HR workplace dry goods

HR workplace dry goods, let me sort it out for you! Welcome to read the following!

? Why don't you go back and wait for news? It is no exaggeration to say that 80% of job seekers hate to hear? We will inform you of the interview results by phone or email. Please go back and wait for news first. ? In fact, some companies will inform job seekers of the interview results as soon as possible, express their gratitude and look forward to future cooperation; In some companies, the interview results will pass with time, and people will not ask, even if it is over. Even before the interview, I called HR three times, but no one answered. Before that, I emphasized that the final result will be good or bad, and you will tell me. What a beautiful word? Don't worry, I'll tell you, okay? . So the question is, which company do you prefer? The answer is obvious.

Summary:

The human resources department should not be afraid to tell the applicant the fact that he lost the election. As the saying goes, we should look after each other. We should recognize our role. We give job seekers a feedback out of professional ethics, or it is the responsibility of the HR position itself. It can even be said that this is an agreement in the interview process. As long as we have a correct attitude towards HR, considering the psychology of job seekers, I believe that although it is the result of failure, it is not a bad thing. You have established a good image for the enterprise and added luster to your HR career. Seriously, I made a lot of friends in phone calls and emails that only informed each other of the failure of the recruitment process.

Do you think HR recruitment only asks questions according to the list? Just a while ago, Ji just moved to Beijing and found a phenomenon when looking for a job. Because my resume was posted on Zhilian, I didn't vote. Many HR people found out. When I called again, my tone was very blunt. When I came up, I didn't like to recruit a real student. A few words later, I was asked to go for an interview. However, I only heard from him that the only useful information was the company address. Out of courtesy, I asked the other party to give a brief introduction. But I heard a rhetorical question? What do you want to know? I'm confused, too I want to know what size shoes you wear. I want to add you to WeChat. Actually, I am a WeChat business (goodbye manually).

Summary:

To tell the truth, HR also has a certain sales nature, whether it is a sales company or a sales position. At least you should know the advantages of the company, the competitive advantages of the position, and what kind of candidates you will get if you come to our company. Company introduction must be what HR is good at, and one of the prerequisites for recruitment is to have a full understanding of the company and job background. However, if you call as HR, an interview will be held. Anyone who can talk can do the work. What's the use of asking you Whether you are a Fortune 500 company or a startup company of Angel Wheel, the salary is the same, so it is necessary for you to take every communication seriously.

Usually, when the interviewer selects candidates, if there are three candidates a day, he thinks it's ok after meeting the first one, but he still wants to see the second one. After meeting the second one, he wants to see the third one, and often looks back several times, thinking that the candidate behind is always better than the last one. By the end of the month, he suddenly felt that the last one was actually good, and as a result, people had joined other companies.

Summary:

There is an old saying that opportunities are reserved for those who are prepared. As an HR with decision-making power, you should keep hesitating. I'm afraid you can't even complete the KPI. What kind of people are needed to fill this position? Maybe this person's resume is average, but this person can fill this hole perfectly. You have to find a gorgeous person to put it here, but people may think the pit is too dirty to stay.

In addition, when HR encounters a limited number of resumes, on the one hand, it should properly disclose such information when communicating with the employing department; on the other hand, the most taboo of HR is that it will only complain and will not find a way through channels. Generally speaking, I don't recommend this kind of communication before recommending candidates or after completing the first round, because it is easy for the employing department to misunderstand that HR doesn't support their work. At least first, strictly screen resumes according to the standards of the employing department, and recommend about 10- 12 people. Then, on the premise of producing at least two candidates, put forward the difficulties appropriately, so that the employing department can accept them better, and then HR will guide them a little? Are there really not so many people to choose from? Let the employing department make a decision as soon as possible.

Interview is not the right way to force. Generally speaking, applicants have to go through several rounds of interviews to get a job opportunity. Most enterprises will set up at least two interviews for basic positions, and middle and high-end positions need to meet the general manager at the end. The forum exposed the spit of many applicants. For example, an applicant said that he would go to Company A for five interviews, and each trip would take 40 minutes to 1 hour, and the thunderstorm weather was even more troublesome; Some applicants also said that from the initial test to the final, every interviewer asked the same question, which was puzzling.

Summary:

When designing interview links, HR should set the adjustment according to the nature of the target recruitment position, not the more links, the higher. It is necessary to know the purpose and significance of each link, who will lead the interview in each link, and what is the significance of screening candidates in each link. It is not to let the candidates feel the aggressive momentum of your company, but to determine the attributes of the candidates after the interview.

Chatting doesn't mean traditional chatting. Serious interviewers don't mention it in the interview. What surprised me the most was a person who ignored the people waiting for the interview. When he chatted with a candidate until he took off, he just stood up and danced. However, the candidate leaned back in his chair as if watching him perform there.

Summary:

Some interviewers keep asking questions during the interview, which seems very professional and active, but they can't get any useful information. If the interviewer talks more than the candidate during the interview, it is putting the cart before the horse and an inefficient interview. The correct method should be to let the candidates talk more and the interviewer listen more without losing control.

In fact, not only HR needs to popularize interview skills, but also employers need guidance. However, I don't admire HR's initiative to train the employing department in interview skills. After all, the improvement of skills will not happen overnight. Everyone has a personalized interview style, and their consciousness will not change at all because of a training. So what is a relatively conservative approach? I have my interview manual, and you have your own ideas. Can you use it together and modify it? , at least let the other party try, use? Norm? Replace? Overthrow? It takes half a year to a year, and HR people should just hold their horses.

As an HR, don't be caught by job seekers. When I was in college, I attended a group interview. I have always been introverted, and I instinctively chose to ask me. I said, I won't talk without asking me. However, there is a buddy whose image and resume are outstanding, which gives the company interviewer a good first impression and naturally gets more attention from the examiner during the interview.

In the first round of opinions, this buddy's unusually clear thinking and gentle performance won the affirmation of the interviewer. But before the second round of collective discussion, the interviewer went to the conference table, supplemented the precautions with the candidates, and mentioned and affirmed the views of the buddies in the last round by the way. Then, in the third round, a dramatic scene happened: the young people expanded, the volume increased by several decibels, and the tough rebuttal was used as a way to unify the opinions of the group. Just now he was completely polite and couldn't jump. All this also surprised the interviewer. Obviously, considering the running-in with team members in the future, he was undoubtedly eliminated. This is also because of the interviewer's affirmation of his face, overwhelming superiority and initiative. However, this mentality is doomed to failure.

Summary:

Regardless of the candidate's performance, the interviewer should not make comments in person. On the one hand, it is easy for the other party to misunderstand in person, thinking that the interview result is certain. However, in fact, the public performance in the interview process does not represent the whole story. On the other hand, in the group interview, the public evaluation also easily interferes with the interviewer's play. But from a dialectical point of view, it is not impossible to do so. At least you can see through the essence of the interviewer from the side. After all, Mianba also understands these routines of HR. In short, before organizing an interview, HR must communicate with each person in charge in advance to clarify the interview process. The interviewer's responsibilities in all aspects, especially the interview without a leading group, are very particular about form. Only when the interviewer understands the significance and method of this technology will the process be more rigorous.

;