Act Acting » Acting Jobs » Must be confident

Must be confident

Question:

In article <8hi2ef$aj…@nnrp1.deja.com>,   Steve R. <sr…@vcn.bc.ca> wrote: – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> >   I think it usually *is* dishonest, myself.  The main idea seems to > be > > to ensure you don’t pass interview unless you can spout a lot of > things > > about how the work is your life, how like you it is, and similar. > A lot of people subscribe to this kind of thinking, that, in a nutshell > can be summed up as ‘you are what you do’ > I don’t see much wrong with working hard, and putting a lot of effort, > hours, and energy into work.  In fact, I like doing this myself – some > might even say I work too hard :-)  I think it’s commendable to acquire > job skills, learn new ones, solve problems, benefit employers, and work > to improve organizations as well. > However, my problem lies in conflating a person’s identity with the work > that he or she performs.  There is so much more to a person in addition > to what they do for a living, and it’s an awfully narrow way to judge > somebody exclusively by this. > One of the things I’ve found in my experience, is that when I redefine > work to include not just paid work, but other forms of work in addition > to it (stuff like writing posts on this group, volunteering, setting > goals, organizing social events, etc.) then, ironically, I perform much > better at the paid work than if I were to define myself exclusively by > the paid work.  By realizing that I’m more than the paid work, and my > identity isn’t tied down to what I do for a living, it allows for much > better and efficient work performance, as ironic as that may seem.

  Yea, I agree with this, but a lot of places seem to encourage you to mix your identity with your workplace.  Things like company flats and creches encourage you to link your life with work.  And interviews are part of that – they try to make you be the job, not just be good for it. Why else do they ask you about hobbies and similar at interviews? What business is it of theirs? > >   Yea, that’s a thing with job interviews.  The self-confidence you > need > > for them is different from the self-confidence you need for dating or > > whatever. > This I’m not so sure about, but I do understand the distinction in terms > of social roles.  However, the confidence, I’d surmise, would be such > that it would be similar across these different social roles.  What > would change would be how you present yourself, I think.

  Mmm, I’m not quite so sure.  I am confident that I do my job well, but not in usual social interaction. Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

Response:

<Mark.Gr…@reading.ac.uk> wrote in message

news:8hdfbe$2a8$1@nnrp1.deja.com… >   This, I am sure, should be discrimination.  For non-social jobs, > interview should be done by a written application form posted to > applicants and compared.  There will be no need for a physical meeting. > (If there is, tell me what information they could get at a physical > meeitng they couldn’t get with a form, and tell me how it’s anything to > do with capability to do the job.)

Well if i were an employer I sure as hell would not be too keen on taking someone on purely on the basis of a written form!  I mean I’d want to at least find out what this person is like as a person, as lets face it, my other employees are goning to have to work with this person and I would want to be sure that they would probably fit in ok.  If I had not met them they could be obnoxious, rude, dispruptive, and could make everyones life a misery.

Response:

In article <8hfums$nl…@nnrp1.deja.com>,   Mark.Gr…@reading.ac.uk wrote: >   I think it usually *is* dishonest, myself.  The main idea seems to be > to ensure you don’t pass interview unless you can spout a lot of things > about how the work is your life, how like you it is, and similar.

A lot of people subscribe to this kind of thinking, that, in a nutshell can be summed up as ‘you are what you do’ I don’t see much wrong with working hard, and putting a lot of effort, hours, and energy into work.  In fact, I like doing this myself – some might even say I work too hard :-)  I think it’s commendable to acquire job skills, learn new ones, solve problems, benefit employers, and work to improve organizations as well. However, my problem lies in conflating a person’s identity with the work that he or she performs.  There is so much more to a person in addition to what they do for a living, and it’s an awfully narrow way to judge somebody exclusively by this. One of the things I’ve found in my experience, is that when I redefine work to include not just paid work, but other forms of work in addition to it (stuff like writing posts on this group, volunteering, setting goals, organizing social events, etc.) then, ironically, I perform much better at the paid work than if I were to define myself exclusively by the paid work.  By realizing that I’m more than the paid work, and my identity isn’t tied down to what I do for a living, it allows for much better and efficient work performance, as ironic as that may seem. >   Yea, that’s a thing with job interviews.  The self-confidence you need > for them is different from the self-confidence you need for dating or > whatever.

This I’m not so sure about, but I do understand the distinction in terms of social roles.  However, the confidence, I’d surmise, would be such that it would be similar across these different social roles.  What would change would be how you present yourself, I think. > Both of which can be learned, of > course. >   Where?

All kinds of places, too numerous to list in one post. The process of learning social skills isn’t such that you go to one specific place, with certain people, and follow a fixed formula.  Rather it’s more of a ‘template’ if you will, a certain state or mindset that, with it, you generate your own program, and end up taking a series of actions to acquire the skills. The actual social situations and people you meet in the process of overcoming shyness are vastly complex if you look at it in terms of a pigeon-hole formula, because they vary significantly for each person, and across time.  There’s really no saying exactly where you’re going to end up, however the *process* of desiring to be more social and learing more social skills is such that you apply it and the actual social situations derive from that process. Just a quick recap of some of the actual situations, or ‘roads’ that I did (and am still travelling) to give a brief example.  This is by no means a complete list and only includes the highlights: Working at a convenience store / gas station Joining Toastmasters Working at a cultural gig Joining a country and western band Working at the grain elevators A little bit of dating Volunteering on a Mexico house project For most of these, I had goals set, some of them I didn’t – however even for the situations that I set goals for, there was still lots of ambiguity as to what would actually occur.  (Goals aren’t set in stone, btw.)  Thus, the desire of wanting to overcome shyness, the knowledge of what to do in order to seek out social situations and learn skills, and most importantly the mechanics of *actually doing it* coalesced to provide these opportunities. That, looking back, it was not entirely clear as to the actual ‘roads’ or situations that I would be involved in, however both the process and goals led to the situations.  Had I sought an exact recipe ahead of time, then it’s not likely anything would have happened. Hope this makes sense, as it’s not the easiest concept to explain.  Are others who are reading understanding this? Steve Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

Response:

In article <8hgqva$pu…@news7.svr.pol.co.uk>,   "Adrian Boliston" <adr…@boliston.com> wrote: > >   This, I am sure, should be discrimination.  For non-social jobs, > > interview should be done by a written application form posted to > > applicants and compared.  There will be no need for a physical meeting. > > (If there is, tell me what information they could get at a physical > > meeitng they couldn’t get with a form, and tell me how it’s anything to > > do with capability to do the job.) > Well if i were an employer I sure as hell would not be too keen on taking > someone on purely on the basis of a written form!  I mean I’d want to at > least find out what this person is like as a person,

  Why?  If it has nothing to do with their quality of work, you shouldn’t be selected based on it, and ergo shouldn’t need to know it to select. > as lets face it, my > other employees are goning to have to work with this person and I would want > to be sure that they would probably fit in ok.

  If it’s a job that does involve teamwork, then sure, because it’s involved in the work, but not all jobs do.  Say it’s a telework post. Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

Response:

On Sun, 4 Jun 2000 00:04:32 -0700, headbeat <ja…@jlu.bn3.comNOSPAM> wrote: >Thus, as I see it, it’s usually to one’s advantage to be as >deceitful as possible and pretend that you’re not shy.  Once >you’ve gotten your ‘foot in the door’ you can let down your act >and focus on the requirements of the job, but not at the >interview stage, IMO.

What about promotions?  The comment there is, I don’t think you’ll ever get a good chance to drop your shyness where it counts–around other people.  :)

Response:

In article <8hfaha$9p…@nnrp1.deja.com>,   Steve R. <sr…@vcn.bc.ca> wrote: >   That’s not what they want to > > hear.  What they want is some ego-flattering BS about how you’ve > > always wanted *this* particular job. > Not necessarily.  The employer would want to hear why you came knocking > at his door (see above), but I doubt he would want to hear ‘ego- > flattering BS’.  I think most employers are looking for *HONEST* > applicants who know themselves well enough to know what they are good > at, what skills they posess, and how they can offer those skills and > contribute to the organization.  And applicants who can present > themselves in a friendly, professional, and *HONEST* way in the > interview. > In my opinion, I think ‘ego-flattering BS’ is dishonest, and if I was > the employer I wouldn’t hire an applicant who fed it forward.

  I think it usually *is* dishonest, myself.  The main idea seems to be to ensure you don’t pass interview unless you can spout a lot of things about how the work is your life, how like you it is, and similar.  Then they can use that as a hook to get you to work long hours at low pay. > In this light, someone who is shy (successfully) would be able to be > enthusiastic about him or herself and market his or her skills > successfully.  Even though the person recognizes that he or she isn’t > gregarious and not a talker type (and refrains from making social > comparisons to that type as the ‘ideal’), the person is still able to > successfully exude confidence and be enthusiastic in an interview. > No faking.  No acting.  No ‘ego-flattering’.  Just honest, > enthusiastic, and natural self-confidence.

  Yea, that’s a thing with job interviews.  The self-confidence you need for them is different from the self-confidence you need for dating or whatever. > > Well, as I’ve said in another post, I think everyone is shy to > > some degree.  What I’m talking about here is people who’s shyness > > is apparent to others.  People who find it hard to smile, maintain > > eye contact, speak up clearly, etc.  These people *are* at a > > disadvantage in the standard interview situation. > Agreed, of course – which is why I think it’s important to develop > social skills and confidence.  Both of which can be learned, of

course.   Where? > > I think that this depends on the organisation.  Some demand an almost > > clone-like mentality. > Then it’s not worth applying to them, which is something you would > likely discover along the way by doing your homework and research on > organizations.

  If it doesn’t demand one now, it will in a few months. Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

Response:

In article <8hdi2f$40…@nnrp1.deja.com>,   bastian9…@my-deja.com wrote: > But I’d say that most applicants *do* have a clear answer.  And > that answer would be, "Because you advertised this job, and I > need a paycheck."

True, but that’s only the bare, bare, minimum.  Suppose the employer asks why you chose this particular organization, i.e. knocking on his door.  The ‘I need a paycheque’ answer could be applied to all kinds of organizations and jobs, but suppose the employer wants to know why you chose *this* one. In other words, the question is designed to weed out those who don’t have a clear idea of what they are looking for in a job.  Such a question would screen out those just going through the paper responding to ads because they’ll take anything that gives them a paycheque.  Shy or nonshy can have this habit.  People who would quickly snatch up an advertised job in the classifieds rather than search for something where they feel they will fit in well, and use their own unique gifts and skills. Besides, most jobs aren’t advertised.   But just try giving that response at an > interview, and see how quickly the interviewer winds the whole > thing up and shows you the door.

I agree.   That’s not what they want to > hear.  What they want is some ego-flattering BS about how you’ve > always wanted *this* particular job.

Not necessarily.  The employer would want to hear why you came knocking at his door (see above), but I doubt he would want to hear ‘ego- flattering BS’.  I think most employers are looking for *HONEST* applicants who know themselves well enough to know what they are good at, what skills they posess, and how they can offer those skills and contribute to the organization.  And applicants who can present themselves in a friendly, professional, and *HONEST* way in the interview. In my opinion, I think ‘ego-flattering BS’ is dishonest, and if I was the employer I wouldn’t hire an applicant who fed it forward. > But if you’re shy, you’ll have a hard time showing your enthusiasm > and playing up your skills and accomplishments.  That’s what > puts you at a disadvantage.

This may be true.  However, I read an article someone posted about those who are "successfully shy" – that is, people who recognize themselves as shy and/or introverted but instead of dwelling on self- consciousness, they substitute self-knowledge and self-awareness instead. In this light, someone who is shy (successfully) would be able to be enthusiastic about him or herself and market his or her skills successfully.  Even though the person recognizes that he or she isn’t gregarious and not a talker type (and refrains from making social comparisons to that type as the ‘ideal’), the person is still able to successfully exude confidence and be enthusiastic in an interview. No faking.  No acting.  No ‘ego-flattering’.  Just honest, enthusiastic, and natural self-confidence.   Someone who bounces into an interview, > full of enthusiasm, either isn’t shy, or is able to put on an > act for the duration of the interview.  I’m very fortunate in that > I’m able to do the latter, but not all shybies can.

See above.  There need not be any acting or faking.  It is entirely possible to be yourself and be professional at the same time, as I wrote in another thread. > Also, even if you do manage to present your skills accurately, the > chances are that you’re still competing against non-shybies with > a similar skill set.  And the sad fact is, if it comes down to a > shybie and a normie with equal skills, the employer will almost > certainly choose the normie.

Maybe – but I think that employers will be looking more for enthusiasm and goals than anything else.  Thus a ‘normie’ who is just applying for a job, versus a ’shybie’ who has done his homework and has a clear idea of why he wants the job and will do anything to get it – ceteris paribus equal skill sets, it may be the ’shybie’ who gets the job. > Well, as I’ve said in another post, I think everyone is shy to > some degree.  What I’m talking about here is people who’s shyness > is apparent to others.  People who find it hard to smile, maintain > eye contact, speak up clearly, etc.  These people *are* at a > disadvantage in the standard interview situation.

Agreed, of course – which is why I think it’s important to develop social skills and confidence.  Both of which can be learned, of course. I think the crux of the matter is forgiving oneself, and realizing that it’s OK to be quiet and or introverted person by temperament.  And then working towards gaining more social self-knowledge, as well as substituting away from painful self-consciousness and towards self and other awareness.  In this process, what happens naturally, is that social comparisons to the culture’s ‘ideal’ are dropped, or lessened. As one realizes that it’s impossible to meet the ’social norm’ of our ‘culture’s ideal’, then one can loosen up and start to forgive oneself more. > I think that this depends on the organisation.  Some demand an almost > clone-like mentality.

Then it’s not worth applying to them, which is something you would likely discover along the way by doing your homework and research on organizations. > Again, if it were that simple….

It is that simple, but it’s not that *easy* I admit.  Two very different concepts.  It’s taken me years to learn the social skills, and I still have a long way to go (but believe me, I am enjoying the journey) so I fully admit the process isn’t easy. However, the action of learning more social skills and gaining more confidence is a farily simple process.  You just have to *do* it, that’s all. Also, almost all of the stuff I’ve written in this thread is expanded on in more detail in Nancy Anderson’s book, "Work With Passion" – as I’ve basically paraphrased a lot of the stuff she’s written and incorporated it into my own words. Steve Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

Response:

Steve R. <sr…@vcn.bc.ca> wrote: >In article <8hb0nf$f5…@nnrp1.deja.com>, >  bastian9…@my-deja.com wrote: >> I’m not sure I’d agree with this.  An interview is like >> a dance, and it’s a dance you’d better know the steps to, >> or you’ll wind up having your toes trodden on.  :-] >But, in an interview, you also have an opportunity to find out >more about the organization and ask questions.  Also, you can >influence the person who is hiring you, by conveying your skills >and why you want the job.

I agree.  I’m not suggesting that the interview process is 100% wrong.  It does have good points, such as those you mention.  My criticism is of those aspects that are "false" or less than honest. >Suppose the employer asks you, "Why are you knocking at my door?" >or "Why are you applying for this job?".  In an NLP book I read >awhile ago, unfortunately can’t remember it right now, the author >pointed out in an employment survey that 70% of job applicants >don’t have a clear answer to that question.

But I’d say that most applicants *do* have a clear answer.  And that answer would be, "Because you advertised this job, and I need a paycheck."  But just try giving that response at an interview, and see how quickly the interviewer winds the whole thing up and shows you the door.  That’s not what they want to hear.  What they want is some ego-flattering BS about how you’ve always wanted *this* particular job.  Like I say, it’s a dance, a game.  And if you don’t play along…. >Thus, it’s very important to have a clear set of goals about why >you’re applying for a certain job, and what you have to offer. >If you treat the interview as an "I’m depedenent on this job, and >desperate to get it, I’ll take whatever comes my way" approach, >then yes you might get your toes stepped on.

Well, desperation isn’t attractive in any situation. >> If you come across as shy at an interview, you will put yourself >> at a severe disadvantage, regardless of what skills you have to >> offer. >But how is this so?  Does the employer go around discounting the >skills you present, ignoring your past experience, disregarding >your questions, downplaying your enthusiasm for the organization, >turning a blind eye to your goals, simply because he/she may >perceive you as shy? >"Oh, I suppose we can’t hire this applicant, even though ……. >because he is shy."

But if you’re shy, you’ll have a hard time showing your enthusiasm and playing up your skills and accomplishments.  That’s what puts you at a disadvantage.  Someone who bounces into an interview, full of enthusiasm, either isn’t shy, or is able to put on an act for the duration of the interview.  I’m very fortunate in that I’m able to do the latter, but not all shybies can. Also, even if you do manage to present your skills accurately, the chances are that you’re still competing against non-shybies with a similar skill set.  And the sad fact is, if it comes down to a shybie and a normie with equal skills, the employer will almost certainly choose the normie.  Shybies are regarded as odd, weird, not to be trusted. >It just seems like a very narrow way to select job applicants, >based on whether they’re shy or not.

I agree.  But that doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. >Besides the fact that shyness is an extremely complex phenomenon, >and manifests itself in varying degrees and situations, thus one >judgment of whether the applicant is shy may not be accurate.

Well, as I’ve said in another post, I think everyone is shy to some degree.  What I’m talking about here is people who’s shyness is apparent to others.  People who find it hard to smile, maintain eye contact, speak up clearly, etc.  These people *are* at a disadvantage in the standard interview situation.  Just read some of lhomme2000’s posts about his experiences in job interviews. >Now, as mentioned in the previous reply – I do think that learning >social skills is essential, and this goes hand in hand with setting >goals for yourself, conveying your skills and strengths, showing your >past experience.  Thus, an employer may be justified in not hiring an >applicant based on lack of social skills, and/or unwillingness to learn >more of them.  As things like working with others, being part of a >team, etc. are extremely important it makes sense to acquire these >basic social skills.

Yes, it does.  It makes sense to acquire these skills for everyday life.  But if it were that simple, there’d be one less newsgroup in the alt.support hierarchy.  :-] >However, if the applicant has a certain amount of skills, and is >capable and willing to be part of a team, but he/she is a quiet person >at heart and prefers to work mainly alone in this context – then I >don’t think employers will have a problem, in fact that may be exactly >the person they are looking for in the job:  dependable working alone, >but also sees his or her work in the context of a larger team.

"I am able to work both independently, and as an effective, integral member of a team." Yep, that line is buried somewhere in my CV/resume.  :-) >> There are >> very few jobs where you are not one cog in a larger machine.  And >> if you give the potential employer the impression that your cog >sticks, >> refuses to turn, or worst of all, rotates in the opposite direction >from >> the rest, then you seriously harm your chances. >Then this may be an attitude adjustment to work on.  It is entirely >possible to be your own person, work independently, have your own >unique sense of individuality and the way you like to work *and at the >same time* fit in with a larger team, work in tandem with others, and >cooperate for the good of the organization.

I think that this depends on the organisation.  Some demand an almost clone-like mentality. >> Good point.  Even if you’re applying for a job that requires no >> interaction >> with others, the interview *for* that job is a social interaction. >So, >> again, the shybie is at a disadvantage unless he/she learns the rules >of >> the game. >Then perhaps it’s worth it to learn more of the essential social >skills, as there is really no hiding from the necessary interactions >you need to make to find jobs, meet people, enjoy a rewarding life, >etc.

Again, if it were that simple…. >Think of the process of doing this as a journey, that you discover new >things about yourself and others, and heck even enjoy it, along parts >of the way.

I’ve no argument with that.  I think it’s a very commendable approach. Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

Response:

HyprRel23 (hyprre…@aol.com) wrote:

: >Just don’t own up to being shy at job interviews!  I’m shy but I can easily : >pretend that I’m confident at interviews! : All you really need to do to give yourself a chance is to pull the : wool over their eyes in the interview(s). I really don’t know about this, guys, I think it’s much better to be honest.  When you’re applying for a job, the process is basically as follows:  you have something to offer, you’re interested in the job, you feel you’d enjoy doing the work, and make a good contribution.  The employer is looking for someone who is enthusiastic, commited, has something to offer the organization, and would make an excellent employee.  The interview offers a perfect place to match these two expecations together. Thus, you need not play these "let’s fool the employer to hide my shyness" games.  If you’ve done your homework, you have a clear idea of why you’re applying for the job and what you have to offer, and you show interest in the job, then there’s a pretty good chance you’ll get it.  Granted, some jobs are more people-intensive and having good social skills and customer service skills is an excellent thing to convey in the interview.  However, not all jobs primarily involve people.  There are plenty of other jobs that are more data oriented, that involve working alone, with not as much people contact as, say, customer service work. So, if you’re applying for a job that primarily involves working alone, the employer is not going to expect someone who is super outgoing and chatty, in fact he may be looking for someone more shy and introverted, who shows a high degree of focus and diligence in working at the job.   Granted, of course, social skills are important in any life and career endeavor, and learning them can’t be undescored enough.  In fact, the skills are essential.  Because, even if you’re applying for a job that doesn’t involve much people contact – the search and interview process still requires social skills.  And besides, learning to relate to others is a good thing, no matter what the job. So there is really no reason to "hide your shyness" in an interview, the main thing is to get across your interest for the job, and show the employer how you would make a good employee.  Because it makes everybody’s job easier if you are the right fit for the work. In my case, I disclosed to the employer I have right now that I used to be really shy, and worked several customer service jobs in the past as a way of overcoming the shyness – and in the process discovered that I really enjoyed the people contact, and prefer to serve others, and find customer service work to be a good fit as a result of that.  In retrospect, that may have been one of the things that got me the job right now. Steve

Response:

On Fri, 02 Jun 2000 03:05:28 GMT, Bloody Viking <nos…@masu.wwa.com> wrote: >Adrian Jackson <nos…@here.com> wrote: >: By that logic, no job could lawfully require anything!  :) >He’s commenting on the fact that there is no place in the job market for >shy people. My attempts at escaping a dead-end postal job I despise is on >the verge of driving me to self-surgery. (DIY ETS of course)

You know, I’d like to be a brain surgeon and make $400,000/yr, but I don’t meet the requirements of having an M.D. and shitwads of experience.  I guess they’re discriminating against me because of my ignorance in that field! Point blank: jobs have requirements.  If you don’t meet those requirements, you don’t get the job.  If you think you’re being wronged by erroneous job requirements, try to find a group with some political or judicial clout to help you out.  If you can’t, you should probably stop shooting rapids up shit creek.  ;)

Response:

nos…@here.com (Adrian Jackson) wrote: >You know, I’d like to be a brain surgeon and make $400,000/yr, but I >don’t meet the requirements of having an M.D. and shitwads of >experience.  I guess they’re discriminating against me because of my >ignorance in that field! >Point blank: jobs have requirements.  If you don’t meet those >requirements, you don’t get the job.  If you think you’re being >wronged by erroneous job requirements, try to find a group with some >political or judicial clout to help you out.  If you can’t, you should >probably stop shooting rapids up shit creek.  ;)

While I understand your point, Adrian, I think there are two different situations here.  Say, for example, that I own a haulage company.  When it comes to employing truck drivers, it’s clearly acceptable for me to insist that they have a valid truck driving licence.  No one’s going to argue with that.  But it’s a different matter if I insist that they weigh less than 180 lbs, because ‘overweight’ employees aren’t the image I want my company to project.  That’s discrimination, and it’s wrong. The thing with shyness is, it falls into a middle grey area.  Many jobs *can* be done by a shy person, and yet an unshy person will probably fit into the team and the working environment better.  It’s not a clear cut case of being a reasonable job requirement, or unfair discrimination. IMO, most employers have unreasonable expectations anyway.  How many job ads have you seen which specify that "excellent this" and "outstanding that" are requirements?  In the vast majority of cases, excellence is *not* required.  All that’s required is competence.  And, IME, that quality is rare enough anyway, without seeking the even more unattainable goal of excellence. Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

Response:

strue…@interchange.ubc.ca (Steve Ruelle) wrote: >I really don’t know about this, guys, I think it’s much better to be >honest.  When you’re applying for a job, the process is basically as >follows:  you have something to offer, you’re interested in the job, you >feel you’d enjoy doing the work, and make a good contribution.  The >employer is looking for someone who is enthusiastic, commited, has >something to offer the organization, and would make an excellent >employee.  The interview offers a perfect place to match these two >expecations together.

I’m not sure I’d agree with this.  An interview is like a dance, and it’s a dance you’d better know the steps to, or you’ll wind up having your toes trodden on.  :-] >Thus, you need not play these "let’s fool the employer to hide my >shyness" games.  If you’ve done your homework, you have a clear idea of >why you’re applying for the job and what you have to offer, and you show >interest in the job, then there’s a pretty good chance you’ll get >it.

If you come across as shy at an interview, you will put yourself at a severe disadvantage, regardless of what skills you have to offer. >Granted, some jobs are more people-intensive and having good social >skills and customer service skills is an excellent thing to convey in the >interview.  However, not all jobs primarily involve people.  There are >plenty of other jobs that are more data oriented, that involve working >alone, with not as much people contact as, say, customer service work.

True.  But most jobs involve *some* element of team work.  There are very few jobs where you are not one cog in a larger machine.  And if you give the potential employer the impression that your cog sticks, refuses to turn, or worst of all, rotates in the opposite direction from the rest, then you seriously harm your chances. >Granted, of course, social skills are important in any life and career >endeavor, and learning them can’t be undescored enough.  In fact, the >skills are essential.  Because, even if you’re applying for a job that >doesn’t involve much people contact – the search and interview process >still requires social skills.  And besides, learning to relate to others >is a good thing, no matter what the job.

Good point.  Even if you’re applying for a job that requires no interaction with others, the interview *for* that job is a social interaction.  So, again, the shybie is at a disadvantage unless he/she learns the rules of the game. >In my case, I disclosed to the employer I have right now that I used to be >really shy, and worked several customer service jobs in the past as a way >of overcoming the shyness – and in the process discovered that I really >enjoyed the people contact, and prefer to serve others, and find customer >service work to be a good fit as a result of that.  In retrospect, that >may have been one of the things that got me the job right now.

Yes, I’d guess that your willingness to overcome the "weakness" of your shyness counted in your favour.  Employers like that kind of thing, which is why the ever popular "What do you see as your greatest weakness?" is often followed up by "And what do you feel you’ve done to overcome it?". Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

Response:

In article <8hb0nf$f5…@nnrp1.deja.com>,   bastian9…@my-deja.com wrote: > I’m not sure I’d agree with this.  An interview is like a dance, and > it’s a dance you’d better know the steps to, or you’ll wind up having > your toes trodden on.  :-]

But, in an interview, you also have an opportunity to find out more about the organization and ask questions.  Also, you can influence the person who is hiring you, by conveying your skills and why you want the job. Suppose the employer asks you, "Why are you knocking at my door?" or "Why are you applying for this job?".  In an NLP book I read awhile ago, unfortunately can’t remember it right now, the author pointed out in an employment survey that 70% of job applicants don’t have a clear answer to that question. Thus, it’s very important to have a clear set of goals about why you’re applying for a certain job, and what you have to offer.  If you treat the interview as an "I’m depedenent on this job, and desperate to get it, I’ll take whatever comes my way" approach, then yes you might get your toes stepped on. However, if you go in to the interview with a clear set of goals and questions, both to ask and to answer, then there’s a good chance you’ll end up getting the job.  At least that’s what it’s been in my experience. > If you come across as shy at an interview, you will put yourself at > a severe disadvantage, regardless of what skills you have to offer.

But how is this so?  Does the employer go around discounting the skills you present, ignoring your past experience, disregarding your questions, downplaying your enthusiasm for the organization, turning a blind eye to your goals, simply because he/she may perceive you as shy? "Oh, I suppose we can’t hire this applicant, even though ……. because he is shy." It just seems like a very narrow way to select job applicants, based on whether they’re shy or not.  Besides the fact that shyness is an extremely complex phenomenon, and manifests itself in varying degrees and situations, thus one judgment of whether the applicant is shy may not be accurate. Now, as mentioned in the previous reply – I do think that learning social skills is essential, and this goes hand in hand with setting goals for yourself, conveying your skills and strengths, showing your past experience.  Thus, an employer may be justified in not hiring an applicant based on lack of social skills, and/or unwillingness to learn more of them.  As things like working with others, being part of a team, etc. are extremely important it makes sense to acquire these basic social skills. However, if the applicant has a certain amount of skills, and is capable and willing to be part of a team, but he/she is a quiet person at heart and prefers to work mainly alone in this context – then I don’t think employers will have a problem, in fact that may be exactly the person they are looking for in the job:  dependable working alone, but also sees his or her work in the context of a larger team. > True.  But most jobs involve *some* element of team work.

Of course – see above. > There are > very few jobs where you are not one cog in a larger machine.  And > if you give the potential employer the impression that your cog sticks, > refuses to turn, or worst of all, rotates in the opposite direction from > the rest, then you seriously harm your chances.

Then this may be an attitude adjustment to work on.  It is entirely possible to be your own person, work independently, have your own unique sense of individuality and the way you like to work *and at the same time* fit in with a larger team, work in tandem with others, and cooperate for the good of the organization. The two are not mutually exclusive. Along these lines, you can still be professional and not feel like you’re "selling yourself out".  Thus, while being professional, you can still convey your own indivuality, and the professional role need not snuff it out, contrary to what a lot of people believe. > Good point.  Even if you’re applying for a job that requires no > interaction > with others, the interview *for* that job is a social interaction. So, > again, the shybie is at a disadvantage unless he/she learns the rules of > the game.

Then perhaps it’s worth it to learn more of the essential social skills, as there is really no hiding from the necessary interactions you need to make to find jobs, meet people, enjoy a rewarding life, etc. Think of the process of doing this as a journey, that you discover new things about yourself and others, and heck even enjoy it, along parts of the way. Steve Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

Response:

In article <MPG.13a38c6eb2753fb8989…@news5.sucknews.com>,   headbeat <ja…@jlu.bn3.comNOSPAM> wrote: – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > But how is this so?  Does the employer go around discounting the skills > > you present, ignoring your past experience, disregarding your > > questions, downplaying your enthusiasm for the organization, turning a > > blind eye to your goals, simply because he/she may perceive you as shy? > Well, I don’t think employers consciously do this, but if they’re > faced with two applicants with roughly the same credentials, and > one of the applicants comes across as shy and the other one > doesn’t, the odds are good that the non-shy person will get the > job.  You might call this the ’socially attractive’ factor. > There have been lots of studies done with *physically* attractive > people where they got job offers much more easily than more > ‘normal’ people, even though the ‘normal’ ones often had better > credentials.  I think an outgoing personality is similar to > physical beauty when it comes to getting a job.

  This, I am sure, should be discrimination.  For non-social jobs, interview should be done by a written application form posted to applicants and compared.  There will be no need for a physical meeting. (If there is, tell me what information they could get at a physical meeitng they couldn’t get with a form, and tell me how it’s anything to do with capability to do the job.) Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

Response:

In article <285668b8.97191…@usw-ex0102-016.remarq.com>,   I Reek <x_the_prodigal_sun_xNOx_S…@yahoo.co.uk.invalid> wrote: > I just looked through the job ads in my local paper and it > drives me mad that nearly all of the jobs that I am looking for > says that you have to be confident, I suffer from shyness and > get very frustrated when I read ad after ad that have the same > requirements.  Could this be descrimination towards shy ppl it > would be descrimination if it said you have to be good looking > or you have to be a certain weight why isnt it when it says you > have to be confident??.

  I think they mean you have to be confident you can do the *job*, not necessarily confident socially. Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

Response:

On Sat, 03 Jun 2000 15:26:40 GMT, Steve R. wrote:

[a bunch of snips] > > If you come across as shy at an interview, you will put yourself at > > a severe disadvantage, regardless of what skills you have to offer. > But how is this so?  Does the employer go around discounting the skills > you present, ignoring your past experience, disregarding your > questions, downplaying your enthusiasm for the organization, turning a > blind eye to your goals, simply because he/she may perceive you as shy?

Well, I don’t think employers consciously do this, but if they’re faced with two applicants with roughly the same credentials, and one of the applicants comes across as shy and the other one doesn’t, the odds are good that the non-shy person will get the job.  You might call this the ’socially attractive’ factor.   There have been lots of studies done with *physically* attractive people where they got job offers much more easily than more ‘normal’ people, even though the ‘normal’ ones often had better credentials.  I think an outgoing personality is similar to physical beauty when it comes to getting a job. Thus, as I see it, it’s usually to one’s advantage to be as deceitful as possible and pretend that you’re not shy.  Once you’ve gotten your ‘foot in the door’ you can let down your act and focus on the requirements of the job, but not at the interview stage, IMO. > "Oh, I suppose we can’t hire this applicant, even though ……. > because he is shy." > It just seems like a very narrow way to select job applicants, based on > whether they’re shy or not.  Besides the fact that shyness is an > extremely complex phenomenon, and manifests itself in varying degrees > and situations, thus one judgment of whether the applicant is shy may > not be accurate.

Yes, it’s a very narrow way to select applicants, but it still seems to be the reality from my perspective. — headbeat <ja…@jlu.bn3.com> —–= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =—– http://www.newsfeeds.com – The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–==  Over 80,000 Newsgroups – 16 Different Servers! =—–

Response:

That’s not really the way I see it, where I work there are certainly shy people(office setting). I myself am pretty shy, yet I have one of the most unshy jobs you can have, I work tech support, and talk to people constantly. I also visit them personally at their cubes/desks often. Also have to travel by myself or with others. I’ve made some office friends, and some friends away from the office as well. Sadly even this still makes it hard to make that first step towards a stranger. Nevertheless a shy person can certainly get a good job, it is important to appear to be somewhat confidient, interviews make people nervous normally.  A key is speaking in a clear voice and looking a person in the eye. David M. On 03 Jun 2000 04:57:34 GMT, hyprre…@aol.com (HyprRel23) wrote: >>Just don’t own up to being shy at job interviews!  I’m shy but I can easily >>pretend that I’m confident at interviews! >Don’t even get me started on this topic, it upsets me too much. Yes, even for >the most menial office job, employers do not want shy people. Even if the job >in question is so simple that it could be done adequately by most monkeys, >employers will still hold you to that ridiculous "outgoing, confident" >standard. That’s why you need to bone up on your acting skills, as Adrian >alluded. All you really need to do to give yourself a chance is to pull the >wool over their eyes in the interview(s). Granted, if there is a second >interview, it’s a lot more difficult to do this.

Remove %^ to reply via e-mail

Response:

In article <s4gijs4g6tihjrqk0logrlpjm7d9u4l…@4ax.com>,   David Martin <%^DavidMart…@home.com> wrote: > That’s not really the way I see it, where I work there are certainly > shy people(office setting). I myself am pretty shy, yet I have one of > the most unshy jobs you can have, I work tech support, and talk to > people constantly. I also visit them personally at their cubes/desks > often. Also have to travel by myself or with others. I’ve made some > office friends, and some friends away from the office as well. Sadly > even this still makes it hard to make that first step towards a > stranger. Nevertheless a shy person can certainly get a good job,

According to studies, shybies tend not to reach the levels of career success that their skills would indicate they achieve.  it > is important to appear to be somewhat confidient, interviews make > people nervous normally.  A key is speaking in a clear voice and > looking a person in the eye.

I tried focusing on eye contact the last time, yet I wasn’t called back for a follow-up interviewer.  And I’m sure I could have done the job :( I need to focus more on speaking clearly.  I ought to remind myself that I have a nice voice.  Too often, I mumble my way through interviews. Finally, you left out the part about not presenting oneself as stiff/dislikeable.  This requires some smiling and some humor, if the interviewer tries to joke about something.  Boy, I’ve got a ways to go :( — Joe Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -On Sat, 03 Jun 2000 13:19:49 GMT, bastian9…@my-deja.com wrote: >nos…@here.com (Adrian Jackson) wrote: >>You know, I’d like to be a brain surgeon and make $400,000/yr, but I >>don’t meet the requirements of having an M.D. and shitwads of >>experience.  I guess they’re discriminating against me because of my >>ignorance in that field! >>Point blank: jobs have requirements.  If you don’t meet those >>requirements, you don’t get the job.  If you think you’re being >>wronged by erroneous job requirements, try to find a group with some >>political or judicial clout to help you out.  If you can’t, you should >>probably stop shooting rapids up shit creek.  ;) >While I understand your point, Adrian, I think there are two different >situations here.  Say, for example, that I own a haulage company.  When >it comes to employing truck drivers, it’s clearly acceptable for me >to insist that they have a valid truck driving licence.  No one’s going >to argue with that.  But it’s a different matter if I insist that they >weigh less than 180 lbs, because ‘overweight’ employees aren’t the image >I want my company to project.  That’s discrimination, and it’s wrong. >The thing with shyness is, it falls into a middle grey area.  Many >jobs *can* be done by a shy person, and yet an unshy person will >probably fit into the team and the working environment better.  It’s >not a clear cut case of being a reasonable job requirement, or unfair >discrimination. >IMO, most employers have unreasonable expectations anyway.  How many >job ads have you seen which specify that "excellent this" and >"outstanding that" are requirements?  In the vast majority of cases, >excellence is *not* required.  All that’s required is competence.  And, >IME, that quality is rare enough anyway, without seeking the even more >unattainable goal of excellence.

Hey, I totally agree!  I’m not saying all job requirements are valid just because they’re job requirements.  If you go apply for a job and get rejected, and think you were denied for unfair reasons, you’re well within your rights (in the U.S., at least) to seek legal counsel. If you have a legitimate complaint, finding a lawyer shouldn’t be a problem.  There is legislation on the books that defends your right to equal employment opportunity.  If you get turned down for reasons other than what the job can be proven to require, you’ll probably win your court case.  You’re not guaranteed to win.  There was a case a while back where applicants thought they were being cheated out of jobs at Hooters.  If I remember correctly, some GUYS wanted jobs there (as waiters).  In case you don’t know, Hooters is a restaurant chain more famous for its ample-chested waitresses than its food.   Anyway, Hooters won the case.  Apparently, big titties was such an integral part of their business model that it could be legitimately construed as a "job requirement."  :)

Response:

I just looked through the job ads in my local paper and it drives me mad that nearly all of the jobs that I am looking for says that you have to be confident, I suffer from shyness and get very frustrated when I read ad after ad that have the same requirements.  Could this be descrimination towards shy ppl it would be descrimination if it said you have to be good looking or you have to be a certain weight why isnt it when it says you have to be confident??. * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet’s Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet – Free!

Response:

On Thu, 01 Jun 2000 17:42:15 -0700, I Reek <x_the_prodigal_sun_xNOx_S…@yahoo.co.uk.invalid> wrote: >I just looked through the job ads in my local paper and it >drives me mad that nearly all of the jobs that I am looking for >says that you have to be confident, I suffer from shyness and >get very frustrated when I read ad after ad that have the same >requirements.  Could this be descrimination towards shy ppl it >would be descrimination if it said you have to be good looking >or you have to be a certain weight why isnt it when it says you >have to be confident??.

By that logic, no job could lawfully require anything!  :)

Response:

Adrian Jackson <nos…@here.com> wrote:

: By that logic, no job could lawfully require anything!  :) He’s commenting on the fact that there is no place in the job market for shy people. My attempts at escaping a dead-end postal job I despise is on the verge of driving me to self-surgery. (DIY ETS of course) — CAUTION: Email Spam Killer in use. Leave this line in your reply! 152680  First Law of Economics: You can’t sell product to people without money. 4968238 bytes of spam mail deleted.           http://www.wwa.com/~nospam/

Response:

I Reek <x_the_prodigal_sun_xNOx_S…@yahoo.co.uk.invalid> wrote in article <285668b8.97191…@usw-ex0102-016.remarq.com>… | I just looked through the job ads in my local paper and it | drives me mad that nearly all of the jobs that I am looking for | says that you have to be confident, I suffer from shyness and | get very frustrated when I read ad after ad that have the same | requirements.  Could this be descrimination towards shy ppl it | would be descrimination if it said you have to be good looking | or you have to be a certain weight why isnt it when it says you | have to be confident??. Maybe they’d accept someone who’s confident in the type of work required. ;) — Thrasher

Response:

I Reek <x_the_prodigal_sun_xNOx_S…@yahoo.co.uk.invalid> wrote in message

news:285668b8.97191c2d@usw-ex0102-016.remarq.com… > I just looked through the job ads in my local paper and it > drives me mad that nearly all of the jobs that I am looking for > says that you have to be confident, I suffer from shyness and > get very frustrated when I read ad after ad that have the same > requirements.

Just don’t own up to being shy at job interviews!  I’m shy but I can easily pretend that I’m confident at interviews!

Response:

>Just don’t own up to being shy at job interviews!  I’m shy but I can easily >pretend that I’m confident at interviews!

Don’t even get me started on this topic, it upsets me too much. Yes, even for the most menial office job, employers do not want shy people. Even if the job in question is so simple that it could be done adequately by most monkeys, employers will still hold you to that ridiculous "outgoing, confident" standard. That’s why you need to bone up on your acting skills, as Adrian alluded. All you really need to do to give yourself a chance is to pull the wool over their eyes in the interview(s). Granted, if there is a second interview, it’s a lot more difficult to do this.

Response:

Related Posts

Leave a Reply