used to do?



I managed supported housing projects (mental health and domestic violence).

That person spec really is rubbish, it was just the first one that came up when I googled (I really should be doing some work )


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

BiddlyBee said:


> Lol... you used to be asked to attach a photo to applications didn't you? I've still seen some CVs that have photos on.



Yep, people still do it as well. Glammed up photos attached to CVs  Also the visual impression of presentation skills influencing the shortlisting process - even if presentation skills aren't needed for the job. Etc.


----------



## innit (Mar 11, 2010)

trashpony said:


> I got turned down by B&Q - you have to complete a personality questionnaire when you apply and I came out as too insubordinate



What the fuck???????????????

that is seriously frightening -- I can't believe they would reject an applicant on that basis


----------



## Biddlybee (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> How do you weed out the fuglies if you don't request a photo??


You do this  at the interview.



innit said:


> I managed supported housing projects (mental health and domestic violence).


Ah, not sure if I'd ever asked you or not - but was thinking about it from a couple of your other posts. Think you've been studying since we met


----------



## scifisam (Mar 11, 2010)

trashpony said:


> I got turned down by B&Q - you have to complete a personality questionnaire when you apply and I came out as too insubordinate



When I was 16 I went for a job - a Saturday job - waitressing at a train station cafe. I had to fill out a really really long application form by hand, including a section for handwriting analysis, take an aptitude test and a personality test and a couple of other tests, then work for half an hour (paid) to demonstrate my skills. The weirdest part was the Rorschach inkblot test. Yes, I'm serious.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

innit said:


> It wasn't meant to be an example of a good set of criteria, it was an example of how a person who did want the job would be at a serious disadvantage if they sent in a CV - they just wouldn't be able to cover enough of the ground to get an interview.



If you ask me, a decent job advert should give a good idea about what the job involves, and if there are specific skills/personality types that are desired they should be stated.

And a decent application would provide a CV which would give all the basic info required for any job, and be accompanied by a covering letter which would address the specifics of that job. (Or, the CV wouldbe customised to include this.)

If I was an employer I would be more impressed with someone able to read a job description, understand the important bits, and then provide concise and relevant information about themselves off their own bat, than I would be with someone able to fill in a load of standardised responses on an application form.

If they fail to provide the information you need - then that says something about them and how much attention they paid to the advert and job description. This would tell me they are the type of person I might not want to give the job.

If they can fill in a form - all that tells me is that they can fill in a form.

I can see that there are certain jobs where the requirements are fairly basic, or not about literacy and initiative and the like, where a form would be appropriate. But above a certain level - nah. Like I say I've seen friends fill in these kinds of forms and this is applying for jobs where one of the requirements is a doctorate, or where there is a significant management/coordination element to the role, or which involve working in difficult areas abroad, stuff like that.


----------



## trashpony (Mar 11, 2010)

innit said:


> What the fuck???????????????
> 
> that is seriously frightening -- I can't believe they would reject an applicant on that basis



They didn't put it quite like that, it was something along the lines of the fact that I was unlikely to take instruction without questioning. So now I never get annoyed with the staff there for their lack of initiative - they select them on that basis. 



scifisam said:


> When I was 16 I went for a job - a Saturday job - waitressing at a train station cafe. I had to fill out a really really long application form by hand, including a section for handwriting analysis, take an aptitude test and a personality test and a couple of other tests, then work for half an hour (paid) to demonstrate my skills. The weirdest part was the Rorschach inkblot test. Yes, I'm serious.



PMSL  Did you get the job?


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

innit said:


> Anyway, my other experience of recruitment is of applying to large City organisations who invest tens of thousands of pounds in their graduate recruitment and use state of the art testing.  They all use application forms too.



I wonder if this is in any way linked to the current financial ruin of the nation.


----------



## innit (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> If you ask me, a decent job advert should give a good idea about what the job involves, and if there are specific skills/personality types that are desired they should be stated.
> 
> And a decent application would provide a CV which would give all the basic info required for any job, and be accompanied by a covering letter which would address the specifics of that job. (Or, the CV wouldbe customised to include this.)
> 
> ...



cesare's already given lots of reasons why they're used - another is that people from a different culture would be disadvantaged by the process you describe as they just wouldn't know the expectations of what should be put in and what should be left out.  An application form sets out a clear framework for all applicants to include the same information - it's fairer.


----------



## innit (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> I wonder if this is in any way linked to the current financial ruin of the nation.



it's pretty unlikely tbf


----------



## scifisam (Mar 11, 2010)

trashpony said:


> PMSL  Did you get the job?



No.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

innit said:


> cesare's already given lots of reasons why they're used - another is that people from a different culture would be disadvantaged by the process you describe as they just wouldn't know the expectations of what should be put in and what should be left out.  An application form sets out a clear framework for all applicants to include the same information - it's fairer.



What do you mean by "different culture"?

What kind of "culture" doesn't know how to make a job application?

And in any case, what about people from a "culture" that doesn't know how to write bullshit answers on an application form?


----------



## innit (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> What do you mean by "different culture"?



Have a fucking guess.



> What kind of "culture" doesn't know how to make a job application?



What's expected from a job application in different parts of the world is completely different.  Not everybody would "get" the stuff that you take for granted about what makes a good CV and covering letter, cos it's culturally specific to this country (or even that particular industry within this country). 

The use of CVs also disadvantages career changers and people returning to work after a long break, who also don't know the current "code" of a given industry, fwiw.



> And in any case, what about people from a "culture" that doesn't know how to write bullshit answers on an application form?



The whole point of the application form is that it sets out exactly what information needs to be covered therefore cultural knowledge of what's expected isn't required.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2010)

scifisam said:


> I have to say, that would make me think that the applicant was either an idiot who can't follow simple instructions or an arrogant bastard who will do things completely his own way, thinking that he knows best; unpleasant to work with and more likely to make serious mistakes.




Then we would not be a good match as employer and employee and we are as well to find that out as soon as possible, no?


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

As an employer I would be concerned that someone who didn't "get" how to do a proper CV and covering letter, might also not "get" how to do the job I'd be wanting them to do. That's the whole point of the application process, isn't it?

And I completely reject the idea that "cultural knowledge of what is expected" doesn't affect the way in which someone would be able to fill in an application form.

Just to be clear, I am talking about jobs demanding a reasonably high level of experience/skill/qualification here - I can see that forms might be appropriate for lower-level jobs, where the ability to write a decent CV and letter isn't really relevant to the role.


----------



## Agent Sparrow (Mar 11, 2010)

I've been filling in applications forms since finishing my undergrad; it's the way things work in the NHS. Whilst I'll admit the on line forms make things a _lot_ easier, I think moaning that a place won't accept a CV is a bit "aw diddums" really. If you can't even be arsed to complete an application form are you really going to be motivated to work hard in the job?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2010)

Why should I work hard to apply for a role that I don't know if I want?

For that matter, why should anybody have to work harder than is actually necessary for anything at all?  Hard work isn't a virtue in and of itself.


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

There's a recently burgeoning industry in businesses that investigate serial litigants at present.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

Agent Sparrow said:


> I've been filling in applications forms since finishing my undergrad; it's the way things work in the NHS. Whilst I'll admit the on line forms make things a _lot_ easier, I think moaning that a place won't accept a CV is a bit "aw diddums" really. If you can't even be arsed to complete an application form are you really going to be motivated to work hard in the job?



It's not so much moaning about it, as what it tells you about that organisation and whether you would want to work in it.


----------



## Agent Sparrow (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> It's not so much moaning about it, as what it tells you about that organisation and whether you would want to work in it.



Yes, but whole spheres of jobs have the application form system. Including lots of jobs that are very skilled and therefore don't anywhere near meet your description here:-



> Just to be clear, I am talking about jobs demanding a reasonably high level of experience/skill/qualification here - I can see that forms might be appropriate for *lower-level jobs*, where the ability to write a decent CV and letter isn't really relevant to the role.



And what does it "tell you" about the organisation do you reckon?


----------



## Agent Sparrow (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> Why should I work hard to apply for a role that I don't know if I want?
> 
> For that matter, why should anybody have to work harder than is actually necessary for anything at all?  Hard work isn't a virtue in and of itself.



Some professions are so competitive you pretty much to take anything you can get, so if you're applying, you pretty much want it.


----------



## innit (Mar 11, 2010)

Agent Sparrow said:


> Some professions are so competitive you pretty much to take anything you can get, so if you're applying, you pretty much want it.



Indeed


----------



## scifisam (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> Then we would not be a good match as employer and employee and we are as well to find that out as soon as possible, no?



You can afford to take that approach. Lots of other people can't. I _know_ you're not an arrogant bastard who can't follow simple instructions, but it would look that way. Maybe they do have a very good reason for doing things their way; it's a bit presumptive to assume they don't. 

FWIW, I think lots of people actually _do_ know that they want the job at the point that they send the application in. I always have.


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

I wonder where 'lower-level' ends and middle or higher starts?


----------



## trashpony (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> Why should I work hard to apply for a role that I don't know if I want?
> 
> For that matter, why should anybody have to work harder than is actually necessary for anything at all?  Hard work isn't a virtue in and of itself.



Depends how many candidates there are and how desperate you are for a job really. Clearly as an actuary, you are in high demand


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

Agent Sparrow said:


> Yes, but whole spheres of jobs have the application form system. Including lots of jobs that are very skilled and therefore don't anywhere near meet your description here:-



I think you misread what I wrote - it's those very skilled jobs for which I feel the application form system is inappropriate.



> And what does it "tell you" about the organisation do you reckon?



It tells me that it is probably rather bureaucratic and hierarchical, and possibly also that it wants me to fit into a fairly rigid and formal system. It also tells me that they consider they are doing me a favour by even considering me, because it is me who has to do most of the work to get to the stage where I can tell whether it's a job that I'm actually interested in or suited to.

While, of course, in many job types, and in a recession, it may be technically true that they are doing me a favour by even considering me, in an ideal world I'd rather work for someone who considered my employment as a two-way relationship. They ought to be selling themselves to me as much as I am selling myself to them, and a tedious application form designed to help bureaucrats tick boxes doesn't really float my boat, as it were.


----------



## tarannau (Mar 11, 2010)

I must admit that I share much the same view of application forms as a bureaucratic and unhelpful pain in the arse. They tend to make me think less of the organisation offering them and their HR team


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

cesare said:


> I wonder where 'lower-level' ends and middle or higher starts?



Somewhere around the point where you are looking for the kind of person that can write a decent CV and covering letter, I'd say.


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> Somewhere around the point where you are looking for the kind of person that can write a decent CV and covering letter, I'd say.



Oh aye? And where do you think that is?


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

cesare said:


> Oh aye? And where do you think that is?



That's up to the employer, isn't it, and the role they are recruiting for. 



I knew I'd get hassle for using discriminatory language like "higher" and "lower" but I couldn't be bothered to work out a contorted way of expressing the same thing without causing offence. To be clear, the terms "higher" and "lower" should not be taken as a judgement on anyone's moral standing or worth to society.


----------



## Agent Sparrow (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> I think you misread what I wrote - it's those very skilled jobs for which I feel the application form system is inappropriate.


And I'm saying how bloody arrogant is it to think that!  There are _loads_ of highly skilled jobs that use the application form procedure. Often it's more about the sphere of work you're in.



> It tells me that it is probably rather bureaucratic and hierarchical, and possibly also that it wants me to fit into a fairly rigid and formal system. It also tells me that they consider they are doing me a favour by even considering me, because it is me who has to do most of the work to get to the stage where I can tell whether it's a job that I'm actually interested in or suited to.
> 
> While, of course, in many job types, and in a recession, it may be technically true that they are doing me a favour by even considering me, in an ideal world I'd rather work for someone who considered my employment as a two-way relationship. They ought to be selling themselves to me as much as I am selling myself to them, and a tedious application form designed to help bureaucrats tick boxes doesn't really float my boat, as it were.


And given your views above, it's quite lucky for you you don't want to work in one of those spheres of work that uses application forms. 

Maybe it's because I've always had to do them. I'll admit they can be a pain (although there are short cuts) but I don't think they're reflective of the employment relationship not being two way. In fact many spheres that use them are also thought of as having pretty good staff perks. 

And practically, no matter how good your CV is, a personal statement written specifically for the role applied for is likely to be better than a generalised thing you send to everyone. It benefits the applicant too as they can really draw out their relevant experience and show themselves in the best light for the job. These days I have too many different facets of experience to write it all down in a full CV in the sort of detail I can go into about specific experiences that fit the job description in a personal statement.


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> That's up to the employer, isn't it, and the role they are recruiting for.
> 
> 
> 
> I knew I'd get hassle for using discriminatory language like "higher" and "lower" but I couldn't be bothered to work out a contorted way of expressing the same thing without causing offence. To be clear, the terms "higher" and "lower" should not be taken as a judgement on anyone's moral standing or worth to society.



I just asked - I haven't given you hassle.


----------



## _angel_ (Mar 11, 2010)

Plus the CV may have been done by a "professional" - don't think there's anything wrong with wanting to know if someone can string a sentence together and answer a question accurately!


----------



## tarannau (Mar 11, 2010)

Eh? But you essentially write a personal statement in a covering letter with the CV, or at least you should.


----------



## _angel_ (Mar 11, 2010)

It's not answering a specific question. App forms are a pain from the job hunters POV, but  I don't know why people feel they are essentally too important to fill out an application form.


----------



## Agent Sparrow (Mar 11, 2010)

tarannau said:


> Eh? But you essentially write a personal statement in a covering letter with the CV, or at least you should.


Well in which case what really is the significant difference between doing an application form and sending in a CV, apart from the former one takes a little more time? It doesn't even take that extra time any more if you use online ones where you can copy across details.

Tbh I still can't see that an application form is such a drain that people would refuse to do them. I still hold that if you don't want the job enough to spend 20 mins or so writing an application form, then you perhaps shouldn't apply.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

Agent Sparrow said:


> There are _loads_ of highly skilled jobs that use the application form procedure.



I know! As I've already described, I've watched people I know applying for such jobs, and having to fill in the stupid forms, and cursing them and the stupid questions and the stupid answers they have to give and the hours of their lives that it wastes.




> And given your views above, it's quite lucky for you you don't want to work in one of those spheres of work that uses application forms.



Lucky that I don't have to, perhaps. I should think that one of the reasons I don't work in one of those spheres, is because I wouldn't want to, because the work in that kind of way. 



> Maybe it's because I've always had to do them. I'll admit they can be a pain (although there are short cuts) but I don't think they're reflective of the employment relationship not being two way. In fact many spheres that use them are also thought of as having pretty good staff perks.
> 
> And practically, no matter how good your CV is, a personal statement written specifically for the role applied for is likely to be better than a generalised thing you send to everyone. It benefits the applicant too as they can really draw out their relevant experience and show themselves in the best light for the job. These days I have too many different facets of experience to write it all down in a full CV in the sort of detail I can go into about specific experiences that fit the job description in a personal statement.



I don't see why the job-specific personal statement can't simply be contained in a covering letter with your CV.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2010)

As an outsider to a firm, I have remarkably few tools at my disposal to assess what it would be like to work at that firm.  I have less to go on than the firm does in its assessment of me, indeed.

One of the very few tools I have, however, is how they treat me as an applicant.  And so any kind of bureaucratic process that is, in my view, unnecessary, OTT or more about helping HR than helping the doers of the work is a warning flag.

How else am I to assess whether I want to work for that company or not?  I don't have the luxury of being able to interview all the staff and finding out what they think or of working there for a week on a trial basis.  I am simply trying to work out if I would fit into their culture using the tools at my disposal.


----------



## tarannau (Mar 11, 2010)

Indeed. Yes, I can spend time reformatting information into a AF, but it's a bit of an unnecessary pain in the arse imo. It just points to a slightly hidebound HR department that, of course, will almost certainly wave that requirement if they have a candidate they like.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

Agent Sparrow said:


> Well in which case what really is the significant difference between doing an application form and sending in a CV, apart from the former one takes a little more time?



In the former, your hand is being held, in the latter, you are being treated like an adult, and get to demonstrate that you understand what the important stuff is in terms of selling yourself.

And when I've seen people doing these things... it hasn't been a 20 minute job. More like half a day's work, in many cases.


----------



## Agent Sparrow (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> I don't see why the job-specific personal statement can't simply be contained in a covering letter with your CV.


That's the main effort though! I don't know if you've seen people fill in different ones but all I've ever been asked apart from the personal statement is pretty basic stuff, with the exception of my application for training. 

Oh, and I'd hope that if you did want to work in one of those spheres it would take you more than having to write application forms to put you off!


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

cesare said:


> I just asked - I haven't given you hassle.



My statement was a prophylactic measure


----------



## Agent Sparrow (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> In the former, your hand is being held, in the latter, you are being treated like an adult, and get to demonstrate that you understand what the important stuff is in terms of selling yourself.



Arrogance again.


----------



## _angel_ (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> In the former, your hand is being held, in the latter, you are being treated like an adult, and get to demonstrate that you understand what the important stuff is in terms of selling yourself.
> 
> And when I've seen people doing these things... it hasn't been a 20 minute job. More like half a day's work, in many cases.



People get expected to fill these in and wax lyrical about minimum wage jobs, so why should others be different?


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

tarannau said:


> Indeed. Yes, I can spend time reformatting information into a AF, but it's a bit of an unnecessary pain in the arse imo. It just points to a slightly hidebound HR department that, of course, will almost certainly wave that requirement if they have a candidate they like.



It's not about being hide-bound. It's about minimising the risk of discrimination claims & vicarious liability.


----------



## innit (Mar 11, 2010)

cesare said:


> It's not about being hide-bound. It's about minimising the risk of discrimination claims & vicarious liability.



Or about a genuine interest in creating a level playing ground and recruiting the best people


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2010)

Discrimination claims because your application process involves accepting CVs?

You can still have your poxy form too, if you really want!


----------



## innit (Mar 11, 2010)

Agent Sparrow said:


> Arrogance again.



Well, it is teuchter.


----------



## tarannau (Mar 11, 2010)

There are other ways to do that than with a AF though. As I say, it seems lazy and more focused on ease for the HR team than applicant. 

I've filled them in from time to time, circumvented them at other opportunties. They just tend to make me think less of the organisation in most cases.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2010)

You have to be a touch arrogant when applying for a job.  You are saying, "You should want ME, above all others!"  You need to be able to convincingly pull that off.

Besides, I *am* arrogant.  And pompous.  It's only natural when you're as great as I am.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

Agent Sparrow said:


> Arrogance again.



In what way arrogant?


----------



## innit (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> Besides, I *am* arrogant.  And pompous.  It's only natural when you're as great as I am.



Oh, me too.  And you've given me a whole 7 page form to tell you all about it?!  Only too pleased!


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

innit said:


> Or about a genuine interest in creating a level playing ground and recruiting the best people



Nah. The reality is that there are better ways of doing that ... but more time consuming and costly. A/fs go some way to taking reasonable measures to ensure that unlawful discrimination doesn't occur at screening stage. That, and making sure that they don't get flooded by speculative cvs from agencies.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2010)

To *enjoy* doing an application form is *surely* a perversion too far, even for these liberal forums.


----------



## innit (Mar 11, 2010)

cesare said:


> Nah. The reality is that there are better ways of doing that ... but more time consuming and costly. A/fs go some way to taking reasonable measures to ensure that unlawful discrimination doesn't occur at screening stage. That, and making sure that they don't get flooded by speculative cvs from agencies.



Well yeah - lots of the other ways wouldn't be realistic for little vol orgs, whereas app forms are.


----------



## tarannau (Mar 11, 2010)

That's not true. They'd just take a more involved HR department. 

I've worked in overstretched firms that are more right-on than a differently abled bus-full of Lesbian nuns and they've not required AFs. They're more common within faceless corps and larger govt. teams ime


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Mar 11, 2010)

Me76 said:


> ...At the moment I am being nice and replying with a cut and pasted 'as per our advert we do not accept CVs, download an application form here' but I know I will get very bored of that soon.


Don't bother.  Because what might happen next is that those stupid people might fill in an application form and submit it, and the information contained within their application form might get them shortlisted.  Do you want to run the risk of employing someone who is so stupid that they can't follow simple instructions and have to be told everything a second time?


----------



## skyscraper101 (Mar 11, 2010)

Onket said:


> Not sure irritating someone that much will result in them giving you a job. Has it worked much in the past for you?



Yep.  Both my last jobs in fact.

Neither had application forms, but I did make a point of emailing, and sending a hard copy of my CV with a personalised covering letter stating the company addres and the name and job title of the person responsible for looking at them. My previous job was through an application to a diiferent role entirely but the fact that I had mailed a hard copy of my details to the employer meant that he took 5 mins to look through it and I was considered for a different role which had just come up, and I got the job.

A bit of googling and calling around soon establishes the name and job title of the person looking at CVs. Then just knock out a personalised covering letter, and print off a CV, and mail it through in a quality envelope, preferably with the address printed on to it.

Far better than just attaching a word doc to an email. Fuck being part of the 100 odd people who do that on its own.


----------



## Agent Sparrow (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> In what way arrogant?



You are saying that application forms are some sort of dumbed down CV that shouldn't be used for highly skilled jobs. It ignores that the public sector (which seems to use application forms a lot more) uses application forms perfectly well for a multitude of very skilled positions.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

cesare said:


> Nah. The reality is that there are better ways of doing that ... but more time consuming and costly. A/fs go some way to taking reasonable measures to ensure that unlawful discrimination doesn't occur at screening stage.



This is to monitor stuff like checking you don't immediately reject applications on the basis of race/disability etc, right? I don't have a problem with a form that takes ten minutes to tick a few boxes about my ethnicity and age and gender and what have you. 

It's the lengthy forms with questions asking you to describe how you once resolved a situation in an inclusive manner or demonstrated motivation in the absence of supervision and all that rubbish that I don't like.


----------



## tarannau (Mar 11, 2010)

I'm not saying that at all fwiw- I'm saying they're more symptomatic of too rigid a HR process and add little or nothing compared to a well constructed cv. As others will testify, it's perfectly possible to circumvent the need for anything other than a cv in big chunks of the public sector. And that's more true the more senior the position


----------



## Agent Sparrow (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> It's the lengthy forms with questions asking you to describe how you once resolved a situation in an inclusive manner or demonstrated motivation in the absence of supervision and all that rubbish that I don't like.



Tbf those questions sound wank. However, I've never come across questions like that before, and I've filled out a _lot_ of application forms over the last 10 years.


----------



## Onket (Mar 11, 2010)

skyscraper101 said:


> Yep.  Both my last jobs in fact.
> 
> Neither had application forms, but I did make a point of emailing, and sending a hard copy of my CV with a personalised covering letter stating the company addres and the name and job title of the person responsible for looking at them. My previous job was through an application to a diiferent role entirely but the fact that I had mailed a hard copy of my details to the employer meant that he took 5 mins to look through it and I was considered for a different role which had just come up, and I got the job.
> 
> ...



What were both of your last jobs?


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

Agent Sparrow said:


> You are saying that application forms are some sort of dumbed down CV that shouldn't be used for highly skilled jobs. It ignores that the public sector (which seems to use application forms a lot more) *uses application forms perfectly well for a multitude of very skilled positions*.



How do you know? How do you know that they wouldn't fill those positions with better people if they didn't use CVs?

Why is it that the public sector uses them more, by the way? 

I do seem to have more problems with petty bureaucracy and jobsworths when dealing with the public sector than the private, I'm afraid to say. I can't help but to suspect some kind of link there.


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> This is to monitor stuff like checking you don't immediately reject applications on the basis of race/disability etc, right? I don't have a problem with a form that takes ten minutes to tick a few boxes about my ethnicity and age and gender and what have you.
> 
> It's the lengthy forms with questions asking you to describe how you once resolved a situation in an inclusive manner or demonstrated motivation in the absence of supervision and all that rubbish that I don't like.



Not entirely (although that too).

It's indirect discrimination - rather than direct discrimination - which is the danger area for recruiters i.e. applying a provision, criterion or practice which disadvantages people of a particular group (defined by sex, race, disability, sexual orientation, religious belief or age). So, for example, someone that doesn't get through an ad hoc screening process could complain that the screening process in itself had bias built into it.


----------



## _angel_ (Mar 11, 2010)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> Don't bother.  Because what might happen next is that those stupid people might fill in an application form and submit it, and the information contained within their application form might get them shortlisted.  Do you want to run the risk of employing someone who is so stupid that they can't follow simple instructions and have to be told everything a second time?



Some manager once told me that I was the only person who filled the application form in correctly. Then I never heard back from them 
So someone who couldn't fill in a form right got the job. God knows what I did that was worse than that!


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2010)

cesare said:


> Not entirely (although that too).
> 
> It's indirect discrimination - rather than direct discrimination - which is the danger area for recruiters i.e. applying a provision, criterion or practice which disadvantages people of a particular group (defined by sex, race, disability, sexual orientation, religious belief or age). So, for example, someone that doesn't get through an ad hoc screening process could complain that the screening process in itself had bias built into it.


How do you remove that by the simple use of an application form?


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> How do you know? How do you know that they wouldn't fill those positions with better people if they didn't use CVs?
> 
> Why is it that the public sector uses them more, by the way?
> 
> I do seem to have more problems with petty bureaucracy and jobsworths when dealing with the public sector than the private, I'm afraid to say. I can't help but to suspect some kind of link there.



The public sector uses them more because public sector bodies are under a legislative duty to actively promote equal opportunities (rather than just complying with the bare minimum).


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> How do you remove that by the simple use of an application form?



You can't remove that by the simple use of an a/f. An a/f is just one of the measures.

But what an a/f does is make sure that all applicants are screened on the basis of the information required applied consistently, and presented in the same way.


----------



## scifisam (Mar 11, 2010)

skyscraper101 said:


> Yep.  Both my last jobs in fact.
> 
> *Neither had application forms*, but I did make a point of emailing, and sending a hard copy of my CV with a personalised covering letter stating the company addres and the name and job title of the person responsible for looking at them. My previous job was through an application to a diiferent role entirely but the fact that I had mailed a hard copy of my details to the employer meant that he took 5 mins to look through it and I was considered for a different role which had just come up, and I got the job.
> 
> ...



I is confused. The jobs didn't have application forms, so obviously you didn't send a CV as well as an application form. Why did you say that you did?


----------



## innit (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> How do you remove that by the simple use of an application form?



You have documentary evidence of the scoring criteria used, and the fact that they were applied to all candidates with some kind of checks and balances built in (eg two people score the forms independently and then discuss any major discrepancies in scoring).


----------



## el-ahrairah (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> I don't care if I get the information to decide on that hurdle by application form, CV, carrier pigeon or telepathy, frankly.



Can I apply by mime?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2010)

innit said:


> You have documentary evidence of the scoring criteria used, and the fact that they were applied to all candidates with some kind of checks and balances built in (eg two people score the forms independently and then discuss any major discrepancies in scoring).


That doesn't work, though, to remove the biases we are talking about.  It just gives a veneer of it.  The scoring system is more than capable of having the same inbuilt bias as the person who designed the scoring system.  And having two people who have similar backgrounds separately score the form tells you nothing about whether they have common assumptions between them.

It's the replacement of true assessment with form-ticking.  It takes the emphasis of the people and puts it on the process.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2010)

el-ahrairah said:


> Can I apply by mime?


That would be awesome.  However, you might struggle if you stuck with mime for the next stage, which would be structured interview.


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> That doesn't work, though, to remove the biases we are talking about.  It just gives a veneer of it.  The scoring system is more than capable of having the same inbuilt bias as the person who designed the scoring system.  And having two people who have similar backgrounds separately score the form tells you nothing about whether they have common assumptions between them.
> 
> It's the replacement of true assessment with form-ticking.  It takes the emphasis of the people and puts it on the process.



Unfortunately kabbes, not all line managers have your analytical skillzzzzzzz.


----------



## Agent Sparrow (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> How do you know? How do you know that they wouldn't fill those positions with better people if they didn't use CVs?


Well tbf, at least with clinical jobs your ability to do all the work associated with that is probably more important than being able to write a perfect CV _or_ an application form. Which of course is what interview is for.

But no, I don't think you would get better people with CVs than with application forms. You'd just be interviewing people who are better at writing CVs. 



> I do seem to have more problems with petty bureaucracy and jobsworths when dealing with the public sector than the private, I'm afraid to say. I can't help but to suspect some kind of link there.


Tbh not my experience, I've had more experiences of jobworths in customer services in private companies than private, but isn't the grand diversity of life great. 

Oh, and as for your other question I won't both repeating cesare's post that pretty much covers it.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2010)

cesare said:


> Unfortunately kabbes, not all line managers have your analytical skillzzzzzzz.


This is true.  The world would be a better place if everybody was replaced with clones of me.

Bwahahaha!  Only now, at the end, do you understand my true plan!  6 billion kabbeses, all marching in step!  Or, at least, slightly out of step, but with some degree of menace despite that.


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> That would be awesome.  However, you might struggle if you stuck with mime for the next stage, which would be structured interview.



Indirectly discriminatory.


----------



## innit (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> That doesn't work, though, to remove the biases we are talking about.  It just gives a veneer of it.  The scoring system is more than capable of having the same inbuilt bias as the person who designed the scoring system.  And having two people who have similar backgrounds separately score the form tells you nothing about whether they have common assumptions between them.
> 
> It's the replacement of true assessment with form-ticking.  It takes the emphasis of the people and puts it on the process.



It's a huge step on, in terms of covering the organisation's back, from having one person shortlist from CVs with nothing to show whether the criteria used were fair or not.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2010)

I think that discrimination against mimes is compulsory, isn't it?  I'm sure I heard something about that on some management course or other.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2010)

innit said:


> It's a huge step on, in terms of covering the organisation's back, from having one person shortlist from CVs with nothing to show whether the criteria used were fair or not.


You can have a scoring system with CVs too.  In fact, this is common.


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> I think that discrimination against mimes is compulsory, isn't it?  I'm sure I heard something about that on some management course or other.



 <<<----- *disables that red tongue*


----------



## Agent Sparrow (Mar 11, 2010)

Tbh when you have to take down adverts after a couple of hours because you've already got 100 or more online applicants I can see why online application forms are both a way of managing to get the amount of applicants down to manageable numbers, and are a way of ensuring a degree of continuity fair to the participant. Although when jobs are so competitive their applications have to taken down in that short a space of time, there are other issues relating to equal ops.


----------



## temper_tantrum (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> Yeah, that's exactly the kind of stupid list, that if I knew someone was going to try and score me against on the basis of my answers to standard questions on a form, I really wouldn't want to work for them.



Me too. I've given up applying for public and '3rd sector' jobs, for precisely this reason - the application process itself. Here, completely at random, is an example I just found on the Shelter website (it happens to be for some kind of writing job).




			
				Shelter job app said:
			
		

> Demonstrating your ‘knowledge & experience’ at the application stage
> For each of the numbered ‘knowledge & experience’ points in the Person Specification you must provide a real example, which describes how you have acquired the knowledge, technical skills, and experience required for the job you are applying for.
> 
> _Demonstrating your competencies at the application stage_
> ...



So, having to do all that for a set of criteria, huh? They must at least be a reasonably short set, right?

Erm, no ...




			
				Shelter again said:
			
		

> _Knowledge and Experience_
> 1.	Experience of writing and editing high-quality, public and professional-facing content for print and online publications, including experience of developing a brief for clients and an understanding of publishing production processes.
> 2.	Ability to research and write for a variety of different audiences.
> 3.	Competent use of publishing software and IT systems.
> ...



Sorry, but, y'know, life's too short. I can perhaps see the point if you're recruiting at a relatively junior level, where a lot of applicants don't have a substantial career history. But in this case, half the criteria should be evidently fulfilled by the applicant's previous employment history, and the rest are just utter garbage. How the hell does one go about coming up with an example of being 'sensitive to the needs of others and demonstrat[ing] interest in their views'? 'I listen to the MD's PA moaning during her coffee break and manage not to tell her to get knotted' ?!
And 'Relates well to people of all backgrounds and cultures' - 'Some of my best friends are black!' ?!

I would be genuinely interested in hearing from any recruitment-related people on here how exactly they would suggest going about answering those points ...


----------



## skyscraper101 (Mar 11, 2010)

scifisam said:


> I is confused. The jobs didn't have application forms, so obviously you didn't send a CV as well as an application form. Why did you say that you did?



Eh? No I didn't require application forms for those jobs. But for any that did - I would send both CV and application. Covers all bases. I'm talking hypothetically.



Onket said:


> What were both of your last jobs?



Sales and Marketing bod for major record label then for a TV production co.


----------



## Onket (Mar 11, 2010)

skyscraper101 said:


> Sales and Marketing bod for major record label then for a TV production co.



Well that explains it then.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Mar 11, 2010)

innit;10412082]cesare's already given lots of reasons why they're used - another is that people from a different culture would be disadvantaged by the process you describe as they just wouldn't know the expectations of what should be put in and what should be left out.  An application form sets out a clear framework for all applicants to include the same information - it's fairer.[/QUOTE][QUOTE=teuchter said:


> What do you mean by "different culture"?
> 
> What kind of "culture" doesn't know how to make a job application?
> 
> And in any case, what about people from a "culture" that doesn't know how to write bullshit answers on an application form?


Someone gave me a book about interview skills years ago, and it was actually quite interesting in terms of highlighting cultural differences.

For example, Asian cultures place a greater emphasis on academic achievements as opposed to work experience and 'soft skills'.  

Thus, in answer to a question like:  Please describe how you meet the person specification for computer geek?  

An Indian or Chinese applicant might reply something along the lines of: 

I gained my BSc in computer science from Bangalore University/Tsinghua University.  Then I won a scholarship to study for a masters at MIT and then I went on to specialise in nanotechnology for my doctorate studies. 

[Therefore I have all the relevant qualifications, so gizza job.]

An American or European applicant might reply something along the lines of:  

After earning my BSc in computer science from Red Brick University I won a scholarship to study for a masters at MIT.  I then went on to specialise in nanotechnology for my doctorate studies, which were supervised by Famous Professor.  I was part of a research team that was exploring the superconduction properties of cutting edge compound X, for which your company is currently trying to develop mass manufacturing processes and commercial applications.  In addition to carrying out research, I also taught undergraduate classes and in my spare time I was an active member of the MIT debating society, which came second place in the national finals in 2009.

[Therefore I have all the relevant qualifications, I have made the point that I can work in a team by saying I was part of a research team, I have made the point that I am good at networking and I know who's who in the industry by name dropping Famous Professor, I've made the point that I can be managed by people above me by saying I was supervised and also made the point that I can 'manage', kind of, people under me by saying that I taught undergraduates, so you can assume I have good communications skills, authority and leadership skills, in addition to which you can assume I have business acumen by appreciating your company's line of work and R&D aims.  I have made the point about having good time management skills by mentioning extra-curricular activities on top of my studies and you can assume that I'm enthusiastic and quite competitive since my debating team was highly placed in a competition.]

There are, apparently, cultural differences.  Some cultures prize academic achievements and certificates, others business and soft skills.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Mar 11, 2010)

temper_tantrum said:


> Me too. I've given up applying for public and '3rd sector' jobs, for precisely this reason - the application process itself. Here, completely at random, is an example I just found on the Shelter website (it happens to be for some kind of writing job).
> 
> So, having to do all that for a set of criteria, huh? They must at least be a reasonably short set, right?
> 
> ...


Ages ago I applied for a job with an application form like that, asking you to give specific examples of how you met all the criteria.  So I did exactly that.  

Guess what feedback they gave me as to why I didn't short-listed?  

My application was "too wordy"! 

Well, if you don't want people to submit "wordy" applications, don't give them a list of 20 criteria and ask them to describe how they meet each and everyone of them, giving examples of related experience.

Seriously!


----------



## temper_tantrum (Mar 11, 2010)

Exactly! 
I love the way it asks for 'approx' 300 words PER CRITERION. I count 28 criteria on that application. That's 8,400 words. How am I ever going to squeeze all my many and varied life experiences into that tiny space?!  
Not to mention the amount of time it'd take.


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

Competency based a/fs taken to the nth degree


----------



## Agent Sparrow (Mar 11, 2010)

I've never addressed every point on a person spec directly, just used what they've asked for to help me shape how I describe my experience. It's really not that hard once you've done a couple.


----------



## temper_tantrum (Mar 11, 2010)

cesare said:


> Competency based a/fs taken to the nth degree



I hope that's  at Shelter, rather than at me?! 




Agent Sparrow said:


> It's really not that hard once you've done a couple.



So application forms are more inclusive because people with experience of similar employers are better able to answer them? I'd say that's a big old diversity FAIL right there ...


Edit: If anyone fancies applying for the Shelter job, do let us know how you get on by the way


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

temper_tantrum said:


> I hope that's  at Shelter, rather than at me?!



Yes!


----------



## innit (Mar 11, 2010)

temper_tantrum said:


> Exactly!
> I love the way it asks for 'approx' 300 words PER CRITERION. I count 28 criteria on that application. That's 8,400 words. How am I ever going to squeeze all my many and varied life experiences into that tiny space?!
> Not to mention the amount of time it'd take.



I'm guessing that's actually 300 words for each of the 5 competencies.


----------



## Biddlybee (Mar 11, 2010)

Some do ask you address them directly AS.


----------



## temper_tantrum (Mar 11, 2010)

@ cesare 



innit said:


> I'm guessing that's actually 300 words for each of the 5 competencies.



Hmm, you may be right, it's a bit hard to tell (for an inexperienced private sector moron like me).
Even so, that's 3 'knowledge & experience' bits of blah + 5 'competencies' bits of blah, each including a specific example. 8 x 300 words = 2,400 words.
Still quite a lot of guff to plough through, isn't it. Whereas my CV is a delightfully short 2 sides of A4, nicely bullet pointed, including only the finest hand-crafted information for your viewing pleasure.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Mar 11, 2010)

Me76

If I PM you a condensed version of my CV can you fast track me through the recruitment process to save me having to fill in any forms?


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

temper_tantrum said:


> Me too. I've given up applying for public and '3rd sector' jobs, for precisely this reason - the application process itself. Here, completely at random, is an example I just found on the Shelter website (it happens to be for some kind of writing job).



Yup, that's pretty much exactly the kind of nonsense I'm talking about.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> Someone gave me a book about interview skills years ago, and it was actually quite interesting in terms of highlighting cultural differences.
> 
> For example, Asian cultures place a greater emphasis on academic achievements as opposed to work experience and 'soft skills'.
> 
> ...



That's an interesting example. But I think that for roles above a certain level of requirement in terms of skill/qualification/experience, if you are going to be working in a culture different from the one you are used to, the onus should be on you learn how it differs from yours, and consider this when you are applying for the job. After all, your ability to appreciate these cultural differences is surely going to have a significant impact on how successfully you perform in the job if you are given it.

And from the employer's point of view - depending on the role you are recruiting for, you might be looking for someone who has demonstrated high academic achievement, or you might be looking for someone with experience/people skills. Why would you want to try and iron out these distinctions - surely the whole point of an application/interview process is to highlight these differences between applicants?


----------



## Agent Sparrow (Mar 11, 2010)

Maybe an application form provides more scope for being reflective on your experience? Rather than just writing out a standard CV and sending it out to all. Despite teucher's arrogant crap about CVs being better for high up positions, maybe it's the opposite? After all, if you're not reflective and adaptable enough to answer a few questions then maybe you shouldn't be shortlisted.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

I still don't see how expressing some opinions about shortlisting methods for job applicants equates with arrogance.


----------



## innit (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> That's an interesting example. But I think that for roles above a certain level of requirement in terms of skill/qualification/experience, if you are going to be working in a culture different from the one you are used to, the onus should be on you learn how it differs from yours, and consider this when you are applying for the job. After all, your ability to appreciate these cultural differences is surely going to have a significant impact on how successfully you perform in the job if you are given it.



that might be what you think, but it's not what the law says.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

innit said:


> that might be what you think, but it's not what the law says.



What does the law say?


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> What does the law say?



The law says summat along the lines of 'thou shalt not unlawfully discriminate, intentionally or unintentionally, directly or indirectly, and by the way the employer has vicarious liability for the acts of its employees unless the employer can demonstrate reasonable steps to ensure employees don't unlawfully discriminate kthxbai'.


----------



## temper_tantrum (Mar 11, 2010)

Seriously though, how would I go about answering some of those points in the example I cited? (not aimed at cesare btw!)


----------



## innit (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> What does the law say?



well basically what cesare said.  what you're describing would be indirect discrimination, as I understand it.

the EHRC doubtless have some booklets on the subject if you wanted to find out  the details.


----------



## Agent Sparrow (Mar 11, 2010)

temper_tantrum said:


> So application forms are more inclusive because people with experience of similar employers are better able to answer them? I'd say that's a big old diversity FAIL right there ...



No less so than people who have been trained in writing good CVs having the advantage. Tbh I think application forms are more able to show common sense and the ability to be reflective, and everyone is in the position where they have to write one to get the hang of it, it's not like some people have this knowledge planted in their brains Matrix stylie.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

cesare said:


> The law says summat along the lines of 'thou shalt not unlawfully discriminate, intentionally or unintentionally, directly or indirectly, and by the way the employer has vicarious liability for the acts of its employees unless the employer can demonstrate reasonable steps to ensure employees don't unlawfully discriminate kthxbai'.



How do you select from candidates without discriminating between them?

Surely the discrimination is only unacceptable if it is on the basis of factors that are irrelevant to the candidate's ability to perform the role.


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> How do you select from candidates without discriminating between them?
> 
> Surely the discrimination is only unacceptable if it is on the basis of factors that are irrelevant to the candidate's ability to perform the role.



*Unlawfully* discriminate. On the grounds that I set out earlier.


----------



## Agent Sparrow (Mar 11, 2010)

temper_tantrum said:


> Seriously though, how would I go about answering some of those points in the example I cited? (not aimed at cesare btw!)



Some people go through each point. As I said before, I don't, but I use the person spec to help frame how I write about it. It can't be a bad strategy as I've had a really high hit rate of interviews to applications in the last few months.

Edit: anyway, my strategy would be to think what you would normally write, and then see how that applies to the person spec. What stuff that seems important in the person spec have you not addressed? What examples do you have for those? And then write.


----------



## innit (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> How do you select from candidates without discriminating between them?
> 
> Surely the discrimination is only unacceptable if it is on the basis of factors that are irrelevant to the candidate's ability to perform the role.



if we're talking about cultural factors then we're talking about racial discrimination...


----------



## temper_tantrum (Mar 11, 2010)

Agent Sparrow said:


> Some people go through each point. As I said before, I don't, but I use the person spec to help frame how I write about it. It can't be a bad strategy as I've had a really high hit rate of interviews to applications in the last few months.



So when you get something like the following, what do you put? 
(geniune question, not argumentativeness)



> Valuing others
> • Sensitive to the needs of others and demonstrates interest in their views.
> • Diplomatic in difficult situations and inspires trust in others by treating all individuals in a fair and consistent manner.
> • Relates well to people of all backgrounds and cultures and adapts style accordingly.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

cesare said:


> On the grounds that I set out earlier.



Sorry - which ones?


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

innit said:


> if we're talking about cultural factors then we're talking about racial discrimination...



culture =/= race FYI


----------



## innit (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> culture =/= race FYI



you are such a tede, you would make a great HR in fact


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> Sorry - which ones?



http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=10412729&postcount=134


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

cesare said:


> http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=10412729&postcount=134



Ok thanks, so:



> applying a provision, criterion or practice which disadvantages people of a particular group (defined by sex, race, disability, sexual orientation, religious belief or age)



So not including "culture" then?


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> Ok thanks, so:
> 
> 
> 
> So not including "culture" then?



It depends what you mean by 'culture'.


----------



## Agent Sparrow (Mar 11, 2010)

temper_tantrum said:


> So when you get something like the following, what do you put?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'd write about working well within teams as a co-worker and with the public here. If I was to expand I might personally say that I am aware that tensions can form in teams due to the differing perspectives and professional roles of others, and one of my strengths is being able to hold individuals' differing opinions and if necessary negotiating between them, whilst also feeling able to express my own views when appropriate. In re: the last one I would say something about recognising diversity and being sensitive to differences, without assuming what those might be. 

If you want to apply for this job I can PM you the paragraphs I used for diversity issues and personal attributes in most of the personal statements I had to write recently. Obviously you're probably applying for a very different job and we won't share the same strengths, but it might give you an idea.


----------



## temper_tantrum (Mar 11, 2010)

Agent Sparrow said:


> I'd write about working well within teams as a co-worker and with the public here. If I was to expand I might personally say that I am aware that tensions can form in teams due to the differing perspectives and professional roles of others, and one of my strengths is being able to hold individuals' differing opinions and if necessary negotiating between them, whilst also feeling able to express my own views when appropriate. In re: the last one I would say something about recognising diversity and being sensitive to differences, without assuming what those might be.



Oh god, doesn't it just make you want to shoot yourself. I mean, thanks for going to the trouble of typing it, I do kinda see where you're going with the response, but an employer who thinks that this kind of thing is the way to get good staff ... 




> If you want to apply for this job I can PM you the paragraphs I used for diversity issues and personal attributes in most of the personal statements I had to write recently. Obviously you're probably applying for a very different job and we won't share the same strengths, but it might give you an idea.



Jeez, no - I'm not jobhunting atm and, like I said, I don't want to work for organisations which use this kind of recruitment approach anyway. I was just using it as an example of the kind of thing I used to contemplate with dread when I WAS a desparate jobhunter. (thanks for the offer though  )
I've had experience of being the person doing the recruiting, as well, by the way. We got absolutely the right person using a CV-based approach and (as far as I'm aware) managed not to discriminate against anyone in the process.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

Agent Sparrow said:


> I'd write about working well within teams as a co-worker and with the public here. If I was to expand I might personally say that I am aware that tensions can form in teams due to the differing perspectives and professional roles of others, and one of my strengths is being able to hold individuals' differing opinions and if necessary negotiating between them, whilst also feeling able to express my own views when appropriate. In re: the last one I would say something about recognising diversity and being sensitive to differences, without assuming what those might be.



You see, to me this is just empty wiffle-waffle - this is not a criticism of you, just the kind of thing that those kind of questions generates.

For example, 


> I am aware that tensions can form in teams due to the differing perspectives and professional roles of others


I'd be inclined to take it as read that anyone with more than two brain cells can realise this. What does a candidate making this statement tell me about their actual ability to do a job (or indeed to work in a team)?

Next to nothing as far as I can see.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

cesare said:


> It depends what you mean by 'culture'.



I'm happy with this definition from the internets:



> The set of shared attitudes, values, goals, and practices that characterizes an institution, organization or group


----------



## Agent Sparrow (Mar 11, 2010)

temper_tantrum said:


> Oh god, doesn't it just make you want to shoot yourself. I mean, thanks for going to the trouble of typing it, I do kinda see where you're going with the response, but an employer who thinks that this kind of thing is the way to get good staff ...



Well, it's not a way of getting _bad_ staff either. Arguably as I said before, it does suggest an ability to be reflective and to be able to work out what is required of you (and fulfil that requirement) more than a CV.

The ones I've been doing recently are a piece of piss. It was the one I needed to do to get onto my training course that was the real bugger. That was more like a carefully considered essay without references in a tight word count.  Mind you, what are they going to do when over 700 applicants for 25 places is common?


----------



## innit (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> I'm happy with this definition from the internets:



semantic bleating


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> I'm happy with this definition from the internets:



And how about if those 'shared attitudes' etc involve, for example, selecting for a young energetic team?


----------



## temper_tantrum (Mar 11, 2010)

Maybe it's just my area of work, but I really don't think that an application form like the one I quoted from Shelter tells you more about me than my CV. If you're recruiting someone with experience, you want to know what that experience is, not plough through pages of guff about how they appreciate diversity.
In fact, I find it a bit offensive that I'm somehow suspected of being racist/sexist/etc and therefore have to jump through hoops to prove myself. Surely in this day and age it should be expected of people that they conform to diversity legislation, team working, etc etc, and if they prove not to, there is a perfectly good disciplinary system in place in the workplace to deal with that.



Agent Sparrow said:


> Mind you, what are they going to do when over 700 applicants for 25 places is common?



We had over 1,000 applications for our job - and one job! It was a nightmare tbh, but then with that number of applicants there's never going to be an easy answer. All you can do is:
1) Chuck out anything with spelling mistakes;
2) Chuck out anything that doesn't meet the basic criteria on the job ad;
3) Spend hours ploughing through the rest.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

cesare said:


> And how about if those 'shared attitudes' etc involve, for example, selecting for a young energetic team?



How about what?

Are we talking about the candidate or employer?


----------



## Agent Sparrow (Mar 11, 2010)

temper_tantrum said:


> We had over 1,000 applications for our job - and one job! It was a nightmare tbh, but then with that number of applicants there's never going to be an easy answer. All you can do is:
> 1) Chuck out anything with spelling mistakes;
> 2) Chuck out anything that doesn't meet the basic criteria on the job ad;
> 3) Spend hours ploughing through the rest.



And the scary thing is that with either CVs or application forms, when there are that many applicants, at some point the decisions are going to have to get personal and arbitrary. There's always luck involved with getting such competitive positions.


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> How about what?
> 
> Are we talking about the candidate or employer?



If the employer has a culture of a young energetic team and applies selection criteria to match that culture.


----------



## Agent Sparrow (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> You see, to me this is just empty wiffle-waffle - this is not a criticism of you, just the kind of thing that those kind of questions generates.


Tbf that's why my strategy is to not answer every little point. I focus on the ones where there is specific experience to talk about or the ones where I really feel I have a personal strength in the area.

However,


> I'd be inclined to take it as read that anyone with more than two brain cells can realise this. What does a candidate making this statement tell me about their actual ability to do a job (or indeed to work in a team)?
> 
> Next to nothing as far as I can see.


The thing is that there are a few people who don't realise it, and even if you're going to get stock responses you can weed out the ones who can't even get that. And tbh, I likewise would assume that people with those two brain cells could be able to work out an appropriate response.

As I've said, sometimes it also shows that you have some ability to be reflective, more than a CV could do.


----------



## temper_tantrum (Mar 11, 2010)

Agent Sparrow said:


> And the scary thing is that with either CVs or application forms, when there are that many applicants, at some point the decisions are going to have to get personal and arbitrary. There's always luck involved with getting such competitive positions.



Yeah, and when decisions become arbitrary I can see the need to be able to account for them because arbitraryness does leave the door open for discrimination, even if it's unwitting.
I'm just not convinced that using application forms is a better way of protecting against that than CVs. With either mechanism, you need to be able to account for decisions about who was rejected.

Maybe I've just had some particularly bad experiences of application forms ... 
I have to say, that Shelter one was the 'norm' in my experience, I didn't go and dig out a really bad one on purpose ...


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

cesare said:


> If the employer has a culture of a young energetic team and applies selection criteria to match that culture.



Then that would fall foul of the stipulation that there should be no discrimination based on "age".

If the employer has a culture of "people with good interpersonal skills" and rejects an application from someone whose CV concentrates on their academic achievements and qualifications, rather than talking about their interpersonal skills, because they were educated in a culture that places lesser value on interpersonal skills than the employer does... would that fall foul of the law?


----------



## Agent Sparrow (Mar 11, 2010)

To be completely honest, I feel more of a twat going on about my interpersonal skills on a CV than an application form.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

Agent Sparrow said:


> The thing is that there are a few people who don't realise it, and even if you're going to get stock responses you can weed out the ones who can't even get that. And tbh, I likewise would assume that people with those two brain cells could be able to work out an appropriate response.



If you were looking at an application form, and discovered that someone hadn't written "I am aware that tensions can form in teams due to the differing perspectives and professional roles of others" or similar - what would you guess the most likely reason would be?

(a) It has actually never occurred to them that there might be tensions between people asked to work together
(b) It didn't occur to them that it would actually be necessary to write down such an obvious thing in a job application for a role to be carried out by an intelligent adult.

Because I would go for a 95% probability that it would be (b) and therefore I could draw no reliable conclusions whatsoever about their ability to work in a team (which is presumably what asking the question is supposed to achieve).


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> Then that would fall foul of the stipulation that there should be no discrimination based on "age".
> 
> If the employer has a culture of "people with good interpersonal skills" and rejects an application from someone whose CV concentrates on their academic achievements and qualifications, rather than talking about their interpersonal skills, because they were educated in a culture that places lesser value on interpersonal skills than the employer does... would that fall foul of the law?



Yes it would. But it need not be done directly, it could be done unwittingly - for example by reference to qualifications (type, and whether necessary to do the job).

In your second example, it would depend on whether the selection criteria had the indirect effect of screening out a disproportionately large amount of applicants from an Asian background (I take it you're using Ann's example). That might well be the case, but if the employer could objectively justify those criteria it would be OK. But why take the risk of having to go through an objective justification process, when you can just make it clear what the criteria are and why, by way of a structured a/f?


----------



## Agent Sparrow (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> If you were looking at an application form, and discovered that someone hadn't written "I am aware that tensions can form in teams due to the differing perspectives and professional roles of others" or similar - what would you guess the most likely reason would be?
> 
> (a) It has actually never occurred to them that there might be tensions between people asked to work together
> (b) It didn't occur to them that it would actually be necessary to write down such an obvious thing in a job application for a role to be carried out by an intelligent adult.
> ...


It doesn't matter if they write that, the point is that they're capable of thinking of something appropriate to write. It's not exactly impossible for someone who has "two brain cells to rub together". 

And as I said, my strategy has always been to not answer all the little things that would risk leading to stock responses.

And basically what you're saying is that a CV approach relies more heavily on assumptions...


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

cesare said:


> Yes it would. But it need not be done directly, it could be done unwittingly - for example by reference to qualifications (type, and whether necessary to do the job).
> 
> In your second example, it would depend on whether the selection criteria had the indirect effect of screening out a disproportionately large amount of applicants from an Asian background (I take it you're using Ann's example). That might well be the case, but if the employer could objectively justify those criteria it would be OK. But why take the risk of having to go through an objective justification process, when you can just make it clear what the criteria are and why, by way of a structured a/f?



So just make clear what the criteria are, and why, in the job description. That's what a job description is for, isn't it? I don't see that a structured a/f is in any way necessary to achieve this.


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> So just make clear what the criteria are, and why, in the job description. That's what a job description is for, isn't it? I don't see that a structured a/f is in any way necessary to achieve this.



Because people present things in different ways, that can influence even if that effect is subconscious and nothing to do with the job.

Plus, there's other information that an employer needs that won't necessarily be added to a personal CV unless specifically requested. 

So instead of writing out all the requirements and in what order - it's easier and quicker to say 'please fill in this form'.

I can see why serial litigation is making people loads of money at the moment


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

cesare said:


> Because people present things in different ways, that can influence even if that effect is subconscious and nothing to do with the job.



Next time I go to a job interview and don't get the job, I'm going to sue them for discriminating against me on the basis of things I did that were subconscious and nothing to do with the job. And they won't be able to deny it.

The better have some good lawyers


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> Next time I go to a job interview and don't get the job, I'm going to sue them for discriminating against me on the basis of things I did that were subconscious and nothing to do with the job. And they won't be able to deny it.
> 
> The better have some good lawyers



That you did


----------



## Ted Striker (Mar 11, 2010)

Agent Sparrow said:


> It can't be a bad strategy as I've had a really high hit rate of interviews to applications in the last few months.



How many interviews have you had? As a candidate?!

So basically they're good for people who an aptitude or fondness for filling in forms, but not much for finding the right candidate 

(joking  )


----------



## existentialist (Mar 11, 2010)

Me76 said:


> Please explain the mentality?  When I am looking for work I try my best to follow instructions given.  I see it as the first test...



The mentality is almost certainly a variation on the "it doesn't apply to me" canard. In this case, probably, "ah well, if everyone else doesn't send in a CV and I do, they will only have mine to read, and it will make my application stand out all the more".

I'd be tempted to bin all such applications on the basis that someone incapable of obeying simple, clear instructions has already told you rather a lot about how useful an employee they are going to be...


----------



## Agent Sparrow (Mar 11, 2010)

Ted Striker said:


> How many interviews have you had? As a candidate?!
> 
> So basically they're good for people who an aptitude or fondness for filling in forms, but not much for finding the right candidate
> 
> (joking  )


Ha ha. 

I got the first job I was interviewed for (part time) and then have just managed to get another part time job just over a month later, which is not easy when you're in the disadvantaged position of applying for full time posts and knowing you have to shine so much more than everyone else in order for them to accept employing you on reduced hours.  It's nice it's over for now.


----------



## subversplat (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> There is no reason why you shouldn't put all the same experience and attitudes into a CV as an application form.


Last application I did I just copied and pasted my CV into roughly the right boxes. It got me an interview (which I failed due to getting ridiculously drunk the night before)


----------



## innit (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> Next time I go to a job interview and don't get the job, I'm going to sue them for discriminating against me on the basis of things I did that were subconscious and nothing to do with the job. And they won't be able to deny it.
> 
> The better have some good lawyers



now you're just confused


----------



## existentialist (Mar 11, 2010)

kabbes said:


> There's no reason why you can't produce a high quality CV that can answer every initial hurdle that should reasonably be placed in front of you for shortlisting purposes.  "Same old CV" already implies that this isn't the case.
> 
> And your "investment of time" is all very well for one form.  But multiply that by a dozen firms and you start to get a different story.  It's just going to end up being the same old answers going on every form -- it's not going to end up being tailored any more than a CV is.



I completely agree with this: I think the general trend towards a blanket policy of making people fill in forms is a bad one, for all the reasons you give. I also think, especially in jobs where presentation and articulacy are important skills, that a CV enables one to demonstrate both a little more clearly than on a fill-in-the-boxes application form. In these keyboard days, too, having to hand-complete a form is a chore most of us aren't used to.

When I went for the post I am now in, there were four posts available. It was necessary to apply for each one individually, and if I had done it - as most people did - by hand, it would have been a huge task. As it is, I scanned the form, and typed the responses into the spaces - that way, I could just change each one as necessary, but not quadruplicate my effort. Given that, apart from the questions such as those cesare points out, everything that the form asked for and more besides was on the CV, it did feel rather futile to be filling in the form. But I suppose they want all the information in a standard format, and I guess there are all kinds of questions of subjective bias, too...

But, if them's the rules, it does seem a little dopey on the part of respondents not to read them properly and then do exactly what they say not to do.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

innit said:


> now you're just confused



About what?


----------



## existentialist (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> Yeah, that's exactly the kind of stupid list, that if I knew someone was going to try and score me against on the basis of my answers to standard questions on a form, I really wouldn't want to work for them.


I think it depends on how they do that scoring process, and also how accurate (as opposed to some kind of idealised abstract) the person specification is.

Assuming it really is a comprehensive list of the attributes required, and presuming that people are scoring it in a sensible and pragmatic way, I think a person spec like that is a really useful - and fair - way of sifting high numbers of applications.

It would be important to recognise that a person spec isn't all that needs selecting for in the job - it may well be that the post requires a set of more indefinable personal skills which you wouldn't necessarily identify until you were interviewing, in which case it makes sense for that to weight the scoring in favour of a broader interpretation of the person spec, so as not to miss people who perform strongly at interview but may not appear to fit all the criteria.

As ever, it's that measuring-what's-easiest-to-measure thing - we have to be aware of the limitations of the systems we're using to make our choices, and not fall into the trap of seeing the system as the whole thing.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 11, 2010)

scifisam said:


> I have to say, that would make me think that the applicant was either an idiot who can't follow simple instructions or *an arrogant bastard who will do things completely his own way*, thinking that he knows best; unpleasant to work with and more likely to make serious mistakes.



There are all kinds of jobs where the personality traits that might be perceived as "arrogant bastard who will do things completely his own way" are very much a positive benefit to the post. Leaders of things, for example.

My suspicion is that sending in a CV when an application form would be a very interesting test of the flexibility of the organisation and the quality of its HR/selection process. The downside is that, if the company fails the test, you don't get the job. I suppose it comes down to that want/need thing again.


----------



## subversplat (Mar 11, 2010)

existentialist said:


> There are all kinds of jobs where the personality traits that might be perceived as "arrogant bastard who will do things completely his own way" are very much a positive benefit to the post. Leaders of things, for example.
> 
> My suspicion is that sending in a CV when an application form would be a very interesting test of the flexibility of the organisation and the quality of its HR/selection process. The downside is that, if the company fails the test, you don't get the job. I suppose it comes down to that want/need thing again.


Leaders of things still need to be recruited and subordinate, unless they're being interviewed for a CEO position (which I don't think really happens). Arrogance is probably only a positive trait in films, pop music and photo shoots, where they're trying to sell an image.


----------



## Agent Sparrow (Mar 11, 2010)

existentialist said:


> There are all kinds of jobs where the personality traits that might be perceived as "arrogant bastard who will do things completely his own way" are very much a positive benefit to the post. Leaders of things, for example.



Confidence is a good trait in in a leader. Self assurance is too. I'm not sure arrogance is.


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

existentialist said:


> I think it depends on how they do that scoring process, and also how accurate (as opposed to some kind of idealised abstract) the person specification is.
> 
> Assuming it really is a comprehensive list of the attributes required, and presuming that people are scoring it in a sensible and pragmatic way, I think a person spec like that is a really useful - and fair - way of sifting high numbers of applications.
> 
> ...



Normally you'd have a job spec _and_ a person spec. The job spec sets out what the job consists of, and what the postholder should be able to do. The person spec sets out the traits/personal skills and any other requirements such as (justifiable) qualifications and other (justifiable) needs such as, e.g. a full driving licence.

In some organisations, they've done the work to set up a competency framework which sets out job & personal competences which can be matched to various roles. This is what temper tantrum was objecting to - when those job/person competences get carried across into a lengthy a/f. There's nothing inherently wrong with that, if it shortens part of the selection process and that candidates know that (for example) if they fill in this lengthy questionnaire - it will cut out the first round of interviews. Unfortunately though, often it just adds another layer which is time consuming for both the applicant and recruiter. It would be far more sensible to supply the competences separately as part of preparation for first round interviews, or cut out first round interviews altogether.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 11, 2010)

Agent Sparrow said:


> Confidence is a good trait in in a leader. Self assurance is too. I'm not sure arrogance is.


Hence "might be perceived". It may well be, from the perspective of some lowly HR clerk, that all these bastards sending in speculative CV's ARE arrogant, when all they really are is confident that their CV will do a decent job of selling them.

As I've read through this thread, though, I've found myself being persuaded more and more by the pro-application form argument. I'd certainly forgotten about the anti-discrimination stuff, which I don't think can really be done any way other than via form-filling.

I suppose what I tend to find most irritating (apart from having to submit four near-identical forms!) is when an application form is clearly badly designed, or not properly appropriate to the post you're going for. But a really good application form (especially if they let you fill it in online!) could be both pleasant to complete, and easy to use by the recruiters.


----------



## Agent Sparrow (Mar 11, 2010)

existentialist said:


> But a really good application form (especially if they let you fill it in online!) could be both pleasant to complete, and easy to use by the recruiters.



These days if you're applying for NHS jobs on the nhs.jobs site it copies the basic details of your application and you just have to write a specific personal statement. Which I will admit makes things much easier than when you had to do it all by hand. On the other hand, being someone who has never had a choice about application forms, I am a little surprised at the hatred towards them on this thread, the suggestion that it would be enough to stop people applying for jobs, and that some people would just send their CV in anyway.

But tbh, I don't this it is confidence that would make people send in a CV when the job specifically says you shouldn't. It comes across more as bloody mindedness, arrogance, or not having read the application!


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

existentialist said:


> Hence "might be perceived". It may well be, from the perspective of some lowly HR clerk, that all these bastards sending in speculative CV's ARE arrogant, when all they really are is confident that their CV will do a decent job of selling them.
> 
> As I've read through this thread, though, I've found myself being persuaded more and more by the pro-application form argument. I'd certainly forgotten about the anti-discrimination stuff, which I don't think can really be done any way other than via form-filling.
> 
> I suppose what I tend to find most irritating (apart from having to submit four near-identical forms!) is when an application form is clearly badly designed, or not properly appropriate to the post you're going for. But a really good application form (especially if they let you fill it in online!) could be both pleasant to complete, and easy to use by the recruiters.



There are some dire a/fs out there, really appalling. I suspect that employers sometimes go for what seems to be a quick/cheap option (e.g. loading up a PDF for applicants to download and fill in by hand and then scan and email/send by post ... argh) rather than investing in something that's easy to do on-line (or by hard copy) with explanations of what they're asking for, and why. Also, I suspect that employers don't always understand why advertising and screening is important. It's another version of 'pc gawn mad' 'elf and safety gawn mad' ... without actually getting to grips with what's important v what's myth/hype.


----------



## Me76 (Mar 11, 2010)

Wow!  I have got home from a day out of the office and am shocked by the fact this has got to 9 pages.  Very interesting reading though.  I have never applied for a job that didn't need an application form and really didn't realise that it wasn't the norm.  As I have always worked in the public/third/charity sector I realise now that this must be why. 

As a job seeker, application forms can some times be a bit of a pain from a formatting point of view but cut and paste is your friend and the personal statement bit just needs to be adjusted slightly to fit the person spec you are applying for.  

There have been a couple of periods in the last few years where I have been jobless and applying for 10-20 jobs a week, all with application forms.  For the ones that didn't catch my fancy so much but would pay the bills, C&P the relevant bits, a personal statement that has generic paragraphs that cover all the obvious stuff (communication, IT, team working, initiative etc) and off you go.   For the ones that I actually felt I would enjoy, a bit more time would be spent tailoring the paragraphs to the actual person and job spec. 

From an employers point of view, and I have worked in jobs where I am the admin person collating the forms for short listing, where I am the HR person filing and responding to applications and a manager who is short listing (or a combination of the three) having all applications in the same format just makes life easier!  
It also ensures that all application are short listed on the same criteria and not on the names of the applicants, the ages of the applicants, the fact that this one is written in a weird font or this one is on coloured paper.  

For this particular position I am talking about:  
The front page of the application which has all the personal information is removed and not seen by anyone short listing.  This helps to stop discrimination on a foreign sounding name basis, by age, by where some one lives, by the type of referees given, by an unprofessional e-mail address etc. 

The job history section is given without dates just length of service, again this helps stop discrimination by age. 

The form doesn't ask any stupid questions but just asks you to specify how you meet the job and person specification in no more than two sides of A4.  This means that the people short listing can very easily go through the short listing grid they are given and tick met or not met.  Applications are then rejected if they do not meet all the essential criteria.  

Depending on how many applications are left, the short listers results are compared and if all agree, people invited to interview.  If there are any wide variances or too many people to interview, the short listing panel then meet to discuss further.  

It is of course still possible to discriminate if you really want to try (along the cultural approaches lines that I can't remember who mentioned) but it is harder.      

As I haven't been in the office today, tomorrow I will be seeing how many actual applications we have got in.  If this is a large number (we still have a week before closing) I will stop replying to people who have sent their CV - they will have failed the first part of the application process, following instructions - if not, I will be setting up an auto reply (I can't at the mo as I don't have the access rights to the in box) to give people a bit of a chance. 





Hocus Eye. said:


> Me76
> 
> If I PM you a condensed version of my CV can you fast track me through the recruitment process to save me having to fill in any forms?



no


----------



## bugmen (Mar 11, 2010)

Me76 said:


> Why??
> 
> I have put an advert out that very clearly states we do not accept CVs and gives the website of where to download application forms.  Yet I have received over 35 e-mails in a day with people sending their CVs!
> 
> ...



Mainly because Application forms in all their amazing variety's fail to be standardised which mean's that you have to be bothered to fill in all these terrible ones. When someone is of a time constraint, its much quicker to bash out the CV's.


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

Prepare to be spurned by kabbes and teuchter from their heady heights.


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

bugmen said:


> Mainly because Application forms in all their amazing variety's fail to be standardised which mean's that you have to be bothered to fill in all these terrible ones. When someone is of a time constraint, its much quicker to bash out the CV's.



You'll be screened out on the basis of your apostrophe deployment but will never know why.


----------



## Me76 (Mar 11, 2010)

cesare said:


> Prepare to be spurned by kabbes and teuchter from their heady heights.



Is it heady heights or a different industry with different conventions and practices?


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

cesare said:


> You'll be screened out on the basis of your apostrophe deployment but will never know why.


That's cultural discrimination that is.


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

Me76 said:


> Is it heady heights or a different industry with different conventions and practices?



Being above conventions and practices is a transferable skill across most industries.


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> That's cultural discrimination that is.



It's unlikely to be unlawful discrimination, but there's a couple of possibilities there.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

cesare said:


> Prepare to be spurned by kabbes and teuchter from their heady heights.


Kabbes gets upset if he is mentioned in the same sentence as me, you know.


----------



## cesare (Mar 11, 2010)

teuchter said:


> Kabbes gets upset if he is mentioned in the same sentence as me, you know.



You should play up that 'k' sound somewhere. Mebbe you could be K6


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

Me76 said:


> Is it heady heights or a different industry with different conventions and practices?


The description of the process you give does make sense to me actually. It's not so much standardised forms per se that offend me, it's the one with the stupid questions where people just copy and paste "generic" responses as you put it.

You mention avoiding discriminating against people who send in CVs with funny fonts and the like. The thing is that in my line of work the way someone presents their CV is highly relevant to the job. If they can't achieve a minimum standard of legitability and graphical competence in their CV it is doubtful they are right for the job. This may be a partial reason for my perspective on this.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 11, 2010)

cesare said:


> You should play up that 'k' sound somewhere. Mebbe you could be K6


There is no 'k' sound in teuchter


----------



## cesare (Mar 12, 2010)

teuchter said:


> The description of the process you give does make sense to me actually. It's not so much standardised forms per se that offend me, it's the one with the stupid questions where people just copy and paste "generic" responses as you put it.
> 
> You mention avoiding discriminating against people who send in CVs with funny fonts and the like. The thing is that in my line of work the way someone presents their CV is highly relevant to the job. If they can't achieve a minimum standard of *legitability* and graphical competence in their CV it is doubtful they are right for the job. This may be a partial reason for my perspective on this.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 12, 2010)

I have come to the conclusion that the ideal situation may be to have an online form that purely allows for CV information to be copied and pasted into boxes in an order that is helpful to the employer's HR and their process.  If you have a high quality CV already, the aim should be for this to be able to be done in no more than 5-10 minutes.  (Obviously, if your CV has big holes in it then you will have to take longer, but then that's your fault for not writing a decent CV.)  A few extra factual questions, such as criminal records, are acceptable too.

I still think all of these "Write 300 words to show that you are a good team player, who knows how to deal with conflict" questions should be left firmly for the structured interview, however.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 12, 2010)

cesare said:


>



Congratulations. You spotted my deliberate mistake. You get the job.


----------



## Kanda (Mar 12, 2010)

kabbes said:


> I have come to the conclusion that the ideal situation may be to have an online form that purely allows for CV information to be copied and pasted into boxes in an order that is helpful to the employer's HR and their process.  If you have a high quality CV already, the aim should be for this to be able to be done in no more than 5-10 minutes.  (Obviously, if your CV has big holes in it then you will have to take longer, but then that's your fault for not writing a decent CV.)  A few extra factual questions, such as criminal records, are acceptable too.
> 
> I still think all of these "Write 300 words to show that you are a good team player, who knows how to deal with conflict" questions should be left firmly for the structured interview, however.



Discriminating against people that don't have internet access.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 12, 2010)

Kanda said:


> Discriminating against people that don't have internet access.


Don't be silly.  There are no such people.


----------



## cesare (Mar 12, 2010)

teuchter said:


> Congratulations. You spotted my deliberate mistake. You get the job.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Mar 12, 2010)

It's years since I've had to deal with job applications, but the last one I did had so many applicants we even binned the ones that hadn't followed the instruction to fill the form in in black ink.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 12, 2010)

I have just sent an email rejecting a job offer and now I feel like a cunt 

Turning people down is never a nice thing to do, particularly after they have put their time in.


----------



## EastEnder (Mar 12, 2010)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> It's years since I've had to deal with job applications, but the last one I did had so many applicants we even binned the ones that hadn't followed the instruction to fill the form in in black ink.


Sounds familiar..... I had to do the recruiting for a role at my last place - not my responsibility, but tiny firm with no HR, etc - the boss wouldn't stump up for recruitment agency fees, so we did it the hard way, advertised the role ourselves, got about 3 millions CVs for 1 technical developer position...

I had to invent ever more creative ways of binning CVs - funny typeface, cheap feeling paper, excessive indentation, insufficient indentation, Welsh sounding surname, unforgivable use of hamburger munching "Résumé" in lieu of "Curriculum Vitae", mind bogglingly unforgivable use of "Resume" in lieu of "Résumé" (seriously, someone did that...), the list went on...

Some people made life very easy - "outside interests - writes for parish newsletter, campanology" - hello Mr Bin, say Hi to Mr CV....

I can see genuine merit in making applicants fill in a standardised application form - it levels the playing field with regard to crappy CVs. Obviously it's totally unacceptable and completely against the rules that I'd discount an applicant based on their bell ringing tendencies, but back in what's known as "The Real World", such prejudice is rife. An application form can direct people into providing only the relevant information, thus avoiding discrimination at the hands of belligerent gits like me.


----------



## Wookey (Mar 12, 2010)

kabbes said:


> If a company can afford to ignore potentially good candidates just because they insist on _this_ rather than _that_ application process then they are obviously more rich in human resource capital than any other firm I've ever seen.
> 
> Really, what's the big deal about the application form?  Are you *really* going to ignore your perfect candidate just because they thought that they'd obey the spirit rather than the letter of the advert?
> 
> ...



Absolutely right! The firm in question might have one post to fill, but the person applying might be on their 200th application - and I've seen some ridiculously long and involved forms for jobs that really aren't as good as some CVs.

Plus many places don't have the courtesy to reply to you even if you do fill in their online form - another sign, as you say, that they are stretched very thin in HR and won't be a great firm to work for.


----------



## cesare (Mar 12, 2010)

Wookey said:


> Absolutely right! The firm in question might have one post to fill, but the person applying might be on their 200th application - and I've seen some ridiculously long and involved forms for jobs that really aren't as good as some CVs.
> 
> Plus many places don't have the courtesy to reply to you even if you do fill in their online form - another sign, as you say, that they are stretched very thin in HR and won't be a great firm to work for.



All of that works in a labour market where you have sought after skills in short supply, but high demand.

But as general advice to most of the working population - not helpful.


----------



## subversplat (Mar 12, 2010)

Kanda said:


> Discriminating against people that don't have internet access.



"cut" and "paste" aren't the sole preserve of the internet, you know.

I'd probably love to receive an application form with bits of CV glued on. Preferably with some added glitter


----------

