Q: Big4 - Yearly salary increment

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Yes I was the SM who interviewed you, you gave very good answers. Keep it up and see you in Marina One

Share with me u sneak ur way up there and how long u u spent to get there. Did u suk up the right boss or take other ppl credit etc. Or other unethical way u can share.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Cleaner than your backside can already

Compare b4 with ppl backside. Really so bad meh b4.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Share with me u sneak ur way up there and how long u u spent to get there. Did u suk up the right boss or take other ppl credit etc. Or other unethical way u can share.

everyday angkat bola, I prob took credit for ur work too lmao

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I think it was because I made an error in my resume and its probably a turn off quite immediately for him and hence the spin. And he's also being nice in which suggesting what I should remove in my resume mainly the objective statement paragraph which is unnecessary since its just a bunch of bombastic words

There are many things that can be turn-off in interviews: resume, how you carry yourself in the interview, how you answers certain questions. And I have given people feedback during interviews too. But turn off + nice in some other way does not mean it is alright to be mean.

Please don't be like him in the future, and recognise that is a very douchey thing to say. Getting to SM is just a passage of time, not sure why your interviewer ego is so high. -.-

Originally Posted by Unregistered

There are many things that can be turn-off in interviews: resume, how you carry yourself in the interview, how you answers certain questions. And I have given people feedback during interviews too. But turn off + nice in some other way does not mean it is alright to be mean.

Please don't be like him in the future, and recognise that is a very douchey thing to say. Getting to SM is just a passage of time, not sure why your interviewer ego is so high. -.-

I'm an SM, what bout u bruh

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I'm an SM, what bout u bruh

Good job on crossing 9 years and more. It is a nice milestone.

I didn't manage to last half that time in audit. But I am quite happy with where I am, and won't envy being a SM or partner.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I'm an SM, what bout u bruh

Sm gt 48hrs a day ? Come on bruh

I realised that those good, technical and competent auditors typically will leave after 2-3 years in audit, whereas the remaining ones in big 4 are either:
1) gunning for partnership
2) underperformers

Can anyone shed some light to this

Originally Posted by Unregistered

There are many things that can be turn-off in interviews: resume, how you carry yourself in the interview, how you answers certain questions. And I have given people feedback during interviews too. But turn off + nice in some other way does not mean it is alright to be mean.

Please don't be like him in the future, and recognise that is a very douchey thing to say. Getting to SM is just a passage of time, not sure why your interviewer ego is so high. -.-

The problem with this "SM" is that there was absolutely no reason for him to make douchey statements like that in an interview. It was totally unnecessary. Was it needed to know the candidate better? No. Was it needed to convey information to see if the candidate is a mutual fit with the company? No.

There are so many ways to give feedback on a candidate's CV or profile without the need for insulting words and condescension.

In short, insulting a candidate serves NO purpose whatsoever except to power-trip and bully.

It also speaks volumes of the interviewer's character given the power imbalance. A candidate is looking to enter the company. The interviewer to some extent holds a large amount of power. And the first thing the interviewer does is to neg the candidate? Not a good look even before starting work. Imagine what happens in a real work situation...

Any self-respecting candidate would be wondering what kind of firm culture produces this kind of mid-level managers, and whether he becomes something like that after staying in the firm for long.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I realised that those good, technical and competent auditors typically will leave after 2-3 years in audit, whereas the remaining ones in big 4 are either:
1) gunning for partnership
2) underperformers

Can anyone shed some light to this

Are you in this profession and your realization come from where? How long you remain in the role is a myriad of factors: job preference, how you weigh WLB and meaning of audit, your portfolio and people you happen to work with, your opportunities outside.

For people in my batch and batches 1-2 years above/below. You see things like what you said. But there are people who are weak technically and left early because of other opportunities or just not suit. There are technically strong people who stay at M or longer, and may not necessarily aim for partnership.