The Proof of the Pudding

Interviews. Not my favourite pastime. Although I’ve had a fair share of experience where interviews are concerned, I still find the process nerve-wracking. The dry mouth. The clammy hands. The tendency to waffle. And this morning's interview was no different.

The prospective company is a publisher of theatre programmes and brochures. The job is the position of full-time proofreader and archivist. Now, I’ve no actually real-world experience as a proofreader, so this morning’s interview partly involved me twisting my skills and experience to fit the role. For example, I mentioned that because there are no proofreaders at the newspaper office I work at, I have to check all my editorials myself. I also mentioned two of the modules I did for my NCTJ distance learning course – continuity in feature writing and sub-editing – which I argued were relevant experience for proof reading.

However, the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and I was given three biographies to proof read as part of the test section of the interview. Luckily, I’d done an online practice test a few days before (although I only got 16 out of 30 on that one).

Positives of the interview:
I asked a lot of questions at the end
I was able to spiel off some knowledge of the company when asked
I maintained eye contact
I provided work-related examples of skills that were relevant to the job spec
The interviewer seemed a nice guy (although he did remind me a little of Jeremy Beadle, which was slightly distracting).

Negatives of the interview:
I hesitated and waffled a lot
I think I missed out lots of mistakes on the proofreading test
I felt the interviewer thought I was applying for the wrong job, as my qualifications seem more geared towards a writing career (which is true - I was hoping that there may have been a chance for progression in this role)
Stupidly, I managed to sign out with the wrong time just before I left, despite the interviewer telling me the time and a clock being in front of me. It was partly because of nerves and partly because the previous signer had put down 11:20 instead of 10:20. Anyway, it doesn’t give a good impression of someone applying for a job that involves accuracy under pressure, does it?

I don't think I've ever done as much preparation for an interview as this one; I would love to get the job. I find out the result next week.