Compromise

Part of job hunting is compromise. When you first set out to find a job, unless you are especially flexible you set a number of criteria which any potential job has to fill. These may be location based, occupation based, money based or based on an entirely different premise altogether. When I first set out to find a job I wanted a marketing exec position in the south that paid over 15,000.

The money was the first thing to go. After all its less important really. For many Graduates, a salary at all is just numbers and I picked 15,000 as a limit as I thought that was reasonable. Of course clever firms are cutting costs by offering significantly lower salaries because they know how tight the job market is.

Next I cut down to look for any marketing position and soon got a few interviews for marketing research positions. This is turn became any business based position which involved marketing which has led me to apply to some rather odd job titles.

Location cannot be changed. I am tied to a contract in Southampton and dont want to leave what I have here and in a way it limits me as much if not more than the others.

I am fortunate in that I have some savings and therefore do not have to literally take anything. The question is though how far do we have to compromise?

Last week I applied for a purely Admin position, a job description which could be filled my a school leaver and which duties include filing and making tea. I justified applying because it was a year contract and would give me office exeperience.

I think this is where I have chosen to draw the line. I don't see any light at the end of the tunnel with regards to the economic situation and I don't expect the job market to simply pick up. I have therefore ruled out jobs which have absolutely no application to my chosen career in business. I could go and work in a shop but then I am effectively just wasting time. Time which for the moment I can use to hopefully find one break. I am not naive to think that with that first job everything will be exceptionally easy, I do think I will be considered for more positions, and at least the excuse "you have no experience" will not be flung at me.

Incidentally I have an interview for a sales and marketing position with JPA tomorrow. When I originally applied the position was a marketing one, the sales was tagged on later. However I was impressed with the company and the position has marketing in the title. It is after all, all about compromise.

Bepuzzlement

As my main post today was about a general thing this is a shorter job related post.
Still waiting to hear from Amicus ITS a month on. Applied for a general admin job which is on a year contract.

Heard from College Chambers. Sounded like the standard conversation. It was a very tough decision, lots of good candidates...(yeah yeah get on with it)..so we are inviting everyone back for a second interview...

You will hear from us next week..

What?! I made a total hash of the interview. I looked nervous, clueless and totally unsuitable. Even if your giving everyone a second interview you may as well rule out some people, surely. Mystifying. I shall obviously wait to hear from them next week but it has left me a little bit of a predicament. From reading the earlier post you will know my thoughts on the job.

But its a job, which pays money and gives experience.
Its a difficult one.

Dissecting the disaster / Sods Law

This particular post will take a more personal standpoint as it essentially reviews my interview last night and what went wrong.

I arrived at College Chambers 10 minutes before my interview. I was directed to a small reception area outside a set of doors where I had to wait. The previous candidate was being interviewed, and the doors were far from sound proof. I have to say this was un-nerving whilst your waiting. The interviewers spoke quietly so I could not catch their comments but I could hear everything the guy said and the one thing that shone across was he knew his stuff.
I think should I find myself in that situation again I will find a reason not to stay directly outside the door. Some people believe you might pick up tips to better prepare you. For me it just made me feel generally and entirely bad.

When I was finally issued into the room it was several minutes past 5 and in fact the next candidate was sitting right outside able to listen to my entire interview.

The interviewers consisted of a panel, two barristers clerk and a barrister. They were across a wide table and there was no opportunity to initially shake hands.
The centre barrister clerk began by asking questions off a printed piece of paper. He did not have my C.V, covering letter he was just asking each candidate the same set of questions regardless. There was no attempt to put me at ease and he went straight in to the first inevitable question, "What do you understand by the role of Barristers Clerk?".
Typical the one time I dont basically memorise the job description is the one time it comes up. I had done some research but missed key points and it was downhill from there.
A later question asked what I knew of college chambers, as you may know from an earlier post this was very little due to their current lack of public promotion and the fact their website is under construction. I could therefore only use the information I gathered from other sources.
Also over the course of the interview it was revealed how the job was 90% barristers clerk and 10% marketing, a fact not clearly explained in the original advert. Marketing was effectively tiny small print to the size 50 "Barristers Clerk".

I think another issue was my understanding of the role, the term clerk, and the wages offered made it seem like a fairly minor thing, a junior role, necessary to the chambers but basically a role in which you were a dogsbody performing all the needed but unwanted duties of the barrister. Nothing had given me the impression it was a career in itself until I met the middle aged interviewer who had been a clerk his whole life. I dont entirely know why my mind could not properly comprehend this previously but it was another thing that made the interview that much harder.

I sweated my way through the other questions, even suffering a mind blank at the marketing one before the final question which asked where I saw myself in 3 years time at which I stuttered to a fairly generic answer.
As I left the room I made sure to shake one hand at least. The girl waiting gave me an apologetic smile, she had inadvertently witnessed the train wreck, whether it had helped or hindered her it is difficult to say.

I know I will not get the position. I am amazed I was even interviewed for it in the first place. After all my C.V and covering letter were marketing focused and put the barristers clerk bit almost as a footnote. A few extra duties that added to the actual job.

Next up in two weeks an interview for a sales and marketing position, where again the marketing seems to be a footnote. Im aware of it this time and each time I err in an interview simply makes one more mistake learned, to be avoided there after.