Interview presentation, going over the allotted time.
Discussion
As everyone says, try to finish at 5 mins and say "any quesrions"
Stopping you at 7 mins proves what ballocks all this is. Because that happens in the real world? Never.
It proves nothing other than the interviewers are up themselves.
So they don't employ a decent engineer, because they aren't a great presenter ?
Stopping you at 7 mins proves what ballocks all this is. Because that happens in the real world? Never.
It proves nothing other than the interviewers are up themselves.
So they don't employ a decent engineer, because they aren't a great presenter ?
This mostly ensures fairness and comparability, so you don’t have one candidate doing a 5 min presentation and another 20 mins. Personally, I wouldn’t stop someone who was just a little over, but I also wouldn’t be impressed.
Makes a lot of sense to test if an engineer can impart information concisely by explaining only the essential facts and doing so at the right level for the audience. It’s not a common skill generally and even rarer in technical professions.
Makes a lot of sense to test if an engineer can impart information concisely by explaining only the essential facts and doing so at the right level for the audience. It’s not a common skill generally and even rarer in technical professions.
Pit Pony said:
As everyone says, try to finish at 5 mins and say "any quesrions"
Stopping you at 7 mins proves what ballocks all this is. Because that happens in the real world? Never.
It proves nothing other than the interviewers are up themselves.
So they don't employ a decent engineer, because they aren't a great presenter ?
In formal sales pitches, when speaking at conferences, when being interviewed by the media etc there is very often an exact time slot to work to. It happens "In the real world" all the time Stopping you at 7 mins proves what ballocks all this is. Because that happens in the real world? Never.
It proves nothing other than the interviewers are up themselves.
So they don't employ a decent engineer, because they aren't a great presenter ?
Edited by ClaphamGT3 on Saturday 6th March 09:07
Ive stopped lots of people mid-sentence before in presentations. They're always shocked that they've not been allowed to waffle on. One guy even tried to override me and just continue on, that didn't go down well.
I sat in on an interview a little while back where the 10min presentation turned into a 35min ramble. It only ended at 35mins when I stepped in as the interviewer wasn't comfortable interrupting - they no longer interview.
Personally, only have a handful of words on the slide - talk about the subject. Im a firm believer of if you needs slides you dont know your subject well enough.
If you are delivering this remotely have a big timer on your screen (that the panel can't see - of course) and keep it to a max of 6mins ... this will allow for minor digressions on the day.
I sat in on an interview a little while back where the 10min presentation turned into a 35min ramble. It only ended at 35mins when I stepped in as the interviewer wasn't comfortable interrupting - they no longer interview.
Personally, only have a handful of words on the slide - talk about the subject. Im a firm believer of if you needs slides you dont know your subject well enough.
If you are delivering this remotely have a big timer on your screen (that the panel can't see - of course) and keep it to a max of 6mins ... this will allow for minor digressions on the day.
ClaphamGT3 said:
One other thing OP - and please take this in the constructive spirit in which it is meant - I counted sixteen typos/spelling mistakes/grammatical errors in your first post. Do make sure that you have someone else thoroughly proof read your slides before your presentation.
A valid point.IIII''''''''
Thanks all. Again, ive taken it all on board.
I think
(spelling mistake aside)
ClaphamGT3 said:
One other thing OP - and please take this in the constructive spirit in which it is meant - I counted sixteen typos/spelling mistakes/grammatical errors in your first post. Do make sure that you have someone else thoroughly proof read your slides before your presentation.
Its just my pistonheads grammar I think
(spelling mistake aside)
How many slides are in your deck for your elevator pitch?
I would have 3 with very high level content that is visually appealing and supplemented by my delivery.
For reading slides, I had a boss that made good slides but delivered them dismally by reading them. Including turning around to look at them.
I would have 3 with very high level content that is visually appealing and supplemented by my delivery.
For reading slides, I had a boss that made good slides but delivered them dismally by reading them. Including turning around to look at them.
The number three is good. People only remember 3 things from presentations - I worked with a shrink for a long time who explained how it worked. I don't remember the details, but I do remember the three things he wanted to get across:
- presenters assume that the audience has the eyes of an eagle (small font, lots of text)
- presenters assume that the audience has the memory of a computer (too many facts)
- presenters assume that time is not important (take too long).
(That presentation was nearly 20 years ago....)
He got that across with 3 pictures. He also had some cool slides from NASA that were very interesting.
Pictures are good. You can't read from them, they jog your memory, you can't make typos and they're easy to assemble.
What are the 3 things you want them to remember about you. Minute each, + introduction, 5 minutes tops.
- presenters assume that the audience has the eyes of an eagle (small font, lots of text)
- presenters assume that the audience has the memory of a computer (too many facts)
- presenters assume that time is not important (take too long).
(That presentation was nearly 20 years ago....)
He got that across with 3 pictures. He also had some cool slides from NASA that were very interesting.
Pictures are good. You can't read from them, they jog your memory, you can't make typos and they're easy to assemble.
What are the 3 things you want them to remember about you. Minute each, + introduction, 5 minutes tops.
I was asked to do a ten minute presentation at interview once (internal promotion) - the interviewers asked many questions throughout. So I finished my ten minutes plus , in my head, time for the ‘interruptions’ ... got really hammered for it the feedback session.
I would aim for just shy of seven minutes and if you get questions during and may run over, I would ask what they want at 7 mins.
Ps I’m doing that same interview on Thursday, but as interviewer, I will allow them their ten mins uninterrupted. But my point is, it’s their rules.
Good luck. Austin.
I would aim for just shy of seven minutes and if you get questions during and may run over, I would ask what they want at 7 mins.
Ps I’m doing that same interview on Thursday, but as interviewer, I will allow them their ten mins uninterrupted. But my point is, it’s their rules.
Good luck. Austin.
To be fair, the best presentation I ever witnessed, was done by a bloke with 1 slide and a white board.
We had a training pack of 36 slides. And he didn't refer to any of them.
Much of his presentation, involved scribbling a graph on the white board, or writing down 3 bullet points, before scrubbing them.off, and saying actually that's what people think but they are wrong, before scribbling another graph and 3 bullet points and telling us that was the new truth.
We had a training pack of 36 slides. And he didn't refer to any of them.
Much of his presentation, involved scribbling a graph on the white board, or writing down 3 bullet points, before scrubbing them.off, and saying actually that's what people think but they are wrong, before scribbling another graph and 3 bullet points and telling us that was the new truth.
7 minutes on continuous send in an interview rings alarm bells to me.
Unless the job requires you to talk continuously and avoid interacting with your audience I really don't see why you would ask for such a thing.
If I was being presented a topic I had even the slightest interest in, I wouldn't make it to 7 minutes without wanting to ask a question or .. something at least.
Unless the job requires you to talk continuously and avoid interacting with your audience I really don't see why you would ask for such a thing.
If I was being presented a topic I had even the slightest interest in, I wouldn't make it to 7 minutes without wanting to ask a question or .. something at least.
It’s a test.
Many jobs (mine included) require you to present material concisely within an allotted time frame often under pressure (at key stages of projects for example).
Often these presentations are given without questioning until the end to avoid the ‘did you consider X’, ‘yes it’s on the next f
king slide you impatient bd’ type of exchange.
If a candidate can manage to present like this about themselves it gives some idea of (however small and limited it will be in that environment) about how they present/communicate under pressure.
Many jobs (mine included) require you to present material concisely within an allotted time frame often under pressure (at key stages of projects for example).
Often these presentations are given without questioning until the end to avoid the ‘did you consider X’, ‘yes it’s on the next f
king slide you impatient bd’ type of exchange.If a candidate can manage to present like this about themselves it gives some idea of (however small and limited it will be in that environment) about how they present/communicate under pressure.
Lots of overthinking going on in this thread (not from you OP).
If they want a seven minute presentation you present for seven minutes, or just under, not over.
Questions from them to you are not included in that seven minutes. They happen after the seven minutes.
Because you're doing a seven minute presentation!
If they want a seven minute presentation you present for seven minutes, or just under, not over.
Questions from them to you are not included in that seven minutes. They happen after the seven minutes.
Because you're doing a seven minute presentation!
Pit Pony said:
As everyone says, try to finish at 5 mins and say "any quesrions"
Stopping you at 7 mins proves what ballocks all this is. Because that happens in the real world? Never.
It proves nothing other than the interviewers are up themselves.
So they don't employ a decent engineer, because they aren't a great presenter ?
Literally no one said stop at five minutes for a seven minute presentation.Stopping you at 7 mins proves what ballocks all this is. Because that happens in the real world? Never.
It proves nothing other than the interviewers are up themselves.
So they don't employ a decent engineer, because they aren't a great presenter ?
Any number they pick is "ballocks". It's what they want. It's just as stupid to do a three, eight, ten or eleventy-trillion minute presentation.
The interviewers are probably governed by the rules of the company that they work for.
An engineer isn't a guy in a shed tinkering with spanners - most engineers are creating or disseminating information so they do probably want someone who can do this by presenting it under some pressure.
Hi all,
Just a quick update.
It generally went very well, i had quick and convincing answers to all the questions i was asked, accept one, which caught me off guard. (and for which i regret my answer a bit).
I was just looking online, to see how long would be realistic to hear back and came across this website https://www.businessnewsdaily.com/8364-post-interv...
Which states -
"After the interview, it is vital to send some form of correspondence – whether it be snail mail, email or even a phone call – thanking your interviewer for their time and effort."
Personally that doesnt feel natural to me. Ive been told that I will hear back within 2 weeks but most likely within 1 week.
Any ideas?
Do employers usually contact the successful candidate first and then move onto the unsuccessful ones if the first rejects the role, or how does it work?
Just a quick update.
It generally went very well, i had quick and convincing answers to all the questions i was asked, accept one, which caught me off guard. (and for which i regret my answer a bit).
I was just looking online, to see how long would be realistic to hear back and came across this website https://www.businessnewsdaily.com/8364-post-interv...
Which states -
"After the interview, it is vital to send some form of correspondence – whether it be snail mail, email or even a phone call – thanking your interviewer for their time and effort."
Personally that doesnt feel natural to me. Ive been told that I will hear back within 2 weeks but most likely within 1 week.
Any ideas?
Do employers usually contact the successful candidate first and then move onto the unsuccessful ones if the first rejects the role, or how does it work?
shouldbworking said:
7 minutes on continuous send in an interview rings alarm bells to me.
Unless the job requires you to talk continuously and avoid interacting with your audience I really don't see why you would ask for such a thing.
If I was being presented a topic I had even the slightest interest in, I wouldn't make it to 7 minutes without wanting to ask a question or .. something at least.
You should have a go at the police assessment centre! Unless the job requires you to talk continuously and avoid interacting with your audience I really don't see why you would ask for such a thing.
If I was being presented a topic I had even the slightest interest in, I wouldn't make it to 7 minutes without wanting to ask a question or .. something at least.
20 minute interview. Four questions. Five minutes per answer. With a timer. Go over and they just stop you there.
Interviewer asks you a question and that’s it...no conversation all you. It’s horrible.
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff