ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Sunday, March 31, 1996 TAG: 9603290040
SECTION: BUSINESS PAGE: F-2 EDITION: METRO
COLUMN: Working It Out
SOURCE: CAMILLE WRIGHT MILLER
Q: A recent interview went badly. Not because of my performance, but because the interviewer didn't listen to me. He seemed preoccupied. For future reference, what could I have done to grab his attention?
A: You need to appreciate what you're confronting before you can overcome it. Your interviewer was employing, probably unwittingly, "blocks to listening."
Matthew McKay and others in "Messages: The Communication Skills Book" list the basic and most common "blocks."
"Mind reading" is one common block. People interpret what they think the other is saying, ignoring the real conversation. Another block is "judging." The interviewer judges you at first sight and makes a quick decision, minimizing the potential of the interview.
Another is "rehearsing," which means the interviewer doesn't "listen because all attention is on the preparation and crafting of the next comment." This is common with those new to the role of interviewer.
While all of these are possible, the most likely is the "dreaming block." Something troubling may have had this person's attention, such as an enormous problem presented to him just before your interview. If this were the case, while well-intentioned in completing the interview, he did you both a disservice.
One rule for effective listening, offered by McKay and other experts in the communication field, is giving and getting feedback. For someone only slightly distracted, try making eye contact, varying your voice, and asking questions. Your efforts are a form of feedback.
If the interviewer is completely occupied, say something. For example, "you seem distracted. This interview means a great deal to me. Would you prefer I reschedule for another time?'' Said with sincerity and concern, you may help win back the interview.
If this is the only distracted interviewer you've ever encountered, it's unlikely you'll face the problem again. If, however, this is a recurring state, invest in McKay's "Messages." The communication-skill topics covered are readable, timely and highly accurate.
Q: From overhearing phone conversations, I think a co-worker is on the job market. The vacancy would create a hardship at the company. Should I drop hints or tell our boss so he has the chance to intervene before it's too late?
A: Misinterpretation and well-intentioned intervention create harm.
What if your interpretation of the phone conversations is incorrect? Alerting a supervisor with a false alarm diminishes your credibility and could cause a strained working environment for your co-worker.
Even if correct, how will your colleagues and boss react, knowing you eavesdrop on conversations? What if no job offers are forthcoming? What if a job is offered, and your colleague turns it down?
Ask yourself what you gain by disclosing possibly inaccurate information, or information that isn't yours to disclose. While one may gain a short-term sense of being in the know and linked to one's boss, the long-term damage is serious.
Casual informants are distrusted by co-workers and, eventually, by supervisors. Trust that your co-workers will act responsibly, and do the same.
While overhearing is sometimes unavoidable, most co-workers should engage in "civil inattention." Civil inattention calls for acting if one does not see or hear something which would cause another embarrassment or discomfort. Acting on overheard phone conversations violates a basic rule of social interaction.
Q: A co-worker asked me to write a letter of reference. I said yes, but now wish I hadn't. It turns out the co-worker is leaving this company because of some serious personnel issues. Now that I've learned of the problems, I can't imagine what to write. The truth? A supportive letter?
A: Unless fully informed on the extent of the problems, you're not in a position to write a letter addressing those issues. Doing so opens you to legal risk.
Writing an unwarranted supportive letter leaves your credibility in question.
Go back to the individual. Tell the individual that your agreement to write a letter was hasty and that, on reflection, you believe you can't. Because you've never supervised the individual or been in a position to evaluate performance, suggest that it would be more appropriate to have a former supervisor supply the reference.
The relationship will likely become strained, but your other options offer worse.
Letters of reference should be fair to the author, prospective employers and the candidate. Letters that don't meet those three standards shouldn't be written.
Camille Wright Miller, an organizational behavior sociologist who works in Lexington, answers questions from our readers about workplace issues. Please send them to her in care of The Roanoke Times, Business News Department, P.O. Box 2491, Roanoke 24010.
LENGTH: Medium: 96 linesby CNB