> P.S.: Jordi suggested to split my nm1.txt into two files/mails to the > Applicant. One for the Assigned Mail and one for the T&S Stuff. I > personally prefer to do it in one mail. :) I support Jordi in this. My rationale is that the applicant should be gently guided (harassed :) through NM. First, you ask him about his background, and look at his initial package. While you're trying to find every little buglet in the package, he can answer P&P, which is probably the easiest part of NM. Then, when you're done with P&P, you start to feed him with the bugs you found in his package. Not all of them at once, especially not if there are more bugs of the same kind: lets see if he can find the others by himself. During this stage, one starts to ask the T&S questions (if you're lucky, your applicant chose a package for which one or more of those questions are applicable). I believe this is a good method, since different stages are usually different threads, which makes your job easier, when you review P&P or T&S, if it is really sufficient. If you mix them too much, you'll get lost in the jungle. Of course, this only applies if the NM process is more than 6-7 mails (which it should be, in my opinion. We want to be damn sure that the applicant is qualified, don't we?). Feeding questions slowly also has the benefit of making it possible to track the applicants progress more closely. Based on the questions, your applicant may learn something, and adapt his packages accordingly. If you let your cards out in the first mail, you'll lose this ability. Of course, in the end he'll end up at roughly the same level as if you'd just bombed him with questions in the beginning, but YOU will know him better, and that's a serious advantage. Cheers, -- Gergely Nagy
Attachment:
pgpReBTkIfG6X.pgp
Description: PGP signature