Career Mistakes

Sir Alan Sugar is a bully claims Guardian

Apprentice bashing is back

Lord Sugar and his minions return to the UK tv screens 13/10/14 for the beginning of another series of the Apprentice. The BBC have started a drip youtube feed of the shows contestants aka candidates with sound bites for the couch potatoes that can’t understand the dialogue. You could say that the videos allow the candidates to express themselves but is it just another vehicle for bullying and ridicule prior to the show launch that they must endure? After we have all had a good laugh at their possibly lamentable claims we will see them face Lord Sugar and his bullying tactics according to The Guardian cribbing from the Radio Times. Lord Sugar says he just speaks as he finds and had he been a bully then he would have been inundated with tribunal cases, which he has not. Why they have chosen this over the dire quality of candidates would have nothing to do with an easy headline grab of course. It all begins with a series of videos that have been released which frame the candidate(s) in a noose of their own sound bites.

The real question should be; has The Apprentice become an early season pantomime over the last few years or does it still offer something of value? In the interim, ready yourselves for a hoist of the petard(s).

Steven Ugoalah audition – The Apprentice 2014 – Series 10 – BBC One
[tvideo type=”youtube” clip_id=”79iO3V84wAs” autoplay=”false” controls=”false” disablekb=”false” fs=”false” loop=”false” modestbranding=”false”]

Solomon Akhtar audition – The Apprentice 2014 – Series 10 – BBC One
[tvideo type=”youtube” clip_id=”aVVKKllR48E” autoplay=”false” controls=”false” disablekb=”false” fs=”false” loop=”false” rel=”false” showinfo=”false” modestbranding=”false”]

Sarah Dales audition – The Apprentice 2014 – Series 10 – BBC One
[tvideo type=”youtube” clip_id=”1UXabI33Ezo” autoplay=”false” controls=”false” disablekb=”false” fs=”false” loop=”false” rel=”false” showinfo=”false” modestbranding=”false”]

Apprentice bashing is back Read More »

Recruiters look for holes in a CV

Reading Between The Lines Of A CV

Recruiters could, and are seeing increasing numbers of CVs from a different perspective, and it could be detrimental to the intended career move of the individual.

It transpires when reading a CV that the first review of the detail a recruiter makes is cursory, and a skim for relevant experience to the post applied for. The second review is for career movement, and if the CV passed the relevant experience test then this could be where the detail voids (aka holes) in a CV could let the individual down.

There are many factors that can cause people to move from one job to another which include progression and continuity as just two reasons, but if a CV only offers superficial detail of the roles held, and no explanation of departure then the reader has to arrive at a conclusion.

Usually negative.

Recruiters consider lack of detail on a CV as an attempt to conceal the truth about movement. It transpires, rightly or wrongly, that this lack of detail creates a mental label in the mind of the reader that the CV represents a job hopper, probably unable to hold a position for longer than 18 months before resigning or being sacked.

Conversely, career movements can work in favour of the person being scrutinised but require effort to ensure that they encapsulate and promote responsibilities, achievements and progression to explain clearly to the reader the reasons for change.

We are continually surprised by the number of people that fail to understand what should be an opportunity which can fundamentally change the way recruiters engage with the person concerned.

Do not let a recruiter read between the lines, ensure the effort is made to add the lines of detail to a CV and it could be the difference between you and the next guy.

Reading Between The Lines Of A CV Read More »

Paris Brown Twitter Remarks Cost Job

Paris Brown – The things kids say

Paris Brown, forced to resign from her employment as Britain’s first youth police commissioner, will be remembered for the added dubious distinction of making choice remarks on Twitter in what were still her formative years. Apparently. Although the word on the “street” is that quite a few choice remarks were made in the last 6 months and not just between the ages of 14 and 16. But what of it and what can the rest of us learn from the story?

An obvious conclusion is not to write anything that is, or could be construed as, confrontational on a social network. That is simplistic enough solution for anyone over the age of 40 but what of the population below this age? The “youth of today”, consider the Social Networks a place to dump a plethora of inane remarks for the legions of “friends” to respond to in an equally if not superior example of banality. I’m not going to defend any remarks that are made on Twitter or Facebook, but my instinct coupled with a little introspective consideration suggest that people in glass houses should not throw stones as only the truly righteous will have no skeletons in the closet.

Every generation is the same, there is nothing new under the sun, but the difference for those of us old enough to remember the days before the commercial internet, and this should be seen as pre 1990, will remember that you could say what you wanted (free speech) within reason, without running the risk of losing your job or having your collar felt by the police. As a general rule of thumb teenagers are reckless, feckless beings. Or are they just full of the spirit of youth, brimming with carefree abandon? I would say it’s both. In the instance of Paris, if you scrape past the broad brush of the media and look at the remarks they could be considered zeitgeist generalisations, a crass stereo typical identifier labelling by a kid. She was wrong but in a realm where only a peer group is invited, sometimes the parents can be considered caught sleeping on the job.

But could she prove to be the start of a pivotal moment in the history of social networking? As someone that has learnt from taking the hard path, she would do well to take the blows, stand tall, and turn her lesson into one that can be shared for the common good. She made a mistake, and she should now be allowed to make amends as ambassador for reasonable, acceptable behaviour.

For the rest of us, we should ingest the lesson quickly, or the forfeit could be equally catastrophic for career aspirations. There are ways for everyone to protect themselves from scrutiny, and if your subconscious can not be trusted (a word to the wise – it can’t), then maybe you should consider an exercise in pertinency and perform a social network purge?

Twitter and Facebook are seen as a visible statement of consciousness by a generation. A place where controversy is the king maker, audacity a crown prince but in every court there is a fool, and in the land of the blind the one eyed girl could be Queen.

Paris Brown – The things kids say Read More »

Scroll to Top