It is often argued whether interview is the best way to choose a candidates for a job or not. However others strongly believe that other ways more effeciently. In the following essay I will discuss both notion before a solid conclusion. On the one hand, people who support the idea that interview is common way to company when the pick out new staff members. Due to, by the way, employers can know about the candidate's personality in a short time. As a result bosses are prone to analysis candidates' moral which one is more useful for their work. Futhermore, it leads to choose right new workers in a short period. In the mean time, it is the best way to precise candidates' social skills such as communication and ability to depend on the type of work. As a consequence, it helps the bosses to make a right conclusion about candidates' social life.
On the other hand, some people strongly believe that other ways more effectively to choose the new workers. Owing to, they think that candidates have a great time to prepare the interview. As a result, they may be give a wrong answer during the interview about themselves. Consequently, it is encourage the employers to make a wrong desicion. However, it is the best way to build a conversation with candidate's old bosses about candidate. In this way, they can know concrete answer about new staff and they can save a time. By the way, they can spend interview's time for companies work. In conclusion, after the analysis of the both argument. I think both approaches can offer a number of benefits for bosses, but other ways such as talk to candidate's old employers seems to me greater to pick out new worker. And, it help to employers to save a time and make a correct desicion
It is
often
argued whether
interview
is the best
way
to choose
a candidates
for a job or not.
However
others
strongly
believe that
other
ways
more
effeciently
. In the following essay I will discuss both notion
before
a solid conclusion. On the one hand,
people
who support the
idea
that
interview
is
common
way
to
company
when the pick out
new
staff members. Due to, by the
way
,
employers
can know about the candidate's personality in a short
time
.
As a result
bosses
are prone to analysis candidates' moral which one is more useful for their work.
Futhermore
, it leads to choose right
new
workers in a short period. In the mean
time
, it is the best
way
to precise candidates' social
skills
such as communication and ability to depend on the type of work. As a consequence, it
helps
the
bosses
to
make
a right conclusion about candidates' social life.
On the
other
hand,
some
people
strongly
believe that
other
ways
more
effectively
to choose the
new
workers. Owing to, they
think
that candidates have a great
time
to prepare the
interview
.
As a result
, they may be give a
wrong
answer during the
interview
about themselves.
Consequently
, it is
encourage
the
employers
to
make
a
wrong
desicion
.
However
, it is the best
way
to build a conversation with candidate's
old
bosses
about candidate. In this
way
, they can
know
concrete answer about
new
staff and
they can save a
time
. By the
way
, they can spend interview's
time
for
companies
work.
In conclusion
, after the analysis of the both argument. I
think
both approaches can offer a number of benefits for
bosses
,
but
other
ways
such as talk to candidate's
old
employers
seems to me greater to pick out
new
worker. And, it
help
to
employers
to save a
time
and
make
a correct
desicion