I have found one common reason for the rejection in the interview- \"Poor Communication.\" I was surprised to see the data at my company(U-Worth Business Management Solutions (P) Ltd.) Almost 80% of the total rejected candidates are due to poor communication and rest 20% because of stability,flexibility,poor domain knowledge or attitude issues. I have retrieved this data from F&A domain only.
I really fail to understand as to why people from very good finance & accounting background do not have good communication.
They spend a lot of money on doing CA/CPA/CIMA/MBA/MCOM/BCOM that is almost 1 to 10 lakh but they cant they spent 10k only on their communication?
I have seen a CA/MBA working on lower salary or position just because they do not have good communication skill...
Can someone advise what feedback we need to give if they are rejected due to poor communication....? What is the workaround to improve this among the mass to increase the employ-ability.
Sanjay Kumar
uwo
From India, Delhi
2I really fail to understand as to why people from very good finance & accounting background do not have good communication.
They spend a lot of money on doing CA/CPA/CIMA/MBA/MCOM/BCOM that is almost 1 to 10 lakh but they cant they spent 10k only on their communication?
I have seen a CA/MBA working on lower salary or position just because they do not have good communication skill...
Can someone advise what feedback we need to give if they are rejected due to poor communication....? What is the workaround to improve this among the mass to increase the employ-ability.
Sanjay Kumar
uwo
From India, Delhi
Hi Sanjay,
True the candidates with accounts background are poor in communication, as they spend most of the times in numbers and logical calculations. But it does not mean they are weak in communication, rather you will find that most of them have good written communications.
So in your organisations during selections procedure, you can have more written test for technical and job skills and few final rounds of interview.
If their domain knowledge is good, you can have a small session on good communication in the organisations itself, once they join.
For the candidates, who are rejected for poor communication, correct feedback should be provided, so that they are aware that communication hinders their selection and ask them to groom themselves through websites or communication classes for improving oral communications.
One of the best way they can improve their english is to read a book or novel or english newspaper in front of a mirror, watch english news.
Regards,
From India, Mumbai
True the candidates with accounts background are poor in communication, as they spend most of the times in numbers and logical calculations. But it does not mean they are weak in communication, rather you will find that most of them have good written communications.
So in your organisations during selections procedure, you can have more written test for technical and job skills and few final rounds of interview.
If their domain knowledge is good, you can have a small session on good communication in the organisations itself, once they join.
For the candidates, who are rejected for poor communication, correct feedback should be provided, so that they are aware that communication hinders their selection and ask them to groom themselves through websites or communication classes for improving oral communications.
One of the best way they can improve their english is to read a book or novel or english newspaper in front of a mirror, watch english news.
Regards,
From India, Mumbai
Sanjay,
How does an account with good communication skill is going to help your organisation to grow? If an accountant is technically sound then they can help your organisation to grow further. Good communication skill can be an added advantage for the Job but rejection based on poor communication skill is bad judgement.
regards
Manjay sharma
From India, Delhi
How does an account with good communication skill is going to help your organisation to grow? If an accountant is technically sound then they can help your organisation to grow further. Good communication skill can be an added advantage for the Job but rejection based on poor communication skill is bad judgement.
regards
Manjay sharma
From India, Delhi
Judging a candidate in an hour is hardly tough. Then rejecting them by means of interviewer perspective is highly unacceptable.Interviewer should analyse for which skills can be improved and which is mandatory to work in his organization.Then he could finalize instead searching for more people to interview.Hope this works our for all the employers
From India, Pune
From India, Pune
Dear Kumaresh,
You have dug up this four year old thread and have given reply. Nevertheless, if you say that judging candidate in an hour is tough then I beg to differ with you. For a seasoned interviewer, one hour is more than sufficient.
I conduct training on "Behavioural Interviewing". In this interviewing method, competency based questions are asked. The questions are asked in such a way that candidate cannot concoct replies and he/she has to tell the truth.
You have proposed to identify the competencies for the job, find out which competencies candidate possess and then "improve" certain competencies that candidate lacks. Well this formula may seem good on the paper nevertheless, for employers, business is nothing but a race that has to be won. For this, they prefer to hire horses. Hiring assess and expecting them to get improved into assess is nothing but foolhardiness.
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
You have dug up this four year old thread and have given reply. Nevertheless, if you say that judging candidate in an hour is tough then I beg to differ with you. For a seasoned interviewer, one hour is more than sufficient.
I conduct training on "Behavioural Interviewing". In this interviewing method, competency based questions are asked. The questions are asked in such a way that candidate cannot concoct replies and he/she has to tell the truth.
You have proposed to identify the competencies for the job, find out which competencies candidate possess and then "improve" certain competencies that candidate lacks. Well this formula may seem good on the paper nevertheless, for employers, business is nothing but a race that has to be won. For this, they prefer to hire horses. Hiring assess and expecting them to get improved into assess is nothing but foolhardiness.
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Community Support and Knowledge-base on business, career and organisational prospects and issues - Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query, download formats and be part of a fostered community of professionals.
Reason.jpg
10 reason why programmers leave.doc