[Quantiq]

Originally Posted by Thinktress To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

The job market is glutted at the moment. There are not many positions available in outside sales anymore. So I apply for retail sales positions. This is a far more blue collar endeavor. The hiring process frequently includes a personality test. Guess what? They do not want INTJs. They purposely screen out our personality type. In fact, they purposely screen out ALL introverts. I'm not making this up, it's a fact.

I'm sorry but I've never heard of this. Why would an employer be biased and not want to hire the INTJ personality type or any other introverted personality type for that matter? I would think that introverted and extroverted types would be rated equal. Just because someone is introverted doesn't mean that they have no social skills or be unable to do their position properly. In the job market, I don't see any reason why an extroverted person is valued over an introverted person. I just don't see it.

	Here I am practically starving to death and I'm going to purposely fail the test? I'd have to be retarded.

Exactly.

[GreenElf]

	Originally Posted by Quantiq To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I'm sorry but I've never heard of this. Why would an employer be biased and not want to hire the INTJ personality type or any other introverted personality type for that matter? I would think that introverted and extroverted types would be rated equal.

For retail sales, they want happy, bubbly people with perma-smiles. There's probably not many introverts that fit into that mold.

[Quantiq]

Honestly, as a consumer, I find bubbly people with perma-smilies trying to sell me stuff the most annoying people on the planet.

[Eye on Earth]

I'm an introvert and ultimately my job is selling a product, albeit through modeling the product. It takes all types to complete a sale, not just extroverts. I think the argument that "I's" aren't being hired is false.

On the second matter of ethical honesty to yourself, once you cross the line of falsifying your own beliefs, you've lost yourself. You will do anything to get what you want--lie, cheat, steal, kill, etc. Yeah, the last three may be more extreme, but the thought process is the same because there is no difference in the ethical decision.

I don't lie when it comes to work - at any part of the process. That does not speak to how well off I may or may not be nor does it speak to having too much pride. It only speaks to maintaining what I believe my ethical beliefs are.

If you lack an ethical decision making process, especially when you are starving, then you have no ethical process and you need one fast so you don't become your own personal slippery-slope of bad decisions.

[raneyfaye]

I am sure I's are being hired everyday! I have faith in us(: I just mean that the subconscious choice of hiring an introvert or an extrovert usually chooses extrovert--for communication and customer loyalty reasons.

Ethics are different in everyone, and my ethics are my logic. I have not lost any of myself by attempting to outsmart those who hire me. The thought process is not the same as going from lying to cheating, they are separate entities. Perhaps if I lie I might be more inclined to lie more often if I sense it poses me an advantage. That is a more believable explanation and I have to agree. We get spoiled by our success, and want more of it. I am in an exploratory stage at this point in my life though, and am still discovering what it is I want to have myself ethically defend, that could explain my very liberal opinions at this time.

If someone lets themselves starve instead of saying "I gain energy around people: True", I think that's stupid.

[GreenElf]

Originally Posted by Eye on Earth To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

On the second matter of ethical honesty to yourself, once you cross the line of falsifying your own beliefs, you've lost yourself. You will do anything to get what you want--lie, cheat, steal, kill, etc. Yeah, the last three may be more extreme, but the thought process is the same because there is no difference in the ethical decision. I don't lie when it comes to work - at any part of the process. That does not speak to how well off I may or may not be nor does it speak to having too much pride. It only speaks to maintaining what I believe my ethical beliefs are. If you lack an ethical decision making process, especially when you are starving, then you have no ethical process and you need one fast so you don't become your own personal slippery-slope of bad decisions.

You don't need to lie to get a job because you've programmed your mind to be an automaton. We unprogrammed humans have to lie or we're left out in the cold like the poor little fella in Pink Floyd's The Wall "showing feelings... feelings of an almost human nature... that will NOT do."

[raneyfaye]

I respect his programmed morals though(: it is a wonderful thing to have.

[Orcbum]

Of course they want you to have a happy and jolly personality; you're applying for a freakin' toy store. But I do find myself lying frequently in job interviews/applications. With how the job market is now, you're going to want an edge.

[GreenElf]

	Originally Posted by raneyfaye To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I respect his programmed morals though(: it is a wonderful thing to have.

I thought morals regards one's actions, not thoughts. Even Jimmy Carter admitted to lust.

[MrDoom]

Unicru tests are best answered while role-playing as Ned Flanders, as I understand. If it makes the difference between getting a call back, getting my foot in the door, and showing how hard-working I actually am independent of these silly tests, or being put into the "red pile" and not getting a call back, a white lie isn't going to make me lose sleep regarding a part-time, unskilled entry-level job. You want in, you gotta play the game and do the little dance up front. No one's going to care or even bother to compare your personality traits with test results for these kinds of jobs anyways, HR has better things to do with their time and if you prove yourself useful it won't matter.

[raneyfaye]

	Originally Posted by GreenElf To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I thought morals regards one's actions, not thoughts. Even Jimmy Carter admitted to lust.

So he programmed his thoughts is what you're saying?

[GreenElf]

	Originally Posted by raneyfaye To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	So he programmed his thoughts is what you're saying?

Because he was being honest and I inferred that people who answer honestly have programmed their thoughts? I guess he made the comment for Playboy magazine, actually about a month before taking office, so that weakens my argument although the 70s were more socially liberal than now. On the other hand, I don't think many presidential candidates have actively taken that skeletons-out-of-closet approach to stumping for office although it's a much more important job than an average minimum wage. Most admissions by politicians regard actions rather than thoughts and are made only after being publicly revealed by other sources.

These tests are really just 1984 thought police if they're expected to be answered honestly. What business is it for strangers to know thoughts that people would tend not to voluntarily share even with their friends and family? Many of these tests get rather personal.

They aren't only about "programmed morals" either. How is having a perma-smile a "programmed moral"? The querent is placed in a Zugzwang, defined loosely as "a player to move cannot do anything without making an important concession." If he honestly says no, then he's not ideal for the retail sales position. If he gives them the answer the want, he's deemed to be lying. It's a test where you can't score 100%.

How would this "programmed moral" apply to resumes? Should we document our teenage rebellion years on the resume? "February 1985. Proclaimed myself god while drunk on school field trip. December 1987. Barfed on 6 people at college frat party. September 1995. Wanted to smack coworker who was being a jerk."

[Senseofrelief]

No. Because I don't have to.

[Vocal]

	Originally Posted by Senseofrelief To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	No. Because I don't have to.

I like your style. Concise.

[Eratosthenes]

You can't fill your bank account with sanctimonious self-righteousness.

[Eye on Earth]

	Originally Posted by Eratosthenes To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	You can't fill your bank account with sanctimonious self-righteousness.

If the only thing you have is yourself (no job, no home, wrecked family life, etc.), then perhaps the only thing you have to rely on is how you conduct your actions--that means the only thing you hold true to yourself are your moral and ethical values.

If you become programmed (to steal a phrase) to lie or cheat a little to better your own condition, you have still lied or cheated. You cannot categorically blow off lying by saying you did it to make money.

For example, you are a single mother with two kids. You were recently laid off and your former husband ran away with a bimbo. Your life sucks. You have three priorities: feed your kids; feed yourself; and, better your condition. None of those conditions require you to lie to gain an edge! If you truly have what it takes to be successful in any job then you don't need to lie, even a little. If you do not have the skills, then you are effectively cheating yourself and others out of what would be a great job for them. Instead, you've turned it into a job that means nothing to you. It might pay some of the bills, but you've robbed yourself of really being you. Think about it. Go beyond the short term and think more broadly.

[GreenElf]

Originally Posted by Eye on Earth To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

If the only thing you have is yourself (no job, no home, wrecked family life, etc.), then perhaps the only thing you have to rely on is how you conduct your actions--that means the only thing you hold true to yourself are your moral and ethical values. If you become programmed (to steal a phrase) to lie or cheat a little to better your own condition, you have still lied or cheated. You cannot categorically blow off lying by saying you did it to make money.

But there's the legitimate question of why do they have any business prying into your personal thoughts before hiring for an ordinary job? I could see it for FBI, CIA or police work.

And if you're going to be 100% honest on their test, then why not just lay it all out 100% on the resume or job interview? "I believe I have the qualities needed for this job except I don't really like smiling all of the time, I think some people are jerks, and oh, by the way, to be perfectly candid, you have the biggest, ugliest facial mole I've ever seen and your bouffant doesn't make you look an inch taller. My smile right now is probably the most plastic it's ever been, but please consider me for this job because I might lose my house if I don't find work soon. I'll probably quit the job as soon as I find something with better pay anyhow."

[Nemesis]

I've learned how to sell myself based on my own merits rather than fabricating things to look good. I have zero reason to lie. Lying to get a job will likely come back to bite you in the ass because people will eventually figure out that what they were sold was not what was delivered.

---------- Post added 11-17-2011 at 02:06 AM ----------

	Originally Posted by Eratosthenes To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	You can't fill your bank account with sanctimonious self-righteousness.

No, but building a reputation for having integrity and being trustworthy among people in your field leads to much swifter career advancement.

Most people here only seem to be thinking in terms of the short-term gains that come from lying (ie. you get hired), but not the long-term benefits of being honest (you thrive and advance in your job/career much faster). There's pragamatic reasons for honesty that pay off very well in the long-term.

[GreenElf]

Perhaps the best strategy is to opt out of the test. Simply give the same answer, such as 'A', for the entire test, and be done with it.

[Storm]

The OP is talking about a very specific type of job situation: the questionarre for a minimum wage retail position. These tests are poorly designed, and you don't have to lie on them to get a job. If you do have to lie, maybe retail really isn't the right thing for you. For instance "Do you introduce yourself to people?" is asking "Are you friendly enough to have the minimum level of social awareness everyday social situations call for?" "Do you enjoy being with people?" is asking "Can you handle a job where you interact with people a lot without turning into a jerk?"

If you really can't stand being around people, then you should probably go get a job outside of retail.

As to the broader question, if you find yourself constantly having to lie about your personality to get a job, maybe you aren't in the right field.

I'm also loving all the classic justifications people are giving for lying: Everbody else is doing it! Lying means I'm smart! Morals are for other people!

[Senseofrelief]

Green - If you have the goods, you don't have to lie. Simple as that.

These days, lying on a job application is really secondary to making buddies with the person hiring though. Seems employers needing competence is taking a back seat to 'fitting in' and all that bullshit.

In my profession I have actually been advised to tone down my resume, 'over qualified' 'intimidating' are the words used. Fuck, you can't win.

[mllebrie]

I prefer the term "embellish". At the very least, I try not to overanalyze, that's usually what gets me into trouble.

[Thinktress]

EOE - it doesn't seem as though you really understand the unicru tests. Just sayin' I don't even know if you are getting the point. The point is not that INTJs can't sell. I had my own business in SALES before I became ill and I did very well at it. I was hired for that position because REAL PEOPLE did the hiring. They didn't weed people out with a biased test.

A bunch of psychologists who apparently weren't doing anything else, came up with these tests and they are now selling them to corporate America and telling them that THIS is the type of employee you want to hire. Now, whether or not that really is the template for a good employee is HIGHLY debatable.

I have a work persona. It's mostly me, but much more extroverted. I am exhausted when I get home, but I do a great job at work. You can tell when I'm working a lot, because I'm too tired to even interact on here when I get home at night. But I fail to see how employers can use a discriminatory test, and then you expect me to feel badly when I answer according to my persona instead of as an INTJ.

Or for GOD'S sake, how you would fault the single mother of two children for doing the same thing.

---------- Post added 11-21-2011 at 04:48 PM ----------

	Originally Posted by mllebrie To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I prefer the term "embellish". At the very least, I try not to overanalyze, that's usually what gets me into trouble.

I'll just call a spade a spade. I will answer the questions in the fashion most likely to get me a freakin' interview. And I don't feel bad about it. In fact, I'm just pleased that I figured out how to fill the test out the way they like it (finally). My resume is absolutely correct and the person has a chance to interview me and meet me in person, and I am honest and real during the interview (if more extroverted while at work). To me, it's no different than putting make-up on. They get the person they meet at the interview. Screw the personality test.

---------- Post added 11-21-2011 at 04:55 PM ----------

Originally Posted by Quantiq To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I'm sorry but I've never heard of this. Why would an employer be biased and not want to hire the INTJ personality type or any other introverted personality type for that matter? I would think that introverted and extroverted types would be rated equal. Just because someone is introverted doesn't mean that they have no social skills or be unable to do their position properly. In the job market, I don't see any reason why an extroverted person is valued over an introverted person. I just don't see it.

Oh yeah. The tests want extroverts. Yes, we both KNOW that introverts do a great job at many things, INCLUDING SALES. But, the test doesn't know that. This is the line of bs that these people who make these things have sold to corporate America as of late.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


They are looking for you to screen well on what they call OCEAN, or the big five personality traits (the E in ocean is for extroversion). Everyone might be interested to go online and take a practice test. Answer honestly and see if YOU would pass a pre-employment questionnaire.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[RainingLogic]

Two people put food on the table. One is a liar, the other isn't. Which one are you?

[MrDoom]

Originally Posted by Thinktress To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

EOE - it doesn't seem as though you really understand the unicru tests. Just sayin' I don't even know if you are getting the point. The point is not that INTJs can't sell. I had my own business in SALES before I became ill and I did very well at it. I was hired for that position because REAL PEOPLE did the hiring. They didn't weed people out with a biased test. A bunch of psychologists who apparently weren't doing anything else, came up with these tests and they are now selling them to corporate America and telling them that THIS is the type of employee you want to hire. Now, whether or not that really is the template for a good employee is HIGHLY debatable.

This. Unicru, most often used for minimum-wage retail jobs, is tailored to a very limited view of what an ideal retail employee should be. An INTJ answering as an INTJ with typical INTJ traits and preferences (privacy, unconventionality, ambition, not people-pleasers) WILL NOT get a call back. The scoring system will automatically flag said INTJ as undesirable and unemployable. No one will get to see the gifts an INTJ brings to the table because of the flawed expectations of the test's designers. I don't think some of the posters here have taken this test or understand how it works.

Turnover is so high in these sorts of jobs that HR simply doesn't have the resources, nor practical interest, in evaluating whether or not your personality is 100% consistent with what an online test filtered out. As long as your score is above their threshold, and your real-life personality is such that you care about your job and do good work and can work within the parameters of the position, it's not going to matter and no one's going to question it or even look at it. If you score well enough your name gets dropped on someone's desk, if not then an entry in a database is as far as you get, simple as that. I don't think anyone can ever really fit into the image that the test ideal projects, to be honest. It's the Unicru test and its expectations which are the lie. It's a game that everyone plays and once the deal is sealed, is promptly forgotten.