Dear all,
While training job aspirants for the job interview, it is told to them that if HR or any other senior authority asks a question, "why do you want to leave your current company?" then they should not tell the real answer. It is taught to them that they should pretend that they are ok in their job, however, they are quitting to pursue better opportunity and to handle the challenges of the higher order. They are told that this type of reply shows the candidate's positive thinking.
It is a common knowledge that many times people quit their job out of sheer frustration. They could be frustrated because of overwork, bullying by the seniors, unreasonable targets, politicking at the workplace, marginalisation because of caste, creed, religion etc. groupism, underpayment, unjustified work their stature and so on. However, HR prefers that the real reason be kept under the wraps.
Against this backdrop, the question arises is that why HR prefers false replies than the truth? Is telling lies part of positive thinking? Why telling truth is considered as negative thinking?
Can HR/Training professionals put forth their views?
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
7736While training job aspirants for the job interview, it is told to them that if HR or any other senior authority asks a question, "why do you want to leave your current company?" then they should not tell the real answer. It is taught to them that they should pretend that they are ok in their job, however, they are quitting to pursue better opportunity and to handle the challenges of the higher order. They are told that this type of reply shows the candidate's positive thinking.
It is a common knowledge that many times people quit their job out of sheer frustration. They could be frustrated because of overwork, bullying by the seniors, unreasonable targets, politicking at the workplace, marginalisation because of caste, creed, religion etc. groupism, underpayment, unjustified work their stature and so on. However, HR prefers that the real reason be kept under the wraps.
Against this backdrop, the question arises is that why HR prefers false replies than the truth? Is telling lies part of positive thinking? Why telling truth is considered as negative thinking?
Can HR/Training professionals put forth their views?
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Mr.Dinesh Divekar,
Yes it is true.
Candidates who had issues with their past employer, they themselves are not willing to share the same with prospective employer for reasons
1) Probability of getting hired by the new employer will become remote
2) To avoid negative image.
On the other hand even if they share the real reason with the HR:
1) They are viewed as trouble creators even if they are technically sound and good at work.
2) HR will not consider their application since their might be presence of similar work pattern in their Organization (like extended work hour/unrealistic work targets).
3) They are considered as not a good team player.
4) HR foresee that they may create issues with their Organization also.
Above all the primary reason is the new HR doesn't have time to investigate whether the issues shared by the candidate are genuine - real problem lies with the candidate or it related to colleagues/Supervisors of his past employer.
From India, Madras
Yes it is true.
Candidates who had issues with their past employer, they themselves are not willing to share the same with prospective employer for reasons
1) Probability of getting hired by the new employer will become remote
2) To avoid negative image.
On the other hand even if they share the real reason with the HR:
1) They are viewed as trouble creators even if they are technically sound and good at work.
2) HR will not consider their application since their might be presence of similar work pattern in their Organization (like extended work hour/unrealistic work targets).
3) They are considered as not a good team player.
4) HR foresee that they may create issues with their Organization also.
Above all the primary reason is the new HR doesn't have time to investigate whether the issues shared by the candidate are genuine - real problem lies with the candidate or it related to colleagues/Supervisors of his past employer.
From India, Madras
Dear Mr V.M. Lakshminarayanan,
You have given your reply to my post but failed to give replies to my questions. Why HR prefers to live in the world of pretentions? Why lies are accepted than the truth? Is this a weakness on the part of HR or is it that HR is yet to understand the meaning of the concept of "positive thinking"?
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
You have given your reply to my post but failed to give replies to my questions. Why HR prefers to live in the world of pretentions? Why lies are accepted than the truth? Is this a weakness on the part of HR or is it that HR is yet to understand the meaning of the concept of "positive thinking"?
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Dear Mr.Dinesh Divekar,
Certainly it is not weakness. Decisions of HR Manager are situation based and will vary from time to time, case to case, Organization to Organization. I personally feel that we cannot not confine all HR under one umbrella as the thought process of individuals will differ.
From India, Madras
Certainly it is not weakness. Decisions of HR Manager are situation based and will vary from time to time, case to case, Organization to Organization. I personally feel that we cannot not confine all HR under one umbrella as the thought process of individuals will differ.
From India, Madras
Dear Colleagues,
The poster of this question should have clarified the nature and scope of this poser,
Does he mean by 'Pretensions' only during the tenure of his service in a company or only at the time of citing reasons for quitting the job?
Does he mean all HR persons are pretentious as a matter of habit in their approach to their job responsibilities?
I am raising counter question as to who does not act pretentious on occasions for purely selfish gains? Why only HR is singled out?
While so called top leaders in the field of Religion ,Science and technology , Judiciary, Education, Politics and in every walk of life are found deeply immersed in pretensions every now and then, to single out the HR profession is unjustified.
All those indulge in pretensions and gain advantages at the cost of others deserve to be condemned including HR.
Regards,
Vinayak Nagarkar
HR-Consultant
From India, Mumbai
The poster of this question should have clarified the nature and scope of this poser,
Does he mean by 'Pretensions' only during the tenure of his service in a company or only at the time of citing reasons for quitting the job?
Does he mean all HR persons are pretentious as a matter of habit in their approach to their job responsibilities?
I am raising counter question as to who does not act pretentious on occasions for purely selfish gains? Why only HR is singled out?
While so called top leaders in the field of Religion ,Science and technology , Judiciary, Education, Politics and in every walk of life are found deeply immersed in pretensions every now and then, to single out the HR profession is unjustified.
All those indulge in pretensions and gain advantages at the cost of others deserve to be condemned including HR.
Regards,
Vinayak Nagarkar
HR-Consultant
From India, Mumbai
Dear Mr Vinayak Nagarkar,
My post is self-explanatory hence I do not deem it fit to give any further explanation. My point is limited to the replies by the interviewees during the job interviews. They are told not to disclose the real reasons for quitting the job as HR might consider it as negative thinking of the job candidate!
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
My post is self-explanatory hence I do not deem it fit to give any further explanation. My point is limited to the replies by the interviewees during the job interviews. They are told not to disclose the real reasons for quitting the job as HR might consider it as negative thinking of the job candidate!
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Let me start with the caveat that I am not holding a brief for HR, or for that matter, any other profession. Having made that clear, I find the title of the debate itself is rather pretentious, if not facetious. The narrative below proceeds on the following fundamental assumptions:
1. The HR is guilty of deliberately misguiding the job aspirants to lie to get a job.
2. The interviewer is gullible enough to be led up the garden path.
3. The interviewee is an unwary victim who deserves our sympathy.
Let me now give my take on the above in seriatim:
1. A sweeping assumption that an HR professional is by instinct dishonest is unwarranted in the absence of any empirical evidence to support this view. It is possible that some people may have anecdotal experiences to the contrary or there are those HR professionals who may be indulging in such practices. To paint the entire profession with such a broad brush is at best a travesty. There could be exceptions just as there are exceptions in every professional field.
2. An experienced HR professional trains the job aspirants to respect the interviewer and his credentials. It is a common refrain of an HR guy in every coaching exercise of job aspirants to be honest and, more importantly not to fib. Of course, there could be exceptions; but they are just that – exceptions. A man does not become an HR professional merely because of his designation.
3. End of the day an interview is all about the interviewee and his capabilities including his value systems. Among one of the virtues that is expected of a job aspirant is his ability to express himself not only fluently but also in a civilised manner. That calls for some diplomacy, restraint and a degree of decency with which he talks about his previous employer and his previous boss. Someone who does not care for these niceties may not be a good employee to start with. That is a lesson in decency and not necessarily an exercise in concealing truth.
Finally, a candidate must be honest in his views and about his past. A wrong choice of person for a particular job may not only affect the employer but the employee himself. The candidate in an interview should be able to separate the issue from the person even while commenting on his previous employers. It is fallacious to say that the HR tutors the job aspirant to lie. But in the name of truth a candidate also is not allowed to carry his dirty linen from his previous job to someone else’ board room. It is an HR man’s duty to preempt that.
The Defense rests.
From India, Nasik
1. The HR is guilty of deliberately misguiding the job aspirants to lie to get a job.
2. The interviewer is gullible enough to be led up the garden path.
3. The interviewee is an unwary victim who deserves our sympathy.
Let me now give my take on the above in seriatim:
1. A sweeping assumption that an HR professional is by instinct dishonest is unwarranted in the absence of any empirical evidence to support this view. It is possible that some people may have anecdotal experiences to the contrary or there are those HR professionals who may be indulging in such practices. To paint the entire profession with such a broad brush is at best a travesty. There could be exceptions just as there are exceptions in every professional field.
2. An experienced HR professional trains the job aspirants to respect the interviewer and his credentials. It is a common refrain of an HR guy in every coaching exercise of job aspirants to be honest and, more importantly not to fib. Of course, there could be exceptions; but they are just that – exceptions. A man does not become an HR professional merely because of his designation.
3. End of the day an interview is all about the interviewee and his capabilities including his value systems. Among one of the virtues that is expected of a job aspirant is his ability to express himself not only fluently but also in a civilised manner. That calls for some diplomacy, restraint and a degree of decency with which he talks about his previous employer and his previous boss. Someone who does not care for these niceties may not be a good employee to start with. That is a lesson in decency and not necessarily an exercise in concealing truth.
Finally, a candidate must be honest in his views and about his past. A wrong choice of person for a particular job may not only affect the employer but the employee himself. The candidate in an interview should be able to separate the issue from the person even while commenting on his previous employers. It is fallacious to say that the HR tutors the job aspirant to lie. But in the name of truth a candidate also is not allowed to carry his dirty linen from his previous job to someone else’ board room. It is an HR man’s duty to preempt that.
The Defense rests.
From India, Nasik
Find answers from people who have previously dealt with business and work issues similar to yours - Please Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query.
From IPM to corporate topic content details, profile, client list.doc