Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

nkelsch wrote:

For a basically 'zero skill' position GW is advertising, it seems the only relevant thing needed is attitude.

I would have said you need hands as well... until I saw "My Left Foot" and realised you could probably crack on and paint minis to tabletop standard without actually needing hands.

nkelsch wrote:
For a basically 'zero skill' position GW is advertising, it seems the only relevant thing needed is attitude.

Not at all seeing a problem as this is how the real world is.

I don't think this is what the OP meant when he mentioned the ad being passive aggressive. I agree with you in that it's far easier to teach someone with a positive attitude the necessary skills to do a job than it is to teach a skilled person who refuses to compromise or co-operate in anyway.

It's in the latter half that things start to get a bit sinister; the whole "if you don't fit with our culture, you'll be unhappy" stuff. It sounds like they're recruiting for a cult.

 Samwiiise wrote:

nkelsch wrote:
For a basically 'zero skill' position GW is advertising, it seems the only relevant thing needed is attitude.

Not at all seeing a problem as this is how the real world is.

I don't think this is what the OP meant when he mentioned the ad being passive aggressive. I agree with you in that it's far easier to teach someone with a positive attitude the necessary skills to do a job than it is to teach a skilled person who refuses to compromise or co-operate in anyway.

It's in the latter half that things start to get a bit sinister; the whole "if you don't fit with our culture, you'll be unhappy" stuff. It sounds like they're recruiting for a cult.

At least they are honest about it. Companies have cultures, teams within companies have cultures. If you can't stand the culture, you won't succeed. To pretend that fitting with corporate culture isn't important or real is a recipe for disaster.

If you want a good example, compare government vs government contracting vs commercial contracting

I had a friend who was a government contractor and was hired onto the government team by the client. After 6 months she couldn't stand working there because the level of effort was so low and the employees were so lazy, and it was accepted. She couldn't handle the culture and had to come back.

On the other end, Government contracting is slower than Commercial. I have seen many employees burn out when forced onto the commercial side of the fence because they actually have to do a better quality of work for less money and higher speeds... (IE: work hard) and they have become used to the relative ease of government contracting.

Other examples are some teams are very close. If you are a person who keeps work/personal separate and this team goes to Happy Hour 3 times a week and you refuse to go, expect a rough work experience.

Culture is a real thing, Some companies or teams embrace it and basically say "get with the program or get out". Pretty common in my experience for groups to take that attitude.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Sounds like pretty normal HR speak to me. They get off on things like "core values" and "having the right attitude" and lots of other meaningless waffle that means nothing on the ground (where sales targets are more important than your 'attitude').

I do like how the flyer has two things you'll never do as a GW employee:

1. See a female redshirt (or blueshirt in this case).
2. Build a Hierophant Bio-Titan!

GW Brighton in the UK has had many female blue shirts, a woman works there right now I believe.

I don't see the problem here.
A good attitude is more important than skills.
You can train people to do a job, but someone with a poor attitude, well as they say, "you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink."

nkelsch wrote:

 Samwiiise wrote:

nkelsch wrote:
For a basically 'zero skill' position GW is advertising, it seems the only relevant thing needed is attitude.

Not at all seeing a problem as this is how the real world is.

I don't think this is what the OP meant when he mentioned the ad being passive aggressive. I agree with you in that it's far easier to teach someone with a positive attitude the necessary skills to do a job than it is to teach a skilled person who refuses to compromise or co-operate in anyway.

It's in the latter half that things start to get a bit sinister; the whole "if you don't fit with our culture, you'll be unhappy" stuff. It sounds like they're recruiting for a cult.

At least they are honest about it. Companies have cultures, teams within companies have cultures. If you can't stand the culture, you won't succeed. To pretend that fitting with corporate culture isn't important or real is a recipe for disaster.

(snip)

Oh yes, of course. I agree with that completely. I'm not going to pretend that the finer points of workplace psychology is my area of expertise, and so I'm probably not the best-informed person to be discussing this, but I definitely understand that it's infinitely better for someone to share the values of the company they work for. Similar to your friend, I worked for a couple of years in a place where the vast majority of the employees were lazy, irresponsible and completely self-serving, and it was hellish.

I think the point I'm trying to make here, though, is that there's a world of difference between a company that tries to figure out what the cause of the clash of values is and do something about it, and one that just says 'Agree or GTFO' (though maybe I'm being naïve in believing that the former actually exists at all ). Looking at GW's actions in the past, it's hard to believe they'd be anything but a particularly hardline form of the latter kind, and there's definitely a tone to the advert that suggests exactly that. It really doesn't come across well for someone who'd be interested in working for them, and I can't help but feel that there's something subtly threatening about the language they use. This is all just IMO, of course.

 Samwiiise wrote:
It's in the latter half that things start to get a bit sinister; the whole "if you don't fit with our culture, you'll be unhappy" stuff. It sounds like they're recruiting for a cult.

Well, it's just that the reality of hiring lackeys in any profession is that you're hiring them, first and foremost, to do what you tell them to do. In candy-coated speak, this translates to "good attitude".

Now, I definitely don't have a personality conducive to appearing happy, energetic, and eager to please, so I can certainly understand the rancor created by lackey-hiring realities. A lot of people don't, which is probably why society tends to keep to free economies where we don't necessarily have to go get employed in the typical fashion where demonstrating our good attitude is necessary.

If I employed people, I'd probably just be the same way, where I cared more about them doing what I say and trying hard than their actual competence.

 SalamanderMarine wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Sounds like pretty normal HR speak to me. They get off on things like "core values" and "having the right attitude" and lots of other meaningless waffle that means nothing on the ground (where sales targets are more important than your 'attitude').

I do like how the flyer has two things you'll never do as a GW employee:

1. See a female redshirt (or blueshirt in this case).
2. Build a Hierophant Bio-Titan!

GW Brighton in the UK has had many female blue shirts, a woman works there right now I believe.

You sure it's a girl? Long hair and boobs are not exactly indicative of a female in this hobby...

 Samwiiise wrote:


Oh yes, of course. I agree with that completely. I'm not going to pretend that the finer points of workplace psychology is my area of expertise, and so I'm probably not the best-informed person to be discussing this, but I definitely understand that it's infinitely better for someone to share the values of the company they work for. Similar to your friend, I worked for a couple of years in a place where the vast majority of the employees were lazy, irresponsible and completely self-serving, and it was hellish.

I think the point I'm trying to make here, though, is that there's a world of difference between a company that tries to figure out what the cause of the clash of values is and do something about it, and one that just says 'Agree or GTFO' (though maybe I'm being naïve in believing that the former actually exists at all ). Looking at GW's actions in the past, it's hard to believe they'd be anything but a particularly hardline form of the latter kind, and there's definitely a tone to the advert that suggests exactly that. It really doesn't come across well for someone who'd be interested in working for them, and I can't help but feel that there's something subtly threatening about the language they use. This is all just IMO, of course.

I would ask you if you've ever met someone who has come in and tried to change the company to fit them. It's not pretty for anyone.

While companies can change, no company is going to hire you and go "okay, we hired you as an entry level employee, let us know what we can do to change our culture to fit you". They hire consultants or high level executives typically do conduct those long term analyses. If you go into a company and you don't mesh with the culture, that is on you, not them, and why it's very important to have some understanding of the culture of a company you are considering for long term employment. If almost no one can deal with the organizational culture, that's an entirely different beast, but one very common in retail and sales.

First lets just get something out of the way... GW is not alone here, many companies do this and look for this...

Personally I dont care if the sculptors or miniature designers etc are tuned into GW way of thinking what I do care is that they DO their jobs really well!

One thing ( the attitude) is not exclusive of the other ( competence ) and if anyone ever worked in a big company knows is that personality is kind of secondary if you are not competent/professional.

So in short, It's a philosophy like any other which i could care less... yet they should hire more talent to balance the yes mans... lately the quality has slipped a lot.

The only issue with the poster in my eyes is the Sales Come First aspect. I dont really have a problem with the personality aspect. I've always gone by the motto that you should sell yourself, more than your experience. And they even say in positions where experience is relevant, they of course factor it in.

But to me, my concern after reading this is having a ground floor of a company which is only concerned about sales. And if youve ever been in a GW Store, that feels pretty accurate.

You can train a guy how to work a register.

You can't train him to get excited over it.

Almost every business works this way. I'd rather hire a guy with a can do attitude and train him a bit than hire a guy who knows what to do but is lazy.

If these guys were nuclear engineers or something then I would be worried, since there are certain skills needed to keep radiation contained and whatnot. A base level salesperson doesn't really need any skills they can't learn on the job.

 The Foot wrote:
If these guys were nuclear engineers or something then I would be worried, since there are certain skills needed to keep radiation contained and whatnot.

And those skills can be trained, no-one is born a nuclear engineer.
However, if they have a sloppy attitude to safety......

Boom.

Uh, those last 2 paragraphs were a bit weird for a hiring ad.

"Come work for us, chances are you won't get on with us, and you won't be happy. Call today!"

I wonder if the advertising department got their jobs on this 'attitude over skills' philosophy; and if so, maybe they should reconsider it?

V1ND4LOO wrote:
Uh, those last 2 paragraphs were a bit weird for a hiring ad.

"Come work for us, chances are you won't get on with us, and you won't be happy. Call today!"

I wonder if the advertising department got their jobs on this 'attitude over skills' philosophy; and if so, maybe they should reconsider it?

Maybe they have a drink while you work attitude. They could use that as a selling point!

I can only wonder how much the people criticising the ad have actually worked for a large company or how much education they have on the subject of HR management.

"Corporate Culture" is a thing. Part of the interviewing process is also in large part to find out if a person is going to be a "fit" in a given company. Part of the orientation process at the place I work currently is where people are told basically "If you can't or won't do the things we are about to outline you might consider not working here".

As has already been said, you can be the best (insert job title here) on earth, but if you're a gakky employee people won't want you to work for them for long.

 mattyrm wrote:
I think we can settle that both you and Mel were right, I dont think anything she said wasnt perfectly logical, because its true that attitude is more important than anything else, there were several guys who were taller, fitter, stronger and leaner than me when I was doing my commando training, but they still quit before the 32 weeks was up. One of the most awesome guys in the troop everyone used to call him Dolph because he looked like Ivan Drago and he could do about 60 fething heaves and run a 5 minute mile, I think the guy quit about 2 weeks in.

But you are obviously right, and we dont even need to crank it up to basic underwater demolition, a great many military tests are simple pass or fail criteria, if you don't pass, you go home.

So your both on the money really. I suppose a happy medium is always required, and thats got to be true of even GW right? I mean, they won't give you a job painting minis no matter how enthusiastic and jovial you are if you suffer from parkisnons disease and your hands shake worse than Michael J Fox sitting on a ice cold washing machine during a spin cycle.

Absolutely. My overall point was that you never see some dude who pounds down three Big Macs a day and has five extra chins sitting there at the end of BUD/S going, "All it took was willpower." People (rightly) say, "Hey, it's not always the guy in the best shape who makes it through," but on the other hand, it's never not a guy in damn good shape. There's a baseline level of fitness (which I guess we're considering analogous to skill) that you need before the willpower (which I guess is attitude in the analogy) becomes useful.

I dunno. She initially seemed to be parroting a lot of the, "Even fatasses can make it if they want it badly enough," gak that gets thrown around online. It appears she wasn't, so all's well.

Back to discussing how on earth that ad could possibly be considered passive-aggressive. I'm still not even remotely seeing it.

 Seaward wrote:

the "Even fatasses can make it if they want it badly enough," gak that gets thrown around online.

Its pretty much all of life nowadays thanks to that whole "everyone is special" or "you can do anything if you put your mind to it" gak that TV and Hollywood like to promote. Its why people that can't sing think they should be singers, people that can't act think they should be actors, gorgeous 90lb women think they can beat men up, fatties think that its all Mcdonalds fault they got fat, and so many young people think that the world owes them a living.

Joking aside, it's also probably the reason that suicide rates are so high.... because eventually they get to that point when they realise that in actual fact, not everyone is special after all, and sometimes no matter how hard you want something, you wont get it.

 Seaward wrote:


Back to discussing how on earth that ad could possibly be considered passive-aggressive. I'm still not even remotely seeing it.

Yeah me either. As I said have said many, many times, I am no lover of GW, I am entirely impartial and have a love/hate relationship with the company and the people that run it, but this website has a small percentage of users that loathe the company to the extent that much of what they write has a hint of insanity to it that would make me genuinely uncomfortable were I to be in a room with them.

Of course it is, any one with retail "skills" will get a job at a well run company.

Edit: don't see any thing wrong with the ad thou.

You had to read it several times because you were in such disbelief? This is the most standard HR speak you can find.

As others have pointed out, it's easier to train someone with a good attitude to a functional/competent skill level than it is to make a skilled but lazy/uncooperative employee work hard. What's the problem?

Oh excuse me, I know exactly what the problem is. The problem is the letter has the words "Games Workshop" stamped on them, and in the mind of dakkites that's enough to be considered a flaw. If this were a Privateer Press letter you would never have uttered a peep.

775B53 wrote:
You had to read it several times because you were in such disbelief? This is the most standard HR speak you can find.

As others have pointed out, it's easier to train someone with a good attitude to a functional/competent skill level than it is to make a skilled but lazy/uncooperative employee work hard. What's the problem?

Oh excuse me, I know exactly what the problem is. The problem is the letter has the words "Games Workshop" stamped on them, and in the mind of dakkites that's enough to be considered a flaw. If this were a Privateer Press letter you would never have uttered a peep.

Well, two things here, firstly, yes, someone likely would have uttered a peep, because dakka is fething enormous and has a large number of posters on it, including people with a dislike of PP.

Second, there will be more ire towards GW because 1: They're the biggest fish in this small pond of ours and 2: Because they quite often act like a giant bastard so there is a good degree of pre-existing antipathy towards 'corporate' GW.

But, keep clumping all Dakka Dakka users together for the sake of your derision, despite posting here yourself...

775B53 wrote:
Oh excuse me, I know exactly what the problem is. The problem is the letter has the words "Games Workshop" stamped on them, and in the mind of dakkites that's enough to be considered a flaw. If this were a Privateer Press letter you would never have uttered a peep.

Not really, the problem is that it was a flier/advert for the job. Looking at the Privateer Press Careers page on their website, they all have something in common...

Self-motivation (or highly motivated)
Strong work ethic/work with a sense of urgency

They also mention in a few of them:
Upbeat and positive attitude

So it's just company speak for someone that's not going to be a lazy fether on the job. The difference is not that it's GW, it's that the OP saw an advertisement for the position.

The interesting thing about the thread is that the OP is an example of how desperate some people are to critcize GW.

Nothing wrong or passive aggressive about that recruitment flyer.

Removed due to language.
Reds8n

"We expect all staff to spend their time at work helping to improve Games Workshop both commercially and Socially"

Tell that to your hound dog lawyer team, or the harassing staff that chase people out of stores, or you know, when you shut down your facebook because you are getting bad press.

They seem a bit full on about how you need to fit in or you won't be happy, but they don't say much about what sort of person fits in and what they want, just that you fit in. Other than perhaps the stuff about putting the company first and you leaving your ego at home. What they seem to be looking for is a yes-man that they can work like a dog and who will like it. It's a retail job, the pay is low and the potential for progression poor, the reason they want you to fit is because they'll treat you like a cog in a machine, and to be replaced when you get chewed up.

Yeah, that bit about "pretending you'll fit in, but you won't be happy" seems a bit ...weird or passive aggressive. The rest is pretty standard HR-Speak.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But read this blog post.

Enjoy!

http://notsounwashed.com/2009/11/very-dangerous-remove-immediately/

There's a leadership matrix with a fancy name I don't remember that has four quadrants: willing/unable, unwilling/able, willing/able, unwilling/unable.
Which obviously is a measure of skill and attitude. The most desirable new-hires in entry jobs are willing/unable because as you develop them they become willing/able. But skilled workers are more likely to become unwilling in certain situations.
Just the other day I was discussing a person I have issues with and said, "it would be differet if he was stupid, I'd be perfectly willing to help if he was stupid but motivated. But he's smart and lazy and that I cannot abide."

 AustonT wrote:

Just the other day I was discussing a person I have issues with and said, "it would be differet if he was stupid, I'd be perfectly willing to help if he was stupid but motivated. But he's smart and lazy and that I cannot abide."

I feel like sometimes that senior people feel they have earned the ability to coast, like it is owed to them. They want fat paychecks, easy work schedules, and low workloads for their years of experience. They also become the first to be laid off when a Jr associate can do their work ad 1/3rd the billable rate and half the time. Experience is worthless if you won't apply it to work.