Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Actuarial Discussion Forum > Careers - Employment
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions

DW Simpson
Actuarial Jobs

Visit our site for the most up to date jobs for actuaries.

Actuarial Salary Surveys
Property & Casualty, Health, Life, Pension and Non-Tradtional Jobs.

Actuarial Meeting Schedule
Browse this year's meetings and which recruiters will attend.

Contact DW Simpson
Have a question?
Let's talk.
You'll be glad you did.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #41  
Old 04-24-2008, 12:33 PM
mexx
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TZK View Post
Depends on your criteria for success. Plus, delivery is not really a question here. It is on the difference between an argument that sounds good, using fallacious reasoning, and an argument that sounds good because it is good (logically). Most people can't tell the difference immediately, but then when they go to apply the information they run into problems when it was just something someone came up with to sound good.
The success of an interview is highly dependant on delivery. On paper, my grades, exam success, etc were never impressive. I was mediocre, at best. But I knew that the minute I got an interview, the job was mine (and this proved to be true in every co-op round I went through).

I didn't walk into an interview trying to prove how smart I was and trying to create perfectly flawless logical answers - I walked in there ready to show them I was someone they would enjoy working with on a daily basis. They already knew my qualifications based on my resume - I was there to show them my personality.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 04-24-2008, 12:37 PM
TZK TZK is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,074
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by glassjaws View Post
A person going on a rant about how superior their intellect is to any person who may be interviewing them shouldn't be making such careless mistakes. A typo is "you'er" or "your'e", I'd even give you "youre" as a typo. However, I fail to believe this is a typo.

If you're as intellectually superior to me as you claim to be, you'd see the humor in someone spouting off about how marvelously intelligent they are making an amature (yeah, I spelled it wrong on purpose) mistake.
Humor is reserved for people that respect each other. If I expected you to play fairly I would see the humor in it. My experience though is that certain people on this board will just make things up even if you didn't put a typo in your thread title. People here will lie, cheat, and steal to avoid admitting they are wrong about something.

Which you are doing by trying to say it wasn't a typo when it was...
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 04-24-2008, 12:39 PM
Merk Merk is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Studying for money
Favorite beer: Gritty McDuff's Best Bitter
Posts: 611
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by glassjaws View Post
No, I've missed the wonder that is TZK psotings until now. But, I must say, my simple mind is amused.
Ditto.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 04-24-2008, 12:40 PM
Qisoneminusp's Avatar
Qisoneminusp Qisoneminusp is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: in the saddle
Studying for Run DMaC
Posts: 2,909
Default

hahahaha!

this is brilliant!
your you're smrtr than a 5th grade interviewer.
__________________

Why so serious?
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 04-24-2008, 12:42 PM
TZK TZK is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,074
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mexx View Post
The success of an interview is highly dependant on delivery. On paper, my grades, exam success, etc were never impressive. I was mediocre, at best. But I knew that the minute I got an interview, the job was mine (and this proved to be true in every co-op round I went through).

I didn't walk into an interview trying to prove how smart I was and trying to create perfectly flawless logical answers - I walked in there ready to show them I was someone they would enjoy working with on a daily basis. They already knew my qualifications based on my resume - I was there to show them my personality.
We were talking about speeches there, not interviews.

But anyways... You are trying to label fundamental differences in identity conscious choices. I am not trying to show anything... I AM. You were appealing to their naive sense of fairness - Literally that you are just an average guy that they UNDERSTAND and can relate to.

All people have a moral obligation to not run their mouth about things they do not understand. Most people just don't realize that they don't understand nearly as much as they think. Most people bullshit and think they are making a good argument, whereas I know better. If they knew what was wrong with their arguments, they would do the same thing as me. I am happy for you that your success rate in interviews is high, but if you think compared to me this means you know something I don't you are wrong. It is more like ignorance is bliss.

This might get you pretty far in life, but know this. You will always be asking someone to give you something, and at the end of that giving chain will always be someone like me. Only system thinkers create things in this world.

Last edited by TZK; 04-25-2008 at 06:48 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 04-24-2008, 12:42 PM
Merk Merk is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Studying for money
Favorite beer: Gritty McDuff's Best Bitter
Posts: 611
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TZK View Post
There seems to be different ways that people apply intelligence. Some people have high IQ's but are not what you would call "systems thinkers". They use their brainpower to learn how to "persuade" other people without really having a clear understanding of what they are talking about. That is, they don't really have a systematic understanding of the world around them or the people in it.

I find that whenever I deal with other people, these qualities that I have can not be hidden. It is not a matter of tact or anything so simple. Even just gaging the subconscious controlled factors of my demeanor causes people to recognize this. Interviewers expect candidates to be nervous to some degree and unsure of themselves as they are in a new situation. This does not mean that they will stutter or provide poor answers. It just means they might catch a bead of sweat, posture a certain way, or the person will respond to them in a certain way as if they are waiting for a cue from the interviewer to try and say the right thing. These are things that the interviewer may not even recognize consciously, but makes them feel a certain way when they pick them up out of the corner of their eye.

This no doubt provides some sort of comfort to them. I feel that when I interview with people that the interviewer is often intimidated. This seems to put them in defensive mode without me having done anything. It is like the interviewer questions their own self worth just looking at me. I know this would not be an issue with other systems thinkers or people with high self esteem, but such people seem to be limited to the highest positions in a company.

It would seem you could just talk someone into being comfortable with you if this were the case, but it doesn't work that way. People often hide what they think as if they are afraid they would look stupid if their belief was shown false. I once had a conversation with a lady interviewing me about giving speeches on actuarial findings. Every few seconds I would stop to think about how to put what I was saying so that it would be the most convincing and objective argument. She made a face as if she thought that needing to think about what you were saying was a poor quality for a speech giver to have. I said that I find speeches work the best when I write the speech and memorize it. She responded that she had to do the same thing as well and quickly moved on.

In order to form an argument that is both logical and convincing you must take time to form it. It is easy to form specious arguments that have no logical value at the drop of a hat, but this doesn't accomplish anything - someone could do the same for the opposing point of view. This is especially true if you are giving a speech on something important or discussing complex issues. It is easier to destroy understanding than it is to create it. I felt like I was having to bend over backwards to deduce what this lady might be thinking that would cause her to misinterpret my answers.

I find that interviewers have all kinds of backwards views on things that determine how they interpret behavior and arguments. They hide these beliefs to prevent you from disproving them so you can come to an understanding. This in of itself is a poorly reasoned type of behavior. Objective truth is only determined by the confrontation of ideas. If the interviewer naturally liked you, they might be more open minded (although they still would be judgmental based on some silly beliefs they were sensitive about)

However it seems being above average in any area that people didn't feel was a matter of choice causes people to not like you regardless of what you do. It is like your existence automatically challenges their sense of fairness and they consider you an enemy.

I luckily found a job through a family friend who was a high level, systems thinker in another company. If it wasn't for this person, I am not sure I would have ever found a job. Has anyone else faced these kinds of problems and what have you done to overcome them? I may need to move jobs soon (Department closing) which means interviewing all over again. I am not looking forward to it.

Your problem is that the interviewers are failing to understand the full light of your brilliance. You need to write them a proof of why you're smarter than all people in their company. Then you'll be in business.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 04-24-2008, 12:44 PM
glassjaws's Avatar
glassjaws glassjaws is offline
Member
Non-Actuary
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: 99 Franklin St.
Studying for C4
College: Chambana
Favorite beer: Whatever you buy me
Posts: 45,970
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TZK View Post
Humor is reserved for people that respect each other. If I expected you to play fairly I would see the humor in it. My experience though is that certain people on this board will just make things up even if you didn't put a typo in your thread title. People here will lie, cheat, and steal to avoid admitting they are wrong about something.

Which you are doing by trying to say it wasn't a typo when it was...
Show me where I'm wrong and that your thread title is correct. Please. If I'm "wrong" about it being a typo, it's because I don't believe you. In big-people world, sometimes not everyone believes what you say.
__________________
I am the background noise of life
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 04-24-2008, 12:49 PM
mexx
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TZK View Post
We were talking about speeches there, not interviews.

But anyways... You are trying to label fundamental differences in identity conscious choices. I am not trying to show anything... I AM. You were appealing to their naive sense of fairness - Literally that you are just an average guy that they UNDERSTAND and can relate to.

All people have a moral obligation to not run their mouth about things they do not understand. Most people just don't realize that they don't understand nearly as much as they think. Most people bullshit and think they are making a good argument, whereas I know better. If they knew what was wrong with their arguments, they would do the same thing as me. I am happy for you that you are success rate in interviews is high, but if you think compared to me this means you know something I don't you are wrong. It is more like ignorance is bliss.
The bolded part certainly ain't true!!

As an aside .. I didn't claim to know something you didn't - in fact, I'm sure you (and lots of other people) are smarter than me. Smarts only gets you so far - if you cannot relate to others and adjust your behaviour to what is appropriate in that particular situation, you will not get very far in any field that involves interaction.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 04-24-2008, 12:54 PM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 82,943
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TZK View Post
Most people just don't realize that they don't understand nearly as much as they think.
This is very true.

You may want to think on that for a while.
__________________
It's STUMP

LinkedIn Profile
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 04-24-2008, 01:04 PM
oirg oirg is online now
Member
CAS
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 8,241
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TZK View Post
There seems to be different ways that people apply intelligence. Some people have high IQ's but are not what you would call "systems thinkers". They use their brainpower to learn how to "persuade" other people without really having a clear understanding of what they are talking about. That is, they don't really have a systematic understanding of the world around them or the people in it.

I find that whenever I deal with other people, these qualities that I have can not be hidden. It is not a matter of tact or anything so simple. Even just gaging the subconscious controlled factors of my demeanor causes people to recognize this. Interviewers expect candidates to be nervous to some degree and unsure of themselves as they are in a new situation. This does not mean that they will stutter or provide poor answers. It just means they might catch a bead of sweat, posture a certain way, or the person will respond to them in a certain way as if they are waiting for a cue from the interviewer to try and say the right thing. These are things that the interviewer may not even recognize consciously, but makes them feel a certain way when they pick them up out of the corner of their eye.

This no doubt provides some sort of comfort to them. I feel that when I interview with people that the interviewer is often intimidated. This seems to put them in defensive mode without me having done anything. It is like the interviewer questions their own self worth just looking at me. I know this would not be an issue with other systems thinkers or people with high self esteem, but such people seem to be limited to the highest positions in a company.

It would seem you could just talk someone into being comfortable with you if this were the case, but it doesn't work that way. People often hide what they think as if they are afraid they would look stupid if their belief was shown false. I once had a conversation with a lady interviewing me about giving speeches on actuarial findings. Every few seconds I would stop to think about how to put what I was saying so that it would be the most convincing and objective argument. She made a face as if she thought that needing to think about what you were saying was a poor quality for a speech giver to have. I said that I find speeches work the best when I write the speech and memorize it. She responded that she had to do the same thing as well and quickly moved on.

In order to form an argument that is both logical and convincing you must take time to form it. It is easy to form specious arguments that have no logical value at the drop of a hat, but this doesn't accomplish anything - someone could do the same for the opposing point of view. This is especially true if you are giving a speech on something important or discussing complex issues. It is easier to destroy understanding than it is to create it. I felt like I was having to bend over backwards to deduce what this lady might be thinking that would cause her to misinterpret my answers.

I find that interviewers have all kinds of backwards views on things that determine how they interpret behavior and arguments. They hide these beliefs to prevent you from disproving them so you can come to an understanding. This in of itself is a poorly reasoned type of behavior. Objective truth is only determined by the confrontation of ideas. If the interviewer naturally liked you, they might be more open minded (although they still would be judgmental based on some silly beliefs they were sensitive about)

However it seems being above average in any area that people didn't feel was a matter of choice causes people to not like you regardless of what you do. It is like your existence automatically challenges their sense of fairness and they consider you an enemy.

I luckily found a job through a family friend who was a high level, systems thinker in another company. If it wasn't for this person, I am not sure I would have ever found a job. Has anyone else faced these kinds of problems and what have you done to overcome them? I may need to move jobs soon (Department closing) which means interviewing all over again. I am not looking forward to it.
This post reminded me of Sheldon on the Big Bang Theory sitcom.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
origin of your

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:17 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.45181 seconds with 9 queries