Hey Guest, Have an interview coming up? We’ve opened new mock interview slots this week. Book here

TCLA Premium: Now half price (£30/month). Applications, interviews, commercial awareness + 700+ examples.
Join →

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="TS.Law" data-source="post: 235867" data-attributes="member: 24512">Hi, I also struggled to find the right direction in these questions, and I am not sure if my approach has worked so far.I was researching this earlier and could not find anything specific to this. However, grabbing some related concepts here and there, I realised this is similar to the 6-step scale from Likert, which is that psychometric test also largely used by law firms (strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, strongly disagree).In my @Milbank assessment, what I considered to mark a statement as very strong or strong etc, is a mix of persuasion strategies (logos, pathos and ethos) with the original Likert reasoning:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Very strong if I had an unquestionable clear and persuasive argument which could reasonably persuade ANY person/bystander. It addresses the problem with no objections.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Strong, for a quite clear argument with a valid point directly linked to the question, although some objections can be made.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Fairly strong, for a relevant argument which might have a point to be considered but lacks substantial judgement or some logic could addresses the issue</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Fairly weak if I faced an understandable argument with grains of truth and could persuade those already inclined. However, it doesn't address the real problem from the question and appeals to emotion, values, and feelings (pathos) and doesn't bring any logic or fact to substantiate.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Weak, for a statement which is completely unpersuasive and/or unrelated to the question. Sometimes, these statements make us consider an adjacent problem rather than focus on the real one being asked.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Strongly weak: no logic and/or reasonable answer at all. Lacks facts, judgment, while trying to bridge this gap with manipulative/irrelevant emotion.</li> </ul>Again, I don't know if it worked at all, but psychologically speaking, this gave me more confidence and a kind of direction during the assessment.</blockquote>

Verification: Our company is called, "The Corporate ___ Academy". What is the missing word here?

Top Bottom

Search

Search

Reply to thread