Disqualified from a job because of a book I didn’t read

Quote from bwc:

So did you get the position? Or you don't know yet since everyone is like on vacation this week or so. I agree, so some weird reason, there is always this invisible 'pressure/uneasiness' that will cause you to sound like don't know where you are going in the problem..or just purely some how frozes you and make you slow down from your usual thinking pace when answering those puzzle questions for a position that you like...unless you are really confident or arrogant..or seen the problem before or just don't care about the position

Yeah actually I did, despite how stupid I may have sounded. The interviewer said what tipped the scales for me was that in the phone conversations and interview, my enthusiasm was 'second to none' about getting a shot.

He said in his expirience, succeeding w/ them depends simply on single minded determination to make it...putting everything aside aside for perhaps two years. I said I'm your guy.
 
Quote from agin1415:

Hey I was with Morgan Stanley for a while.

Talk about STUPID.

Here's what they did with online trading, "Hey, if we double the online Commission we will double our Profit" "lets do it"

Brave new world, yeah, lets have a brave new world, ignore the new, and try old ideas.

Inturn Morgan Stanley no longer has an online discount brokerage.

LOL... but ya'll got John Mack (respectable guy somewhat)... Purcell... man i hated him.
 
Quote from tomcole:

Not bitter at all - I just respond in a forthright manner to comments made here.

Every employer makes a pitch of hiring the "best and brightest" but as this thread shows and most companies P&Ls show, most companies embrace mediocrity as a way to maintain stability and job safety.

I'm not advocating hiring brilliant yet disturbed folks, just saying when you hire, "... someone a slight notch below who is normal and easy to work with than someone who is a constant problem. That 0.1% extra is probably just not worth it. Sorry, but that's the way it is in life....", its a sure way to be mediocre.

The writer states he can only attract folks 0.1% above average/normal. To me, statistically, thats insignificant and means he just hires average people and will only get average results. Whats so special about that?


Sorry, I think that you misunderstood my statement.

The point I was trying to make was that, given the choice between candidate #1, who was an "A+" kind of person but with personality issues or candidate #2, an "A-" person with excellent interpersonal skills, a can do attitude, and a desire to get along, I'd go with #2 every time unless I could put candidate #1 in a box somewhere and never need them to interact with anyone.

And just for the record - asking me if I belonged to the "best and the brightest" - is a question that serves no purpose to answer. Its irrelevant fluff at best, and like asking how much is in an acquaintance's bank account, makes poor dinner conversation.
 
Quote from ChiBondKing:

LOL... but ya'll got John Mack (respectable guy somewhat)... Purcell... man i hated him.

Morgan Stanley put a STUPID full service Broker in charge of Online, and he knew nothing about trading or Online, all he knew was coming from the Full Service side.

But instead of leaving the Discount side by itself, which it should have been fine, they had to try and integrate it into the full service side.

Idiots!
 
Back
Top