Can the audition process be improved?

[JamesSp]

Discussions give you a very good idea of what the vote will be, however, I have seen cases where the final (secret ballot) vote went the other way than what I thought would happen. People may have changed their mind after hearing their colleagues comments. That, by the way, is the point of discussions.

Recording discussions is entirely inappropriate, and could be a legal issue. Also, imagine the fallout if you were opposed to hiring someone, and they get the job and end up as a colleague of yours for the next 20 years, knowing that you didn't want to hire them. That's a recipe for a bad work environment.

Gabe said it the best in a previous post - it's not a competition, it's a job interview. The orchestra has the right and the need to try to find a player who will fit their musical needs.

Jim Scott

Ok some good insight here thanks!

I dont know about it being purely a job interview, there are certainly competition aspects to the process, labelling it as one or the other doesnt seen like a good representation to me.

It won't ever happen but I also dont see it as inappropriate to record that discussion. I dont know what legal issues could arise, as a private company im sure organisations could implement that as policy if they had any motivation to do so, and as part of being an employee you would be expected to comply. Maybe some people get hired via unanimous decision, but I doubt any candidate goes in thinking they were every single panel members first choice the whole way through. It's a stressful work environment generally and I can't see knowing who didn't vote for you automatically causing a hostile workplace. On the flip side, knowing someone can pass a trial amicably performing alongside people they know didn't vote for them could be a good thing overall in the eyes of the panel as a whole surely?

[CalgaryTbone]

OK, think of it this way: Imagine you come an audition for my orchestra. The committee discusses your performance, and is unanimously disappointed - negative remarks about sound, pitch and time. Then, the recording that was supposed to go to just you somehow gets sent to the wrong person (clerical error) and that person puts it on the Internet. Lawyers start getting rich and your career and the orchestra's reputation all take a major hit.

Now this is just an example that would likely never happen, and I'm not suggesting that you are a bad player when I've never heard you or met you. There's always a danger of a recording getting out when it exists, and it is a really bad idea (just ask Trump these days!).

If you want comments after an audition, ask for them - most places will accommodate that. No one has any reason to lie in those comments, but if their comments are like mine, they won't be extensive. Just the nature of the day that for most people you can't write a full descriptive essay for each player, so there are lots of shorthand notes like "time on triplets". That should be enough for you to make improvements for the next time.

And lastly. yes auditions are job interviews. I've actually sat on a hiring committee for a job interview for an office position here once a while ago. Those applicants were competing too in a way, but the bottom line is that only one person can be hired - everyone else is disappointed. I can also say that in that environment, it was important to not let any negative comments about how those applicants fared leave the room afterwards. It's considered to be good business etiquette to keep that private.

JS

[Posaunus]

Perhaps a disappointed applicant should sue because they weren't selected.
Their lawsuit might make it to the Supreme Court.
From their recent university applicant decision, we now know how the SCOTUS majority feel about organizations trying to create a congenial productive environment based on subjective criteria.

[JamesSp]

OK, think of it this way: Imagine you come an audition for my orchestra. The committee discusses your performance, and is unanimously disappointed - negative remarks about sound, pitch and time. Then, the recording that was supposed to go to just you somehow gets sent to the wrong person (clerical error) and that person puts it on the Internet. Lawyers start getting rich and your career and the orchestra's reputation all take a major hit.

Now this is just an example that would likely never happen, and I'm not suggesting that you are a bad player when I've never heard you or met you. There's always a danger of a recording getting out when it exists, and it is a really bad idea (just ask Trump these days!).

If you want comments after an audition, ask for them - most places will accommodate that. No one has any reason to lie in those comments, but if their comments are like mine, they won't be extensive. Just the nature of the day that for most people you can't write a full descriptive essay for each player, so there are lots of shorthand notes like "time on triplets". That should be enough for you to make improvements for the next time.

And lastly. yes auditions are job interviews. I've actually sat on a hiring committee for a job interview for an office position here once a while ago. Those applicants were competing too in a way, but the bottom line is that only one person can be hired - everyone else is disappointed. I can also say that in that environment, it was important to not let any negative comments about how those applicants fared leave the room afterwards. It's considered to be good business etiquette to keep that private.

JS

I'm appreciative of your comments, this is exactly where I was hoping the discussion would head.

In regards to comments or feedback post audition, personally I have always been grateful and receptive when offered. A few years ago (during the corona ordeal) I was forced to submit a tape for a very good orchestra I had worked with on a few occasions before. I was very interested in working with them full time. I made finals so didn't win (obviously) so I was disappointed but it was fine, I know how this process goes and the winner deserved it just as much as anyone else. Very kindly the orchestra said feedback was available and I was very interested. I wasn't living in the same country as the orchestra at the time so I asked for my feedback to be emailed or messaged. They said that wasn't possible, it HAD to be a phone call from the principle trombone player. I braved the time difference and spoke with the principle, who to be clear, I am grateful made the time to do it.
It's very hard to explain all this with no specifics, but the comments I received were very mixed. A few I could see related to the recording I sent but some were very unusual and bizzare. Those ones I could easily double check for myself because I had sent a recording. I have nothing but my word but a few of the comments I received simply couldn't have been in relation to my recording. I'm not at all saying this person outright lied, and I have nothing but my own suspicions as to why the outcome turned the way that it did and why those commemts were made, but from then on out I have always asked for any feedback offered in writing.

The motivation is not to embarass anyone or "prove" something, but I think people are more careful and honest about what they say if it's clearly written from them. And I think that's important in an industry with so many people who spend so many hours on something they really care about when the employment process can at times appear vague. Of course, I could be completely wrong and in the instance I've referred to im just not a good enough musician to understand what was said to me. But I dont think so.

In regards to the (hyperthetical) recording being sent to the wrong person..... im ok with that. What I mean is, I think the hiring process should be a little less one sided and in this hyperthetical you have presented, if potential candidates know a specific organisation is unprofessional enough to send the recording to the wrong person, or have people in their organisation who say/describe players in a way that is (in their eyes) unwarranted in a public capacity, it might make some applicants think twice about whether they actually want to apply for that organisation when they advertise positions. I think that would be good in the long run for both parties.

Auditions being a normal job interview..... maybe. But I dont think this industry is normal and the process (to me) has a number of aspects that are unique to the industry. You can find similarities without looking too hard but the differences are there.... and significant in my opinion.

[JamesSp]

Perhaps a disappointed applicant should sue because they weren't selected.
Their lawsuit might make it to the Supreme Court.
From their recent university applicant decision, we now know how the SCOTUS majority feel about organizations trying to create a congenial productive environment based on subjective criteria.

Honestly.... I think this is not a good suggestion. I'm trying to think of ways to improve the process for both sides because it interests me, and I think normalising sueing would be negative for all involved.

[Posaunus]

Perhaps a disappointed applicant should sue because they weren't selected.
Their lawsuit might make it to the Supreme Court.
From their recent university applicant decision, we now know how the SCOTUS majority feel about organizations trying to create a congenial productive environment based on subjective criteria.

Honestly.... I think this is not a good suggestion. I'm trying to think of ways to improve the process for both sides because it interests me, and I think normalising sueing would be negative for all involved.

Jams,
My "suggestion" was intended to be satirical, not serious.
We have enough lawsuits and enough interference in our lives from the court system!

[CalgaryTbone]

The biggest difference between an audition and regular job interviews is that orchestras try to hear as many applicants as they can (subject to available time in their schedule). The job interview I took part in was only 3 or 4 people, after all the other applicants had been eliminated by the CEO (or someone working for them) decided that their resumes didn't merit an interview. Orchestras give many more applicants a chance, and that makes it a bit of a conveyor belt.

As far as thinking that an orchestra would be unprofessional to make a mistake with a tape, etc. - mistakes like that happen every single day in the corporate world. It would not be the principal player that made a mistake like that, it would be a lower level employee in the office who handles mail/emails etc. I once had someone else's personal contract sent to me by mistake. I've heard similar stories from people in the NY Philharmonic, and Chicago Symphony. It's seldom a major issue, but everyone who has received someone else's magazine subscription renewal knows that clerical errors happen. Computers, for all the good they provide in convenience, make mistakes like that even more common - anyone ever get message that was supposed to be "reply" to one person and instead someone clicked "reply-all"?

Now, you had a bad experience - that is on the person you were dealing with, and not on the entire orchestral industry. There are many reasons for someone to have problems relaying information, particularly bad news to someone else. No one else can know if they were being shy, guilty (because they knew you), sad (because they wanted to hire you, but were outvoted). Lots of possibilities - but honestly, so what! Like it or not, the orchestra went another way, so dust yourself off, practice, study and be even more prepared for the next one. That is the way it works, and frankly, I think it sucks that there aren't more jobs out there, but it beats office politics, etc. that happens in the corporate world.

JS

[JamesSp]

The biggest difference between an audition and regular job interviews is that orchestras try to hear as many applicants as they can (subject to available time in their schedule). The job interview I took part in was only 3 or 4 people, after all the other applicants had been eliminated by the CEO (or someone working for them) decided that their resumes didn't merit an interview. Orchestras give many more applicants a chance, and that makes it a bit of a conveyor belt.

As far as thinking that an orchestra would be unprofessional to make a mistake with a tape, etc. - mistakes like that happen every single day in the corporate world. It would not be the principal player that made a mistake like that, it would be a lower level employee in the office who handles mail/emails etc. I once had someone else's personal contract sent to me by mistake. I've heard similar stories from people in the NY Philharmonic, and Chicago Symphony. It's seldom a major issue, but everyone who has received someone else's magazine subscription renewal knows that clerical errors happen. Computers, for all the good they provide in convenience, make mistakes like that even more common - anyone ever get message that was supposed to be "reply" to one person and instead someone clicked "reply-all"?

Now, you had a bad experience - that is on the person you were dealing with, and not on the entire orchestral industry. There are many reasons for someone to have problems relaying information, particularly bad news to someone else. No one else can know if they were being shy, guilty (because they knew you), sad (because they wanted to hire you, but were outvoted). Lots of possibilities - but honestly, so what! Like it or not, the orchestra went another way, so dust yourself off, practice, study and be even more prepared for the next one. That is the way it works, and frankly, I think it sucks that there aren't more jobs out there, but it beats office politics, etc. that happens in the corporate world.

JS

For sure, I would say there is probably a bit more subjectivity that goes into a hire in the music industry, especially at the elite levels. Its not just who has the most experience or qualifications. Not saying every other industry is like that but I think a lot more jobs will weigh qualifications and experience more than a panel will at an audition, if they even care about that stuff at all. One of my qualifications is from arguably one of the world's leading performance schools, and even with that I've been denied attendance at an audition before. I'm not sure many other industries care so little about qualifications and work experience when it comes time to hire a candidate. Basically just gets your foot in the door to be heard on audition day.

Yes, I'm not suggesting a particular person in the orchestra would leak the hyperthetical recording. You are absolutely correct, I myself once got an email that was clearly not intended for me by an organisation that should have known better. I'm just saying in my opinion, the benefits to having something like that exist would outweigh the concerns. I dont think miss sent recordings would be a common occurrence, and I think candidates would be better off hearing the discussion warts and all. I doubt panels would "like" it, but I think it would be better for all in the long run.

Absolutely, what I relayed is simply a single anecdote from my experience, but I dont think im alone. It's not the only time (not identical) comparable things have happened post audition to me, and im not blaming any individual or even the organisation. I would probably do the same or have the same said about me if the roles were reversed. I'm saying that I think its an issue, enough of one the discussion interests me and that I think a positive solution is written feedback. I get people will disagree, but I think it would be mostly people from one side of the isle.
I suppose in a way this is me dusting myself off. I'm not particularly emotionally worked up over it, disappointed of course as anyone would be but that's just the industry, and I've chosen to be a part of it. As I mentioned, I've also been on the positive receiving end of an audition for a full time well paid job once before and im sure there were other people upset with that result at the time. It's swings and round abouts doing music, but as I keep saying I think this is a discussion worth having and there seems be be no good medium for it. Im hoping others are interested, but if not that's fine. Always a learning experience!

[JamesSp]

Honestly.... I think this is not a good suggestion. I'm trying to think of ways to improve the process for both sides because it interests me, and I think normalising sueing would be negative for all involved.

Jams,
My "suggestion" was intended to be satirical, not serious.
We have enough lawsuits and enough interference in our lives from the court system!

Haha ok. Hard to tell over text sometimes!

[timbone]

One of my colleagues in France was a former soloist with the Paris Opera orchestra and he told me their auditions are about playing a concerto- they want to hear you play music- you are expected to know the repertoire. Oh how different that would be in the US!