|..tried to smile but this was a post close to my heart hence..,lol|
I don tire for some companies really.This is with regard to the shortlisting process.
This is my 2-cents on shortlisting;
If your short listing process involves an aptitude test, then ALL graduands who make the effort of filling in your 100+page
(why some companies have such a darn tiring form, I do not understand. Or perhaps its part of the 'slashing down applicants' for the lazy bones who will not read to the end of the form!!)
application form should at least be given a chance to take part in it.
Let the SHORT LIST come from the results of the aptitude.
This is because when you (and I) leave the university, a bigger majority of job seekers more or less have a similar resume..personal demographics are similar(we are likely to be in the same age group, most likely countrymen), education background is more or less the same- a high school and degree certificate with a likely 2.1+GPA and for some a professional qualification such as ICDL
. Work background most likely involves a third year internship and a probable entrepreneurial stint behind the scenes. Other skill sets may vary but if you are SERIOUSLY looking for employment availability on the resume always reads 'IMMEDIATELY'.
Therefore, DEAR HR's(
ok, a subsection of HRs
), I do not understand the criterion you use to short list candidates with similar backgrounds for graduate program positions. Do come out and defend your cause, unless offcourse you do not have an aptitude as part of the recruitment process in which case im ok with you slashing the applicants list in half for reasons as trivial as missing an apostrophe in their own name..,and the short list has to be, well, a SHORT list.
Anybody share these sentiments??