Capitalizing on strengths and minimizing weaknesses of veterans in civilian employment interviews: Perceptions of interviewers and veteran interviewees.

IF 1.1 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Military Psychology Pub Date : 2024-05-23 DOI:10.1080/08995605.2024.2356498
Md Nazmus Sakib, Ellen Hagen, Nidhal Mazza, Neha Rani, Ehsanul Haque Nirjhar, Sharon L Chu, Theodora Chaspari, Amir H Behzadan, Winfred Arthur
{"title":"Capitalizing on strengths and minimizing weaknesses of veterans in civilian employment interviews: Perceptions of interviewers and veteran interviewees.","authors":"Md Nazmus Sakib, Ellen Hagen, Nidhal Mazza, Neha Rani, Ehsanul Haque Nirjhar, Sharon L Chu, Theodora Chaspari, Amir H Behzadan, Winfred Arthur","doi":"10.1080/08995605.2024.2356498","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Like all job applicants, veterans have to face the ubiquitous employment interview and pass this potential hurdle to civilian sector employment. So, because of the uniqueness of transitioning from the military to civilian employment, the present paper sought to identify perceived interviewing strengths and weaknesses of veteran interviewees from (a) the perspective of civilian sector human resource professionals (i.e. hiring personnel) with experience interviewing veterans (Study 1, five focus groups, <i>N</i> = 14), and (b) veterans (Study 2, <i>N</i> = 93). Qualitative analysis of the focus group transcripts resulted in the emergence of two theme categories: (1) veteran interviewee strengths and (2) veteran interviewee weaknesses. This information guided the development of a 10-item survey that was completed by 93 veterans (Study 2). In its totality, the results (from both Study 1 and Study 2) indicated that communication of soft skills, confidence, and professionalism were perceived to be strengths that veterans displayed during civilian employment interviews, and conversely, the ineffective translation and communication of relevant technical skills acquired in the military, use of military jargon, and nervousness were considered to be weaknesses. Recommendations to capitalize on the strengths and mitigate the weaknesses are presented.</p>","PeriodicalId":18696,"journal":{"name":"Military Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Military Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08995605.2024.2356498","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Like all job applicants, veterans have to face the ubiquitous employment interview and pass this potential hurdle to civilian sector employment. So, because of the uniqueness of transitioning from the military to civilian employment, the present paper sought to identify perceived interviewing strengths and weaknesses of veteran interviewees from (a) the perspective of civilian sector human resource professionals (i.e. hiring personnel) with experience interviewing veterans (Study 1, five focus groups, N = 14), and (b) veterans (Study 2, N = 93). Qualitative analysis of the focus group transcripts resulted in the emergence of two theme categories: (1) veteran interviewee strengths and (2) veteran interviewee weaknesses. This information guided the development of a 10-item survey that was completed by 93 veterans (Study 2). In its totality, the results (from both Study 1 and Study 2) indicated that communication of soft skills, confidence, and professionalism were perceived to be strengths that veterans displayed during civilian employment interviews, and conversely, the ineffective translation and communication of relevant technical skills acquired in the military, use of military jargon, and nervousness were considered to be weaknesses. Recommendations to capitalize on the strengths and mitigate the weaknesses are presented.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在文职就业面试中利用退伍军人的长处并尽量减少其弱点:面试官和受访退伍军人的看法。
与所有求职者一样,退伍军人必须面对无处不在的就业面试,并通过这一潜在障碍,进入文职部门就业。因此,鉴于从军队转业到文职工作的特殊性,本文试图从(a)有面试退伍军人经验的文职部门人力资源专业人士(即招聘人员)的角度(研究 1,5 个焦点小组,N = 14),以及(b)退伍军人(研究 2,N = 93),找出退伍军人面试受访者感知到的面试优缺点。对焦点小组记录的定性分析产生了两个主题类别:(1) 退伍军人面试者的优势;(2) 退伍军人面试者的劣势。在这些信息的指导下,93 名退伍军人填写了一份 10 个项目的调查问卷(研究 2)。总体而言,研究 1 和研究 2 的结果表明,软技能沟通、自信和专业精神被认为是退伍军人在文职就业面试中表现出的优势,反之,在军队中获得的相关技术技能的无效翻译和沟通、军事术语的使用和紧张则被认为是劣势。本文提出了利用优势和减少劣势的建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Military Psychology
Military Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
18.20%
发文量
80
期刊介绍: Military Psychology is the quarterly journal of Division 19 (Society for Military Psychology) of the American Psychological Association. The journal seeks to facilitate the scientific development of military psychology by encouraging communication between researchers and practitioners. The domain of military psychology is the conduct of research or practice of psychological principles within a military environment. The journal publishes behavioral science research articles having military applications in the areas of clinical and health psychology, training and human factors, manpower and personnel, social and organizational systems, and testing and measurement.
期刊最新文献
A qualitative assessment of perceptions of gender-based stigma among US Marine Corps officers in training. Are veterans willing to assist with firearm safety for suicide prevention? Associations among psychological health problems, intimate-relationship problems, and suicidal ideation among United States Air Force active-duty personnel. Fluid teams. Low psychological resilience and physical fitness predict attrition from US Marine Corps Officer Candidate School training.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1