Extremely Long Post Ahead

So I went to a job interview yesterday for a brazilian web hosting company called Locaweb. This was their 2015 Trainee process, and out of the 12.000 people who signed up for it, only 400 people made it to this step of it, for a pittance of 8 openings. There were people from all kinds of areas there, and to be honest I think I was the only psychologist in a room of nearly 30 people! It was odd, but I'm kinda used to it, it happens a lot. One of the consultants that was helping Locaweb with a psychologist from this other company called Across that does HR/R&S consulting, so I at least knew that there was someone who wouldn't see my degree and have negative pre-conceived notions about it.

At any rate, the group activity they had planned for us was to first divide the 30+ people room in two halves so they could better manage us, and then on those halves, we had to form 3 groups of 6 people and create some sort of new product or service that was relating to Locaweb's already existing work. It had to be low cost, and obviously, we couldn't have repeats between the 3 groups. That was neat, my group came up with this idea for an Ez App Maker, similar to how you can quickly create your own site through Locaweb's site and host it. It was just an idea, and we did go into several manners which it could be implemented and what kind of people would want to use it, it went well.

There was this "bit" after everyone had presented their projects where now, in a hypothetical situation Locaweb wanted to send us to this Latin American technology conference, but only one person of each group could go, so now we had 1 minute each to state why we thought each of us was the best option for it. That alone already freaked me a bit, because first they ask us to co-operate and now we need to compete? During the entire time I kept thinking that this was all a bit ridiculous, because as a team that is sending someone to represent us in a conference, surely it should be the person who is the best public speaker and who can comprehend exactly what we want to show to the public, how to call the attention of potential investors and so on.
This just simply wasn't a matter that warranted infighting for personal accolades, because everyone's success depended on the person that would go to this convention. I'm still left wondering if they only put this "bit" in as a means of catching onto people who are wildly competitive and would be a nuisance more than an asset, but who knows. Locaweb kept waxing on about how "the other's success is my success" and "teamwork", so either they're flat out lying about how they operate, or they were just trying to catch assholes like I said.

At any rate, after that, then they asked "ok, so who goes?", but they don't ask anything else. So, since we just had to explain things in 1 minute each, that likely goaded us into believing we didn't have any time, and that it was a decision that had to be made immediately. In hindsight maybe that was another thing that they were evaluating, though to be fair, it was the reasonable response to believe you would need to answer things quickly once more. I pointed towards the person who had taken the leadership role in our group, and the rest seemed to agree, that was that.

In the end, they called several people to the next room, with the exception of me and some other people. When I saw who was going and who was staying, it became really obvious, before they even said anything, that we were the ones that had been rejected and not the other way around, which temporarily hurt a little. I believed to have done a better job than at least a few of the people in the room, so it felt like I wasn't being appreciated. I mean, that's how everyone who fails an interview feels, at least partially.
I spent the next few minutes just real god damn pissed internally, thinking back about what I mentioned a few paragraphs above, that maybe their selection process wasn't being realized properly. And knowing that we didn't even get a chance to have an individual interview before being tossed, it certainly raised a few flags on my "psychologist method" alarm. Now it seemed pretty likely that things weren't being conducted all that thoroughly, or at least not as thoroughly as I wish they were.

They then stated that the feedback that they were going to give us individually was optional, and that if any of us wasn't feeling up to it, we were fine to leave, but no one left. I think that shows at least that everyone there was interested in themselves and mature enough to want to do it, which was good. When I got called, it was honestly a bit surprising what they had to say.

The examiner first asked me what I thought I had done well, and what I maybe could have done better, which I first answered that I felt that I may have come off as too passive during the activity, but that I feel that I was able to encourage people to see their ideas through, and that I was able to sell their idea and show why it would be a solid investment. She then answered that she felt that my manner of presenting information was very clear, very easy to understand, that I had great didactics and analytical skill. She also said that from what she observed during the activity was that I was a good listener, that I was very earnest in hearing what others had to say, understand it, and then continue the discussion to further improve the idea.

And when she came to "the bad", she actually didn't have anything to say. She stated that it wasn't a matter of me doing something wrong, it was a matter of Locaweb being a company that wouldn't fit me. She asked me if I had considered academia, because she would see me as a researcher, or a teacher. I was less a "business" person and more a teacher. She also mentioned that I seemed more of a guy who would work on more traditional companies, rather than Google-y kinda companies, which is completely true. Like, that is exactly what I was dreading about Locaweb, them being a Google kind of company. The mere fact that them having a "relax room" with big bean bags, pool tables and so on registered to me initially as something that could mean that they weren't as serious as they said, which is a completely ridiculous assumption, but still was my first thought.

Her argument to her decision was that basically if I were hired, I would most likely do a good job, but I would have to be constantly making an effort to fit in, that I would be feeling like an outsider all the time. Her argumentation was actually really Jungian, because while one does have the capability of exercising something that is different from their preferred nature, doing so over long periods of time generates incredible strain on the person, which then leads to the person wanting to quit much faster than someone who was exactly in the profile that they wanted. So I entered that room ready to get pissed, but came out with honestly a really plausible and agreeable explanation. I still have my reservations regarding the "bit" at the end of their activity, but I do lean more towards them wanting to filter assholes out than anything. And I would have vastly preferred a chance for an individual interview before tossing us, but two things: 1) they already caught onto the kind of person I am and why I wouldn't fit in there from the group activity alone, that implies that the group activity served the purpose that it was supposed to serve, 2) an individual interview would only further prove that I wasn't the person they wanted. Because none of her feedback felt wrong or like she was just reaching, trying to give me a pat on the back, I think they may have enough experience to be able to glean the information that they needed from the group activity alone.

SO THAT IS KIND OF A BUMMER BUT ALSO NICE AND NOW I HAVE SEVERAL OTHER PLACES I'VE BEEN APPLYING TO AND HOPEFULLY I'LL ENCOUNTER A MORE TRADITIONAL COMPANY TO WORK FOR. HONDA HIRE ME PLS