venabili:
Did any non-engineering graduate get invited? Seems lyk i was the only business science gradute invited while i was being accredited.

yes, i saw accountan

ozara:




yes, i saw accountan

tuesday or wednesday and what time?

It was Friday, 2AM.

ismokeweed:

I meant crap concerning the recruitment. You really are an obnoxious toad.

I smoke ganja. U no go kill me o.lol

I studied accounting n was invited.

I guess we r few though unlike eng. graduates.

abeg wia samson (computer scientist) n kabir ajao (civil eng.- jbn) ?

bellosulaiman:
abeg wia samson (computer scientist) n kabir ajao (civil eng.- jbn) ?

kabir Ajao!!!!!! that funny guy

pls frds dis was one of the interview questions i was asked and i will like to kn ow ur view abt it, i just want to learn for future sake
" you are one of a team of three, asked to execiute a job within a limited tym, but the 3 of u seems to have different approach to the job which make the team not to reach a consensors abt hw to do the job. for hours u are still arguing on which persons approach u should use, what will u do to remedy the situation considering u have limited tym. NOTE: even wen u suggested u drop ur own idea so u could make use of one of their approach, d 2 seems never to agree on the approach to use."

dt means u r d computer scientist, samson frm awka.

bellosulaiman:
dt means u r d computer scientist, samson frm awka.

No

Macsholly:
pls frds dis was one of the interview questions i was asked and i will like to kn ow ur view abt it, i just want to learn for future sake
" you are one of a team of three, asked to execiute a job within a limited tym, but the 3 of u seems to have different approach to the job which make the team not to reach a consensors abt hw to do the job. for hours u are still arguing on which persons approach u should use, what will u do to remedy the situation considering u have limited tym. NOTE: even wen u suggested u drop ur own idea so u could make use of one of their approach, d 2 seems never to agree on the approach to use."

There's is no right or wrong way to answer this. The whole idea is for you to take them through your thought process.

For instance, I might go this way;
Since I've offered to step down my approach not because its way off but cos I see a lot of convergence in the build up to with our respective positions, I'll now have to take it further by moving to play the devil's advocate on the guy who's approach I genuinely believe to be weaker compared to the other chap.

In playing the devil's advocate, I'd pitch tent with the guy who's submission I feel is weaker but doesn't just know it, yet. This may be due to ego and his determination not to loose bragging rights to a colleague he feels he's light years ahead of in all fields of endevour.

So I will side him for the purpose testing the quality of his argument and identify weaknesses in its structure, and to use such information to abandon his original opposing position. In taking this route, I'd have taken a stance that would have been seen as unpopular or unconventional, but is actually another way of arguing a much more conventional stance without bruising the ego of any of these two gladiators. In seeing the "poverty" of his submission he'd [hopefully though] have no option but to go with a more roboust and encopassing opinion of someone that is not even me!

Agreed there would have been a little down-time with this particular approach to a compromise, it would have gone a long way to preserving the team spirit and unity which we both know is mission critical to the successful accomplishment of any team work.

My 3coins.

Case study gan, plenty grammar sha ^^^

wo1F:


There's is no right or wrong way to answer this. The whole idea is for you to take them through your thought process.

For instance, I might go this way;
Since I've offered to step down my approach not because its way off but cos I see a lot of convergence in the build up to with our respective positions, I'll now have to take it further by moving to play the devil's advocate on the guy who's approach I genuinely believe to be weaker compared to the other chap.

In playing the devil's advocate, I'd pitch tent with the guy who's submission I feel is weaker but doesn't just know it, yet. This may be due to ego and his determination not to loose bragging rights to a colleague he feels he's light years ahead of in all fields of endevour.

So I will side him for the purpose testing the quality of his argument and identify weaknesses in its structure, and to use such information to abandon his original opposing position. In taking this route, I'd have taken a stance that would have been seen as unpopular or unconventional, but is actually another way of arguing a much more conventional stance without bruising the ego of any of these two gladiators. In seeing the "poverty" of his submission he'd [hopefully though] have no option but to go with a more roboust and encopassing opinion of someone that is not even me!

Agreed there would have been a little down-time with this particular approach to a compromise, it would have gone a long way to preserving the team spirit and unity which we both know is mission critical to the successful accomplishment of any team work.

My 3coins.

on point but too much grammar o.

Macsholly:
pls frds dis was one of the interview questions i was asked and i will like to kn ow ur view abt it, i just want to learn for future sake
" you are one of a team of three, asked to execiute a job within a limited tym, but the 3 of u seems to have different approach to the job which make the team not to reach a consensors abt hw to do the job. for hours u are still arguing on which persons approach u should use, what will u do to remedy the situation considering u have limited tym. NOTE: even wen u suggested u drop ur own idea so u could make use of one of their approach, d 2 seems never to agree on the approach to use."

I was asked d same question. What's it with that question? I said evrything I knew, said evrything I thought, they kept saying u havent answered. From "I'll drop my opinion n align theirs (bringing 2 surface d strong points of each argument)" to "we'll just have 2 start using 1 of their opinions", they didn't seem to agree. We took forever on this question.What was your own answer?
Or who has any different ideas?

faith2ogesco:
on point but too much grammar o.

When you dey talk am e nor too sound big big plus you'd actually be done with all d talking in less than 90secs

wo1F:


There's is no right or wrong way to answer this. The whole idea is for you to take them through your thought process.

For instance, I might go this way;
Since I've offered to step down my approach not because its way off but cos I see a lot of convergence in the build up to with our respective positions, I'll now have to take it further by moving to play the devil's advocate on the guy who's approach I genuinely believe to be weaker compared to the other chap.

In playing the devil's advocate, I'd pitch tent with the guy who's submission I feel is weaker but doesn't just know it, yet. This may be due to ego and his determination not to loose bragging rights to a colleague he feels he's light years ahead of in all fields of endevour.

So I will side him for the purpose testing the quality of his argument and identify weaknesses in its structure, and to use such information to abandon his original opposing position. In taking this route, I'd have taken a stance that would have been seen as unpopular or unconventional, but is actually another way of arguing a much more conventional stance without bruising the ego of any of these two gladiators. In seeing the "poverty" of his submission he'd [hopefully though] have no option but to go with a more roboust and encopassing opinion of someone that is not even me!

Agreed there would have been a little down-time with this particular approach to a compromise, it would have gone a long way to preserving the team spirit and unity which we both know is mission critical to the successful accomplishment of any team work.

My 3coins.

bro, u call that 3 coins

@wo1F: This is my suggested answer: I respect the opinion of my team leader, if there are more than one approach to solving the problem I would suggest to my team leader that we pick the approach that is safer, less time-consuming, less cost intensive, withstand unfavorable conditions and has good theoretical background.

Lero15:
bro, u call that 3 coins

Lero my baws, how far na?
Wetin I for call am oga?

wo1F:


Lero my baws, how far na?
Wetin I for call am oga?

lol. More like 3 dollars. I'm good sir. U?

sirbone007:
@wo1F: This is my suggested answer: I respect the opinion of my team leader, if there are more than one approach to solving the problem I would suggest to my team leader that we pick the approach that is safer, less time-consuming, less cost intensive, withstand unfavorable conditions and has good theoretical background.

Nice one man. But they've put you on the spot by stripping you of those options you just laid out.
Also the question doesn't suggest there is a team leader cos if there were to be one, he would've used his overiding power to arrive at a vote. But its stated they've already spent hours on it without reaching a concensus if when you offered to step down your opinion. Except you now want to take it to your supervisor. Read it again

Lero15:
lol. More like 3 dollars. I'm good sir. U?

Oh I see. I'm doing well man, thanks

bellosulaiman:
abeg wia samson (computer scientist) n kabir ajao (civil eng.- jbn) ?

testing microphone, samson reporting from awka, boss i double hail.

wo1F:



When you dey talk am e nor too sound big big plus you'd actually be done with all d talking in less than 90secs

lol.i feel u

Guy....you aint communicating atall!!

wo1F:


There's is no right or wrong way to answer this. The whole idea is for you to take them through your thought process.

For instance, I might go this way;
Since I've offered to step down my approach not because its way off but cos I see a lot of convergence in the build up to with our respective positions, I'll now have to take it further by moving to play the devil's advocate on the guy who's approach I genuinely believe to be weaker compared to the other chap.

In playing the devil's advocate, I'd pitch tent with the guy who's submission I feel is weaker but doesn't just know it, yet. This may be due to ego and his determination not to loose bragging rights to a colleague he feels he's light years ahead of in all fields of endevour.

So I will side him for the purpose testing the quality of his argument and identify weaknesses in its structure, and to use such information to abandon his original opposing position. In taking this route, I'd have taken a stance that would have been seen as unpopular or unconventional, but is actually another way of arguing a much more conventional stance without bruising the ego of any of these two gladiators. In seeing the "poverty" of his submission he'd [hopefully though] have no option but to go with a more roboust and encopassing opinion of someone that is not even me!

Agreed there would have been a little down-time with this particular approach to a compromise, it would have gone a long way to preserving the team spirit and unity which we both know is mission critical to the successful accomplishment of any team work.

My 3coins.

chemicstein:
Guy....you aint communicating atall!!

Fair enough. I accept your criticism.
Why not go further and give us an improved opinion on the subject. We're all here to learn

@ samson aka audu 001, ow u dey na? n ow ur syd?

@sir bone007, ur response wasn't practical enof. rephrase the structure n bliv me, u r somwat ryt. 3 over ten. make it eight outta ten. u can do better.

@ woIF, there wud surely b a team lead. no doubt about it. even if the team consists two ppl.

Plz o, is dia any 2.1 graduate who has stayed
abt 2yrs without gettin a job... I wan knw
weda I go go MFM for prayers...

AltarBoy1:
Plz o, is dia any 2.1 graduate who has stayed
abt 2yrs without gettin a job... I wan knw
weda I go go MFM for prayers...

me neva get oo. Had 1st class shaa

SQLmaster1:
me neva get oo. Had 1st class shaa

alterboy u don hear am your time will come just in time, don't loose hope...I'm 2'1 yet unemployed, but I believe say better de front ooo...e go better

tochiddy:
My dear, don't take it that u v passed dragnet yet wit banks and the likes of olam and sahara whr d cut off is as low as 40% and some of our badt guys didn't even apply bcoz it is a low profile one. Wait until u write 4 high profile organizations like chevron, exxonmobil, nestle, gsk, I mean top coys where the whole 9ja is writtn and competition is stiff wit all d smart guys home and abroad present, only then will u know the true standard of dragnet and rate ursef accordingly. So keep working on ursef ma

i have a problem with how u think, the way u analyze situations and the way u address people..the way some people abuse the freedom to speak freely stirs up the Idi Amin in me