09:28:53 From Mike Nemcsok : Scenario 1
Very calm and approachable tone and navigation in the conversation. I think a more firm stance on the working hours would be good. There’s always discretionary work that should fill the time beyond covering the basics. Excellent job with keeping Aaron’s trust and confidence that his role is secure. 7.5/10
09:30:42 From Janna : I thought you did a good job trying to understand the perspective of your staff member. Maybe an option would to say would be you have option 1 or option 2 because of resources or values of punctuality.
09:30:51 From Josee : 7/10 – You remained calm! However, as an office manager, you have to think of finances and schedule…etc. You could have offered more alternative. Overall great job!
09:31:26 From William Doherty : It is think you assessed very well what the issus was with the employee. You gave enough leeway to the employee, but not too much either. Pretty good! 7.5/10
09:33:18 From Truong, Thien-Vu : I like that you remained non judgemental and you suggested solutions. 8/10
09:33:24 From Orélie Tran : 8/10 I like that you cared for Aaron if he’s okay and if there’s something going on, and looking through his point of view. This was a hard situation because Aaron kept pointing good arguments. Good job!
09:36:25 From William Doherty : If I understand correctly this situation is more about reasonably confronting a situation rather than holding your ground?
09:37:56 From William Doherty : Ok thank you!
09:50:13 From Josee : 6/10 – you answered all questions. You could have been more structured and
09:50:52 From Janna : You came off very non-judgemental, which was great! I understand your nerves (I feel the same). The structure seemed a bit disorganized, maybe helpful to answer question by question to ensure you are answering the direct question. 7/10
09:50:53 From Josee : you used him/her multiple times which was a bit distracting for me. Overall good job!
09:51:35 From William Doherty : I think it was pretty good! You addressed many important perspectives. I think that your stress was noticeable in your tone of voice. I would keep that in mind. You were very non-judgemental which was great! 6/10
09:51:46 From Mike Nemcsok : Excellent discussion, and good job relating your experience. I suggest establishing the focus of your main argument early, and keep your discussion tied to that. Your plan for actions to take was well-developed, and showed empathy based on your experienced. good job! 8/10
09:53:07 From Truong, Thien-Vu : I think your answer was well developed and you answered all the questions. I think you could have improved on structure. 7/10
09:53:29 From Orélie Tran : 8/10 I think that it’s great that you mentioned experience and history from Alex, your example was good, i think it would have been a little better if your answer was a little more structured.
10:03:15 From Mike Nemcsok : If we don’t know what to say, what would you suggest we do to avoid ‘filler statements’? I’m sure I fall into this sometimes!
10:05:33 From Mike Nemcsok : Great, thanks for the useful tip!
10:18:35 From Mike Nemcsok : Good level of confidence, and assuming the role at the start. I suggest possibly describing the mix of male/female as a representative balance of human gender distribution, and the importance of equality to avoid getting lost in the sensational tone of the reporter. Excellent job defending the importance of your mission and research to advance conditions on earth. I really like your idea to ask people from around the world for their objects to bring to Mars. 7/10.
10:19:50 From Josee : 6/10 – you remained calm and non-defensive. You could have structured your answered a little better. you spoke of considering different perspective, but did not mention what those could be. Overall good job for a hard situation!
10:20:10 From Orélie Tran : 7/10 It was a hard situation because the interviewer was very abrupt with his questions and his « feedback », but I like that you said to ask people around the world for the objects since you have a limited point of view.
10:23:55 From Michelle Leong : Score: 6. This was a very difficult station and you handled the questions well. I think you could bring in additional information about crew member make-up and expertise before the reporter brought up a follow-up question about crew diversity. Crowdsourcing the 10 items was a brilliant response!
10:37:56 From Michelle Leong : Score: 6. You touched on a lot of important points about waste, repercussions of waste, and waste reduction strategies but I think the point of this question was to get your thought process on how you would go about calculating the weight of garbage (Scholar role). You kind of glazed over this after using your own family as an example. Some things to consider – what is defined as garbage? Does recycling and compost count as garbage? Family unit size? Age of those in household (babies tend to generate a lot of waste)?
10:38:11 From Mike Nemcsok : Good job introducing yourself, describing your calculation, providing your answer, and bringing in the topic of waste and conservation. You qualified your response and shared perspective that other people/families would have different experience. Your response may have run too long on the details of different packaging. Good job tying in the climate impacts of wastefulness with determinants of health, and good job taking correction in stride during your response. 8/10
10:41:05 From Janna : Josee you speak incredibly well! You come across confident (the right amount) and in other stations I have seen you do, this is consistently great. You did a great job sharing your mental model with all of us. You appear flexible when Morgan clarified the additional information.Followed along with the prompts well. I think just adding more insight or depth would be the cherry on top. 8.5/10
10:43:01 From Rishav Sharma : 8.5/10 – Great job Josee! I think you did an excellent job of breaking down your perspective and steps you took to arrive at your answer. Just an idea I thought of for the follow up, single use items (plastic cups etc.) are always way cheaper than maybe some more long term utensils/items that a family needs. This would explain why lower SES families have more waste. So maybe reflecting on how these items may be affordable for lower SES families but at the same time being environmentally unfriendly. Maybe a policy where we could subsidize or reduce the cost of re-usable items/utensils. (definitely not a needed, just something I had in mind)
10:59:23 From Mike Nemcsok : Great introduction, good job describing your interpretation of the data. I suggest looking at both peaks (as you did well) and looking at the steep rates of change, plus the variation in periods of time over which data was collected (some data runs over longer periods). Very good ideation around the causation, and good confidence in your delivery. 7/10.
11:00:05 From Janna : I didn’t notice you got distracted by someone in the room so that is good! Maybe breaking down the chart to share with the interviewer more (ie. axis, title, age groups etc.). You are able to think about a lot of different aspects which is awesome. 7/10
11:03:11 From Josee : 8/10 – you are very articulate and bring up different perspective! You could have explained why you think the plateau is similar in all age group. Also, I think mentioning the color and location of the curve you are talking about to be sure you convey information clearly and you and the interviewer are on the same page. Overall I thought you did very well!
11:04:56 From Michelle Leong : Score: 7.5. I think you analyzed the graph well and brought in very relevant information about vulnerable populations. Your response could have been strengthened by noticing the date (Jan – May 2020) and indicating this was at the start of the pandemic and individuals in assisted/communal living were at increased risk. I really liked how you were explicit about the confusing colours!
11:07:17 From Janna : Is it worthwhile to say you disagree with that perspective, but give examples of that opposing side?
11:07:57 From Janna : Got it, be subtle
11:08:15 From Victoria Shi : thank you so much!!
11:24:50 From Mike Nemcsok : Excellent job with empathy to Jonathan’s situation. I think that shying away from the task of delivering the termination was not in line with the assignment of the post (although I know very well that this is difficult to do!). Your kindness and caring nature shines through! good job! 7/10.
11:26:39 From Josee : 7.5/10 – you remained calm and articulate. You could have asked if the setting was appropriate before starting the conversation. You did a really god job!
11:27:16 From Josee : good*
11:27:54 From Morgan Glass : https://www.mymedcoach.ca/shop/the-weekly-mmi-live/
11:28:51 From Janna : Thank you everyone for your time and feedback!
11:33:12 From Orélie Tran : Thank you so much!!
11:33:21 From Nijiati Abulizi : Thank you