Firms' use of Watson Glaser (slight complaint)

[elsieee0410]

I'm currently a first year student and I applied to Linklaters' brand ambassador role. After submitting the initial application I was then asked to submit a video introducing myself and answer two questions.

I still firmly believe that video was the best I've cooked up since I learned how to edit, and I think the written questions I've done pretty well too. But after I submit all that I was invited to do the Watson Glaser and subsequently failed (which is weird because I've done and passed WG a few times in the past, but oh well)

My question is WHY IN THE WORLD did the ask us to do a high effort assignment (edit a whole video) BEFORE assigning WG, and binning the effort of everyone who didn't pass? It seems like a video introduction is something similar to an interview so why didn't they just put it after the WG, if the purpose is to wipe out candidates in the first place? It's not like I'm mainly upset about not passing (kind of, but not really) but rather the fact that I put in so much effort for the video just for it to probably not get looked at, or get binned over a (in my opinion) pretty arbitrary test.

But oh well, I guess such is life and I'll get used to it when I apply to more. Still don't think this is an okay practice though. (if anyone have some particularly useful WG tips pls let me know as well haha cause obv that's something I need to improve upon.)

 

[Abbie Whitlock]

Hey!

I completely get why you are frustrated - that is a lot of effort to put in before a screening stage, and it does sometimes feel a bit backwards! I think firms sometimes include things such as video submissions first because they are also assessing motivation / communication early on, but I do agree that it can feel inefficient from a candidate perspective.

On the WG test, the biggest thing that personally helped me was just consistent practice. It is one of those tests where technique matters a lot more than raw ability (although I'm sure there are some people that are naturally good at WG tests!). The more questions that you do, the more you start to recognise patterns (especially for assumptions and inferences), and you get much quicker at spotting any traps. I think when I first starting doing WG tests, I used to overthink the answers and fall into traps - therefore, doing lots of questions helps you to understand what the test is looking for.

A couple of things that I picked up online that made a difference for me are:

• Stick strictly to the information given and don't bring in outside knowledge at all (this is the main part I struggled with!)
• Be quite literal with the statements, even if they feel unrealistic
• Practice under timed conditions so that you don't rush and make silly mistakes in the actual test

It is definitely annoying to fall short when you have passed before, and I found that my results sometimes felt a bit random, but I'd say if you keep practising you'll be back to passing consistently.

Best of luck!!