Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
alternative words to describe
- Thread starter zoran
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The question was asked, by the OP, and I mentioned this as a reply to an asked question, about ethics in an interview, not something you would volunteer out of the blue or put in your resume.
Actually, I’m puzzled that a group of you would make fun of this statement, as if ethical behavior along with frank and honest communications/ feedback, is something to be made fun of as an expressed workplace standard, something said out loud. It’s not unlike me being asked in my job interview for pilot about how as a first officer, I would respond to a Captain screwing up, say showing up inebriated for a flight.
So I’ll ask, what would you say if asked about workplace ethics in a job interview? Laugh out loud... raise an eyebrow, blink rapidly, stare at them stone faced, or do your best Jim Carrey impersonation?
Last edited:
The question was asked, by the OP, and I mentioned this as a reply to an asked question, about ethics in an interview, not something you would volunteer out of the blue or put in your resume.
Actually, I’m puzzled that a group of you would make fun of this statement, as if ethical behavior along with frank and honest communications/ feedback, is something to be made fun of as an expressed workplace standard, something said out loud. It’s not unlike me being asked in my job interview for pilot about how as a first officer, I would respond to a Captain screwing up, say showing up inebriated for a flight.
So I’ll ask, what would you say if asked about workplace ethics in a job interview? Laugh out loud... raise an eyebrow, blink rapidly, or do your best Jim Carrey impersonation?
You gave a decent and honest answer to the question you posed.
But, that question was not the OP's question.
You misunderstood and offered an odd reply — that might explain why people piled in on you. I don't think it is because they are without moral character.
*shrug* But then on the internet… who knows?
Don't take it seriously, these are just internet strangers sniggering at you. It is of no consequence.
Edited to add:
I personally find it slightly disheartening to see posters, who I actually have some respect for, all piling in on you, elbowing one another out of the way to get the proverbial boot in.
Last edited:
The correct answer to that is: “bet you can’t do a loop the loop in this hunk of junk!”
Captain: “Hold my beer”
I replied like I did because while the meaning and intent behind the statement you phrased is a good, it's just not plain or common language I would expect to hear. It sounds scripted and maybe even a tad pretentious.The question was asked, by the OP, and I mentioned this as a reply to an asked question, about ethics in an interview, not something you would volunteer out of the blue or put in your resume.
Actually, I’m puzzled that a group of you would make fun of this statement, as if ethical behavior along with frank and honest communications/ feedback, is something to be made fun of as an expressed workplace standard, something said out loud. It’s not unlike me being asked in my job interview for pilot about how as a first officer, I would respond to a Captain screwing up, say showing up inebriated for a flight.
So I’ll ask, what would you say if asked about workplace ethics in a job interview? Laugh out loud... raise an eyebrow, blink rapidly, or do your best Jim Carrey impersonation?
I'm interviewing a bunch of people this Thursday for two openings I have and I certainly don't expect any of them to say something quite like that.
This is what was asked:
#1
How can i say in different words that "communication skills" and "work ethics" are some of my qualities as a character/personality?
The only way I see this realistically coming up is in an interview being asked a question. It would not be something you would say in a resume or as part of a tell us about yourself question such as: I am an honest person. That would be a given and it would be odd to volunteer that up front, and not be viewed suspiciously.
What would you expect them to say if you asked them about workplace ethics and how would you expect it to be different than what I said? You either believe in workplace ethics or you don’t, there is not a whole lot you can say about it. And it is possible I don’t talk like average job applicants.
Or is workplace ethics not a topic discussed in typical job interviews? It was asked in mine. Personally, that would be a question that I would want to have thought about in advance and be ready for. Whether it is rote or prepared, all you can do is be sincere, unless raising an ebrow would be a better way to respond.
[doublepost=1566226581][/doublepost]
You made me laugh.
Last edited:
I wasn't disputing the meaning and belief in ethics. I just felt that the wording seemed scripted.
Understood, so what kind of better worded answer would you think about in advance that sounds natural? Or would they be better off saying, i have not thought about it or i don’t know? Some of this has to do with words that would be expected to be said, along with sincerity and yep it might sound scripted.
The question was asked, by the OP, and I mentioned this as a reply to an asked question, about ethics in an interview, not something you would volunteer out of the blue or put in your resume.
Actually, I’m puzzled that a group of you would make fun of this statement, as if ethical behavior along with frank and honest communications/ feedback, is something to be made fun of as an expressed workplace standard, something said out loud. It’s not unlike me being asked in my job interview for pilot about how as a first officer, I would respond to a Captain screwing up, say showing up inebriated for a flight.
So I’ll ask, what would you say if asked about workplace ethics in a job interview? Laugh out loud... raise an eyebrow, blink rapidly, stare at them stone faced, or do your best Jim Carrey impersonation?
That is a more than fair answer (and the question asked about how you, in your role as a first officer, would deal with a drunk captain is an excellent example of the application of an ethical principle in the real world).
And, point taken about the need for ethics, in a professional setting and the need to preach an ethical existence in the way one lives one's life - very much so - but what you answered was not what the OP had asked (he had wondered how he could express that he believes that his work ethic is impressive).
@arkitect, below, gave an excellent response.
Apologies for piling on, but I suppose it struck me as the sort of pious twaddle that one gets so often from Americans (not you personally, as I know we share a similar outlook on a good many issues) who mouth pious platitudes and mean not a single syllable of them.
However, in interviews, or formal recruitment settings, there can be a thin line - sometimes very thin - to be walked between signalling your suitability for the position (while also stressing that you are not a moral monster) without sounding sickeningly insincere.
Fair comment. Mea culpa.
Last edited:
So instead of:
Something like...
Whilst workplace behaviour is an essential part of a thriving business, I believe being candid about issues and identifying problems are vital to improving the success of an organisation.
Basically means:
- I'm not gonna dump on the office floor cause I know that's bad
- I'm willing to contribute and engage with the business to make it better
- If I see another person dump on the office floor, you'll know about it
The first one sounds more impersonal and scripted whereas the other one makes you sound more engaging. Heck, I dunno. Just what I would say if I was to rewrite it. I'll probably get corrected too.
You modified what I said, only slightly and maybe if I put more thought into it, could come up with something more naturally sounding, not scripted.So instead of:
Something like...
Whilst workplace behaviour is an essential part of a thriving business, I believe being candid about issues and identifying problems are vital to improving the success of an organisation.
Basically means:
- I'm not gonna dump on the office floor cause I know that's bad
- I'm willing to contribute and engage with the business to make it better
- If I see another person dump on the office floor, you'll know about it
The first one sounds more impersonal and scripted whereas the other one makes you sound more engaging. Heck, I dunno. Just what I would say if I was to rewrite it. I'll probably get corrected too.
For the job applicant, it should be topic waited for, but ready to be fielded, definitely not initiated by the applicant.
The question was asked, by the OP, and I mentioned this as a reply to an asked question, about ethics in an interview, not something you would volunteer out of the blue or put in your resume.
Actually, I’m puzzled that a group of you would make fun of this statement, as if ethical behavior along with frank and honest communications/ feedback, is something to be made fun of as an expressed workplace standard, something said out loud. It’s not unlike me being asked in my job interview for pilot about how as a first officer, I would respond to a Captain screwing up, say showing up inebriated for a flight.
So I’ll ask, what would you say if asked about workplace ethics in a job interview? Laugh out loud... raise an eyebrow, or do your best Jim Carrey impersonation?
My response would begin by my trying to make sure I understood the focus and scope of the question. If it was very (stupidly) general, e.g. "so what about workplace ethics, how do you handle ethical issues on the job?" I'd put the most professional face possible on the question itself, i.e. I'd assume the question was not about whether I was a potential embezzler or thief of massive quantities of hard drives.
I'd inquire if the question was about how I would handle any non-routine issues regarding co-worker, subordinate or (gulp) a boss.
I was actually asked questions not unlike that a few times. Working in database security, I was often asked how I'd handle inquiries that were out of the usual, i.e. an off-hours request from someone in my own or another group and above my paygrade to allow some developer to put a one-line fix into production without the normal testing routines.
Still, those were questions about the work itself, or whether I would understand there could be acceptable exceptions to guidelines. "Everyone knows" that corporate data security is about as good as a CEO's respect for it, which falls somewhere short of enough respect to keep business from getting conducted in timely fashion. Yet... there must be accountability, and documentation of exceptions that a data security manager accedes to. The ethics of my job required me to report attempts at unauthorized access if they were made without at least asking for the access first. That was a no-exceptions guideline. What I'd have done if the CEO tried to hack a database and I saw the footprints? I wouldn't have had a problem calling his office and asking to speak to him about a security matter. And I'd have described the footprints and asked if he had tried to access the database and how could I help him get what he needed. And maybe I'd have been fired. Or, maybe I'd have passed a test. It's not like security managers don't get tested. We can be thieves too...
But as to issues of ethical behavior in general in the workplace, I myself always explored some ethical issues in interviews that got to an advanced stage. I wanted to know about how the company expected managers to handle apparent "troubled employee" scenarios.
Having been helped into recovery from alcoholism myself due to the very existence of a well-run, effective employee assistance program, I was not particularly interested in working for any place that had no guidelines for managers, no path of referral to let the manager focus on job performance alone and not be wading into the details of what, exactly, was a troubled employee's problem.
Not my biz if it was drug addiction or an impending divorce or a child's medical issue that was distracting my coder. I would of course need and expect a reliable and productive coder on my team, not least to protect the team's functionality and my own track record, but I also would want the coder to get the help he or she appeared to require.
I would not want to end up coddling and enabling poor performance of someone who needed help and was damaging my own ability to perform to expectations. The company hired me to produce, not to babysit.
Sadly to say, a lot of the answers I got to my inquiries about how the company helped its managers cope with nonperforming employees were pathetic. I came to realize that I had been assisted back into professional productivity at a time that was apparently the peak for corporate employee assistance programs. The push for higher profit margins extends into people-centric corners first, no doubt about it. It's short sighted, because it costs a lot of time and money to hire and train replacements for employees whose untreated personal issues become professional timebombs, but business is focused on the short term sometimes and employee assistance programs always look good for a haircut at budget time.
Some of the places where I sought work later on in trying to advance my own CV had toothless EAPs or nothing... once, the answer to my question "how would I help a troubled subordinate without jeopardizing my own performance here?" was a hearty laugh and "yeah, that's a bee, ain't it? Been there done that, I dunno, they're all a dice roll really. Fire them? Take them out for a drink? In the end ya gotta look out for yourself, right?"
(Damn straight... and thank you for taking the time for this interview...)
Not being in the job market these days I have no idea how companies during a hiring process can or do handle issues related to #metoo or potential blow-ups over an employee's use of social media. Not my biz if it was drug addiction or an impending divorce or a child's medical issue that was distracting my coder. I would of course need and expect a reliable and productive coder on my team, not least to protect the team's functionality and my own track record, but I also would want the coder to get the help he or she appeared to require.
I would not want to end up coddling and enabling poor performance of someone who needed help and was damaging my own ability to perform to expectations. The company hired me to produce, not to babysit.
Sadly to say, a lot of the answers I got to my inquiries about how the company helped its managers cope with nonperforming employees were pathetic. I came to realize that I had been assisted back into professional productivity at a time that was apparently the peak for corporate employee assistance programs. The push for higher profit margins extends into people-centric corners first, no doubt about it. It's short sighted, because it costs a lot of time and money to hire and train replacements for employees whose untreated personal issues become professional timebombs, but business is focused on the short term sometimes and employee assistance programs always look good for a haircut at budget time.
Some of the places where I sought work later on in trying to advance my own CV had toothless EAPs or nothing... once, the answer to my question "how would I help a troubled subordinate without jeopardizing my own performance here?" was a hearty laugh and "yeah, that's a bee, ain't it? Been there done that, I dunno, they're all a dice roll really. Fire them? Take them out for a drink? In the end ya gotta look out for yourself, right?"
(Damn straight... and thank you for taking the time for this interview...)
Reputational risks to the company are obviously huge so one should expect there would be some vetting of prospective employees, and that it might be staged, i.e. a preliminary look-see via asking for screen names etc., and if one is on point of hire, then perhaps a request for access to accounts, etc.
But as to #metoo issues... the ground is shifting. Dismissals for that used to be concealed by mutual agreement. Maybe that is not dissimilar to dismissal for stealing $5k of hard drives... make restitution, leave with a noncommittal reference --"he worked here 2 years and left of his own accord, not our policy to comment on performance"-- or else get fired on the spot and charges will be brought as well. The thing is, with dismissals over accusations of unwanted sexual contact, it becomes less and less acceptable to just hand some abusive person on to the next unsuspecting company.
I imagine it's a thorny issue in HR and corporate legal counsel circles. And I would fully expect those departments to weigh in with guidelines for conduct of interviews where the conversation ever touches on those issues.
I mean it's one thing to have a policy in place like "if you steal more than $10k worth of our stuff, we're going to have you arrested and you're fired, otherwise you're fired and make restitution and we confirm only that you worked here, full stop." It's another thing to try to calibrate levels of inappropriate sexual conduct or "hostile workplace" behavior and construct corresponding levels of how an employee's departure is subsequently described upon inquiry by another firm. The range of potential legal issues is probably mind boggling. Whether they should be or not is another question. But then not all accusations are valid either, hence "thorny issue". I would think that managers doing job interviews are advised to leave all that stuff to HR and likewise refer applicants to HR if they have related questions.
As for me, it should be obvious that I have no moral character and anything I blurt should be taken with two grains of salt.
[doublepost=1566237069][/doublepost]
Downloading to read offline during my flight to China.
Edited to add: I needed to upgrade my Comcast data plan first.
Last edited:
Downloading to read offline during my flight to China.
Edited to add: I needed to upgrade my Comcast data plan first.
You should try this Brazilian Cerrado, it's fantastic coffee...