Nanny&Me

I was so nervous going into the interviews because I kept thinking about how paramount it was that they go successfully. This would not be a good time to doubt the strength of the selection process that I had created, or our gut instincts. Even though in reality it would have been possible to extend the interviewing process for as many rounds as we’d like, it really did feel ominous; as if we had this one shot at finding the perfect caregiver for our precious baby. I could sense a lot of anxiety from my husband as well, who despite his seemingly aloof nature, was just as nervous as me to see whether or not we would find anyone that would be adequate for our son.

It was the evening of our first interview, and we had reviewed all of the candidate packages. The first interview was a very exciting one as the individual had submitted a wonderful cover letter detailing her passion for children and telling us about her family back home in the Philippines. One of the most important elements of an application for me is the cover letter. I really value when people take the time to not only tailor it to our specific situation, but are open enough to share about who they really are; their background, and family life.

Mike (that’s my husband) and I scrambled to get everything set up for our first interview. We moved the screen of my laptop around to find the best lighting, and got ourselves positioned. We would be conducting all of the first round interviews via Skype (post on Skype interview tips soon to come). I have studied interviewing fairly extensively throughout my post-secondary education, but sometimes struggle with actualizing the theory that I am so familiar with.

In our first interview, I sort of dove right in. I’m more of a structured sort of person (albeit warm and friendly…I hope), but Mike is much more casual, laid back and informal. We made a great team because he seemed to know just when the right time was to jump in and ease the mood of the interview. I fear that if I had been alone, I would have interviewed in far too formal a nature, which does not yield optimal results. Yet if he had been alone then an interview probably would not have taken place. The goal of interviewing (or at least the interviewing practice that I favor) is to make candidates feel as at ease, comfortable, and confident as possible because it will enable them to be their most sincere self and will create an environment that welcomes them to take some time, reflect on your questions, and provide more in-depth answers. I have a tendency to rush from question to question leaving little room for easy conversation, but Mike, a conversational mastermind just seemed to float effortlessly from one question to the next, interjecting an appropriate amount of small talk, and follow up questions. He had a real knack for establishing a flow of reciprocal conversation, rather than the interrogation style that I was struggling to avoid.

My biggest fear going into the interviews was that we wouldn’t find anyone remotely suitable; that no one would be qualified enough, possess the right temperament, and be the right fit for our family. I couldn’t be more wrong. As our first interview came to a close, we were elated (and relieved) that the first candidate was so wonderful, but as we moved on to the second candidate our worries swung the other direction as we began to wonder how we would ever choose the right person amongst a sea of wonderful, competent, and suitable candidates. We ploughed through interview after interview of lovely people. We had many genuine conversations, and heard some very interesting stories about nanny situations worldwide. Listening to several candidates’ stories about some of their living conditions and treatment by previous employers made me very proud to live in a country where employers (for the most part) embrace caregivers as part of their family, treat them with respect, and value their role in their household.

We did have a few doosies including candidates that were ill prepared, unqualified, or poorly suited to our family. Perhaps one of the more notable flops was when we interviewed a candidate who made ten times more of a fuss over our dog, Orly, than over our son. She fawned all over the dog, and then barely glanced at the baby. Now as you can see from the photo on the right, Orly IS pretty darn sweet, but that doesn't make it any less worrisome when someone seems more interested in our friendly furry friend, than our son.

While we did introduce Orly the dog to all of the candidates to ensure that we could sense a level of comfort with dogs, we only introduced Logan if he happened to wake up during the interview as we felt that the second round interview would be a more appropriate time to introduce him. 

Looking back on the first round interviews, I feel like we could have improved the outcomes by changing a few things. Here are the suggestions I would have based on our first round interviews:

In the end, it was actually a pretty clear-cut decision. We chose 4 candidates to proceed on to the next round of interviews. I won't use their names, but candidate 1 was a front runner from the very beginning (lovely cover letter and resume, strong interview, and very warm and consistent), candidate 2 was someone that I had been talking to for several months and was very excited about (genuine and competent), candidate 3 had us giddy with excitement (she was peppy, talkative, social, and confident), and candidate 4 was a late comer to the running, but had a great interview (seemed very competent, and calm).

Stay tuned for my post on the second round!