 Poster: A snowHead
|
| Wayne wrote: |
| SMALLZOOKEEPER wrote: |
| Wayne, Sounds very 80's approach. Reps are reps mate. They have a rep for being a rep. Nothing you can do about it. Pay them well, give them good amount of time off, develop them as people and let them make mistakes and be creative. I think in modern times we call it..the Human Touch. |
Maybe cut and paste that into a few threads that I have seen here. 
Few points about interviewing reps.
We sell a logistically complex product and the reps make up part of the logistics. If they are not suitable it will detract from the value of the rest of the operation. So we really do need to at least try and determine their suitability. Don't assume that we get the interview results right all the time, we don't. But we try and get it right as much as we can. They will be wearing our uniform and so, regardless of how long they have been with us, they will be seen as representing the company.
We don’t know these people when they turn up. We make a guess about their suitability from the application form but it really isn’t the full picture.
We only have a relatively short period to find out as much as we can about these people and from this make an assumption how they will react in a given situation – and I fully appreciate that this is an inexact art.
If we were just to ask questions such as “how well do you work in a team” the answer may be different from what we observe in a situation (however contrived) that actually requires teamwork. The same can be said of punctuality, public speaking, etc, etc (long list).
We really do need to come up with tasks that will, in our opinion, help us to determine if an interviewee will help us run high quality trips. If they will they may get a job, if they won’t they don’t get a job. It’s not the reps who will have a Pandora dropped on them: to put it bluntly it's me.
An “80's approach” would be to create a stressful atmosphere or situation to see how people react to it. We don’t – we create a relaxed atmosphere where people are assessed on how they respond to assessment criteria.
As for wages - AFAIK (may be wrong) we pay the best rates of any TO
£250 per week, plus free flights, transfers, lift pass, accommodation, meals, etc. |
If you are paying the best rates, I would expect that most of the people you are interviewing have already worked a season for you or someone else.
In which case, ask them what that employer would say about them. Then ring a mate at one of those TOs from the interview room. It's worked for me a few times, where one story suddenly becomes something quite different before I've even finished dialling the area code...
They should, given that they are likely to have some experience, be able to answer with relevant competency based questions - give me an example of when you have done x, y or z basically. And support it with facts, and answer detailed questions about it.
I always like to ask a couple of questions at any interview. I ask when the last time they lost their temper was. You get some great answers to that one, and it will tell you very quickly who isn't telling you everything or is outright lying. Nobody can tell me they have never lost their temper. I also like to ask who the last person to let them down was, and why. Again, you get some really interesting answers that tells you more than just when someone has worked in a team, demonstrated leadership, resolved conflict, fixed a problem for someone, dealt with a disaster beyond their control, yadda yadda yadda.
I think you should have a Snowheads assessment centre. Let a dozen of us run the thing, and if they get out of there alive they've got the job. Or just invite Pandora and give them that little scenario as a brief  You never know when you might not be around and a rep has to take the flak and try and fix it before you get there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Monium wrote: |
| Nobody can tell me they have never lost their temper. |
Are you saying that nobody has ever told you this? Or are you saying, as I suspect, that they have but you choose not to believe them? Doesn't that say more about you than it does about them?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
Wayne, your approach is right, that is, the role play is unimportant, what matters is how they work with others. However, keep in mind, that the reps usually do not work in a team, rather they work alone vs the "punters", and for some people that is significant change. The tea-making idea is good for support-center staff, it's not bad for your purposes, just that I think that you need reps that can go and sort problems out - i.e you need to to look for someone who can be independent and think of solutions in a more flexible way, not only explain stuff. So, again, you have some basic, solid role plays, and more "creative" ideas are not going to make a difference, more important is haw you "read" into your candidates' performance on tests.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Wayne, for one of my (unsuccessful) TO interviews I was asked,
"So, there you are, in resort, the only bloke we employ, among 6 gorgeous chalet girls who all want to sleep with you. What do you do?"
My response, "well, obviously, I'd organise a rota and have Sundays off,"
Didn't seem to be what they were looking for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| sugardaddy wrote: |
| they work alone vs the "punters |
Not sure I'd agree with that mindset
| under a new name wrote: |
| 6 gorgeous chalet girls who all want to sleep with you. What do you do?" |
I would ask the resort manger if it were possible to have extra staff beds allocated so that sharing was not required. This would mean that all staff members could enoy a good night's sleep so enabling them to represent the company at our best; thus increasing profitability which in turn would enable the directors to gain an even larger bonus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| maggi wrote: |
| Monium wrote: |
| Nobody can tell me they have never lost their temper. |
Are you saying that nobody has ever told you this? Or are you saying, as I suspect, that they have but you choose not to believe them? Doesn't that say more about you than it does about them? |
A few people have just said "I can't think of when I've ever lost my temper" - which I just don't believe. Everyone, at some stage in their life, has lost their rag a bit. Some of the answers to the questions have been what got someone the job, telling us a bit more about what really set them off. We've also had some very very funny answers, where people have opened up and shown us a bit more personality than you tend to get normally to interview questions.
It does say plenty about me - I don't see an issue with that. It is interesting that the question quite often shows you a side to someone that you would otherwise have never known was there, quite often a side that you wouldn't want to employ.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Wayne wrote: |
| sugardaddy wrote: |
| they work alone vs the "punters |
Not sure I'd agree with that mindset
| under a new name wrote: |
| 6 gorgeous chalet girls who all want to sleep with you. What do you do?" |
I would ask the resort manger if it were possible to have extra staff beds allocated so that sharing was not required. This would mean that all staff members could enoy a good night's sleep so enabling them to represent the company at our best; thus increasing profitability which in turn would enable the directors to gain an even larger bonus. |
*cough* cowdoo *cough* - no point lying about it. Then again, I don't think my answer would have been much better, I'd have suggested we draw lots so that nobody feels like they are being treated unfairly and everyone gets their turn
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| under a new name wrote: |
Wayne, for one of my (unsuccessful) TO interviews I was asked,
"So, there you are, in resort, the only bloke we employ, among 6 gorgeous chalet girls who all want to sleep with you. What do you do?"
My response, "well, obviously, I'd organise a rota and have Sundays off,"
Didn't seem to be what they were looking for. |
Do you think they asked the girls in the recruitment process the same question?
What about if you were gay and answered the question honestly? And if you then didn't get the job?
Legal minefield, but then I'd expect nothing less from some of the TOs out there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| Whitegold wrote: |
| wayne should amend his form to allow for Natives cutandpasters. Having a policy that overpromotes creatives at the expense of efficient people will deliver an unbalanced team. |
1] If you don't appreciate the value of a manager, try working somewhere without one, or go on a ski trip where all the reps are doing their own thing.
1a] The application form “is” part of the interview process and anyone who doesn’t realise this has a problem.
2] We want people who want to work for "us", not just work. The process of recruitment requires that you tell us your reason for wanting to work for Us. We don't preclude the (extremely slim  ) possibility that a candidate may also want to work for another TO's, fine by us but in that case will not the reason be, inevitably, even slightly different in each case.
2a] If you can’t be bothered to tell us why you want to work for Us, what does that say?
2b] If any TO recruits people with a Cant Be Bothered attitude, will that enhance their/our product (your ski holiday).
3] We have (like most TO’s) have over 200 people chasing each reps job. Who would you spend time and money on interviewing. Those who cut and paste some bland, one size fits all, rhetoric to possibly hundreds of TOs or those who tell us why they really feel they are a suitable candidate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wayne, it's a waste of time really, trying to argue with someone who thinks cutting and pasting is "efficient" as opposed to idle and derivative.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Wayne, unfortunately I wouldn't feel comfortable repping in Italy without a bit more than my pidgin Italian, otherwise I'd apply like a shot, you sound like an extremely thoughtful employer and I'd love to spend a season in the Dolomites.
A hundred years ago, I learned - sort of - how to ski while working as Supertravel's resort rep in Verbier. I didn't use my French much, but when I needed it, I really, really needed it! I'd already been a solicitor for some time by then, so dealing with clients in a professional manner was ingrained. And no, hand on heart, I have never lost my temper with any client. There are better ways of getting one's view across.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
Hurtle, in this case the question posed was "when did you last lose your temper?", not "when did you last lose your temper with a client?". i hope most of us wouldn't be that unprofessional and lose it with a client (at least, not in front of them/within earshot !)
i'd also apply for this job in a heartbeat, but i have responsibilities here, i don't speak italiano and i don't snowboard well enough (i feel) to do the guiding, etc. expected of a rep. sounds like a fab job though!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sherlock235, I'm not sure that 'when did you last lose your temper?' is relevant when posed in the abstract but, in any event, I have never lost my temper with anyone with whom I am in a working relationship - client, employer, employee or colleague: it would be unprofessional in every case, as well as unproductive.
Wayne has said that he doesn't employ ski guides. Supertravel didn't either (obviously, since they employed me when I couldn't ski) but did expect their reps to acquire a modicum of local skiing knowledge, if only anecdotal knowledge.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Hurtle, i guess how/what causes you to lose your rag may be relevant. interviewing potential employees in this situation is not a process i would want to be involved in. people have such varying expectations of their holiday experience, and therefore what they expect from their reps (if anything at all).
haha and don't tempt me woman....!  i'm having such a crap time trying to get a job here, i'm easily led at the moment!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| Quote: |
I have never lost my temper with anyone with whom I am in a working relationship
|
Neither have I. It probably partly depends on what kind of working environment you are used to. Nobody ever lost their temper with anyone when I was working - if a colleague sent you a minute saying "I was disappointed to hear..." it meant he was really incandescent with rage. And if somebody in the Treasury wrote a letter which started "You put forward a worthwhile case for increasing the spending on XYZ" it would be followed by words which, loosely translated, would mean "but if you think we're falling for that one you're even more stupid than we thought you were; p#ss off and don't waste our time with any more of your old cr@p".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
pam w, there should be a book of translations !
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
david@mediacopy
| Quote: |
p#ss off and don't waste our time with any more of your old cr@p".
|
is the translation for everything at the Treasury at the moment 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| pam w wrote: |
| Quote: |
I have never lost my temper with anyone with whom I am in a working relationship
|
Neither have I. |
Exactly. Most people don't. And if it asked about it at interview it should only relate to your professional life. What does he want to hear? "Oh, it was when I caught my girlfriend in bed with my best friend". Or, "When I discovered my boyfriend's porn collection." What does he want to hear? "Oh, I really lost it when I heard how long it took for relief operations to begin in Pakistan." 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| maggi wrote: |
| Exactly. Most people don't. And if it asked about it at interview it should only relate to your professional life. What does he want to hear? "Oh, it was when I caught my girlfriend in bed with my best friend". Or, "When I discovered my boyfriend's porn collection." What does he want to hear? "Oh, I really lost it when I heard how long it took for relief operations to begin in Pakistan." |
They don't, but then sometimes you ask the question and someone gives you what I call a suicide answer - they tell you that a customer did A, B and C and they told them where to get off.
Other times you ask the question and it gives you an angle you'd not got the chance to see before - one candidate I interviewed a while back said quite openly that it really got to him the third time they completely cocked up an order and the company lost thousands because they had to honour the price. How they expressed it to them is interesting - you don't have to lose your temper with someone, you can get angry in the car on the way home, take 5 mins out to get out of the office or away from a team, how you then deal with it is important.
I like to find people with short fuses. I can't have that in my team, our tempers are tested every day. The same, I would imagine is true roughly once a week as a ski rep. So I ask the question.
Other times you get fobbed off with a nothing answer, because they don't really want to answer the question and tell you about how they went off on one in a road rage incident on the way to the interview.
It does, 100%, relate to their professional life. Whether the example is one from their professional life, I don't really care. If I'm going to include as a sensible response to how someone multi-tasks that they have 5 children of different ages and deal with it every day, I am ok with the negative side of people's personal life as well.
But we are getting rather off topic, about a single question that I suggested could be asked. It's an opinion, plenty of others will differ.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Shows general IQ but cant see how that helps in giving the customers good service!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1-B, 2-B, 3-C, 4-A, 5-B, 6-A, 7-C, 8-B, 9-A, 10-B, 11-D, 12-A, 13-C, 14-D, 15-B, 16-3, 17-9, 18-11, 19-12, 20-6, 21-D, 22-C, 23-A, 24-B, 25-C, 26-B, 27-B, 28- don't know, 29-31, 30-E
Slow day at work, I guess. I really hope that you're using some kind of normal scores, and not just raw scores, that you look at which questions they got right, how many were guesses and that you know it's just a "fast and dirty" assesment tool, and far from being a well constructed one (coming from someone that does quite a bit of work using psychometric tools).
I also think that a rep should know when not to bluff and talk out of his ***, so maybe people that leave some unaswered questions are preferable over those that tend to guess alot
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Roy Hockley,
The written paper is just one (half hour) section of a full weekend assessement.
sugardaddy,
We look at the "type" of questions answered correctly and also not answered rather than just counting the ticks and crosses.
As I said to Roy this is just a very small section.
Oh, and this is not really a "test" as such. It's more a section of a process (gogs in wheels).
Can't say much more as I "know" that some people on next week's interviews are  's
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
Roy Hockley, general IQ is relevant, but of course, not the only requirement. Also, this test has quite a bit of math, basic math but not really general IQ. Again, as a coarse selection tool, it's OK
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sugardaddy,
Has to be like that as many people are Italian's so an English (for example) word association would not a] be fair, b] give a true picture, c]add to the overall process, the same can be said for quite few assessments that require English as a first language. push/press - present/present - set (x93) - etc.
| Roy Hockley wrote: |
| Shows general IQ but cant see how that helps in giving the customers good service! |
Nor does noting who brings a pen, but it adds to the overall picture !
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| Wayne wrote: |
2] We want people who want to work for "us", not just work. The process of recruitment requires that you tell us your reason for wanting to work for Us. We don't preclude the (extremely slim ) possibility that a candidate may also want to work for another TO's, fine by us but in that case will not the reason be, inevitably, even slightly different in each case.
|
Then I can see why you have problems. It might be fine for a big company that has a great rep or prospects of career advancement to think like this, but if your recruiting 12 people for short term work its an absolutely insane policy, unless your holidays are so ace that people that have been on them are lining up with applications.
I am in a totally different industry, but recruit client facing individuals for short term/part time who have to think quick on their feet, especially when responding to crazy problems that come totally out of the blue, and adapting quickly is one of the things I look for most. The chap who answered the question about the 6 girls with such wit would get top marks from me, although our client base is probably of a lot lower 'class' than yours. People don't truely 'know' if they want to work for us until they've done a few weeks on the job (we re-recruited a lady recently who had previously left for her dream employers!), so from where I'm standing you'd be better off with someone who couldn't care less who hes working for, but can adapt easily to the environment they'll be working in.
| Quote: |
3] We have (like most TO’s) have over 200 people chasing each reps job. Who would you spend time and money on interviewing. Those who cut and paste some bland, one size fits all, rhetoric to possibly hundreds of TOs or those who tell us why they really feel they are a suitable candidate. |
Who do you really want to employ, someone who will sit for three days working at one customers problem expertly or cover a whole host of different problems adequately? I also assume that you send each of the candidates who you decide not to interview or employ who have written bespoke applications an individually written letter of rejection? If you don't, are you helping contribute to the problem?
Sorry to be so blunt, but it sounds an awful lot like your on some crazy hunt for a few 'ideal employee for any industry' type Yes men rather than someone that can and will take on the job at hand with relative ease.
When it comes down to it, for a Rep your probably better off with someone on the workshy side whos an absolute charmer and rides in on luck than a company man with no personality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
I would ask them some behavioral interview type questions, eg give examples of............dealing with difficult customers, dealing with problem situations.
Ask them whatever you have decided is important.
Then I would role-play a problem situation / case study.
I would want them to be cool when under pressure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Esco,
I had a 45 min chat with the boss of natives yesterday about our run of interviews; we’re doing three sets.
The main point I asked them to review was their guidelines on “how that get that job”. It seems to concentrate on the actual interview - the bit where you turn up somewhere and do something. It has almost no information on how to get to that stage in the 1st place. I’ll say it again; the application form “is” part of the interview.
I don’t know for certain, but can almost guarantee, that many of the people who sent in an initial application form would have been able to do this job. Some would have been really good at it and a few would have been brilliant. But they didn't even get to the interview. Why?
Seems daft to me that if you’re looking for work then you don’t even make an effort.
We (like all companies) sort application form into a few piles; you really do need to make the effort to get your application into the Yes give-em-an-interview pile. If you can’t be bothered to at least try and give us a reason to put your app in the Yes pile, fine – up to you.
I will guarantee that every single person on this forum who runs a chalet, a TO, an airport transfer company, a ski service operation, a boot shop, etc, etc, etc feels exactly the same. This is not a game, it a business. If my shop, minibus, etc is not up to scratch then the clients will go with someone else and I don’t want that. Real people, real mortgages, real kids need shoes, real bills need paying. Are you going to trust someone with that who can’t even take the time to fill in a form ?
Another point I raised with the Natives bod -
We all know why most (not all) people want to work in a ski resort. That’s fine. We know it and accept it. (I was an 18-30 rep for years, back in the day when it was fun and there were no little bugs swimming around to ruin the fun). But !, and this is the main point about application forms - You have to remember that even if you want to go on the razz for a few months in a ski resort, you MUST remember that the person reading your application form works at the other end of the scale (razz to work). They will be taking it VERY seriously. It’s a business. A profit oriented exercise in a service led industry.
If you can’t be arsed to fill in an application will you be arsed to turn up on time for the coach or the airport. Will you be arsed when the hundredth person that week asked you the same question (it’s the 1st time “they” have asked and they want a correct answer). Will you be arsed to make sure your uniform shirt is ironed. Etc, etc, etc.
I don’t say for one minute that working for us for a few months in the Dolomites is the be all and end all of TO jobs. It’s not. “But to us it is”, we take it very seriously.
As we never sell stuff to our client’s, our reps don’t need to be great sales people, just to be able to provide a service. Dead simple. We need to make a decision – rightly or wrongly – about the suitability of each applicant to fulfil that role – this is a 2 stage process, the application form and the interview. If we cock-up on either stages then we get a Pandora dropped on us. If everything goes well you’ll never hear about it, but that’s just the way the world is (I think).
Here endeth Wayne’s letter to the Corinthians, please turn to hymn 123
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
