Which would you consider to be a better option

[iamchristuffin]

Hi,

 

As a prospective employer/interviewer, would you consider lots of work experience with one or two companies to be better or worse than one or two weeks with more (say eight) companies?

 

TIA,

 

Chris

 

EDIT: Something else I've jut remembered, the eight companies would be spread across different areas e.g. Rigging, Hires, Lighting, Sound, etc., while the one or two companies would (probably) be hire and sound-specific

[peternewman]

I should first point out I'm not a prospective employer/interviewer and won't be for a good few years, if at all. However I've been in a similar kind of situation, although it was moving round departments not employers, but hopefully still useful. What I found is that if you are just there for a week or maybe two you don't really settle in properly so the right level of trust etc doesn't arise. Whereas for a longer period you almost become part of the furniture, so you can be more involved with getting your hands dirty and doing useful and relevant stuff. Obviously YMMV and indeed your situation obviously does too, but hopefully its some potentially useful advice. I guess a longer stint also shows more commitment and if you've stayed for longer you obviously weren't getting in the way and being a pain as they put up with you for more than a week. :)

[w/robe]

I would say that a week is too short other than to have a look at how the organisation works. If you want to get practical experience then at least 2-4 weeks.

 

I also always think it looks good if your work experience company has asked you back either for free or, better still, to pay you. Even if it is just for a get out or to help load the truck it shows you are a trust worthy, reliable person who is good to have around.

 

Now my question, Peter what is YMMV?

[Suzette]

From :)

 

YMMV

Literally means "Your mileage may vary" but is often used in forum talk meaning that your results will vary

[Bobbsy]

I would have thought several weeks per place would probably impress potential employers (and benefit you, too) more than a whirlwind tour of the industry.

 

One thing to consider: are you in a position yet to know what area of the industry you want to specialise in, or are you aiming for "jack of all trades". That wasn't meant to be disparaging...there is room in the business for all-rounders (in smaller receiving houses for example) but if you know your prime interest is sound (for example) then I'd go all out to get as much experience as possible in that specific discipline.

 

Bob

 

Edit to add: I believe "YMMV...Your Mileage May Vary" originates from American car ads. They went through a phase of quoting petrol ("gas") mileage as a selling point but the legal eagles forced them to include a disclaimer that real users' mileage may vary since the stated figures tended to be for a steady 55 mph.

[paulears]

Work experience means such different things. I hate the week 'work experience' all the kids at the local schools do. You take some erk in who doesn't really want to be there, waste loads of your time explaining stuff that just gets ignored/misunderstood/forgotten quicky, and thank god it's Friday and they never darken your door again. Sometimes, but sadly quite rarely, a proper one, with a real interest turns up, who can be trusted to actually be gven real jobs to do. After the week has ended a few tend to reappear and are useful - most just vanish!

 

So I reckon longer placements will indicate so much more. A week with somebody like Stage Electrics or Viking is pretty pointless, but a month - they'd be treating you almost as staff and you'd be included on so much more stuff. On the CV it would mean a lot more.

[iamchristuffin]

Thank for all the replies guys

 

...are you in a position yet to know what area of the industry you want to specialise in, or are you aiming for "jack of all trades".

 

I'd quite like to go into Live Event Sound, possibly a bit of touring.

 

Chris

[digisound]

In my humble opinion I believe that if it is sound you are after doing then working for a long time along the hire and live sound route would be a better option.

 

As you will, like has been said become part of the furniture or the skeletons one of the two.

 

You will gain valuable experience in how gear comes and goes and you can get a good jist of just how much work is involved.

 

Also if you are involved more the people around you can give you better feedback where you can improve etc.

 

Hope this helps

[mac.calder]

Another vote for doing a decent stint at a company. Unless you are really lucky, you will find yourself doing jobs like cleaning store rooms and the like if you are only there for a week, and even if you are REALLY lucky, and get to work at places that take you out on shows every day, and you learn heaps, on paper, you spent a week there, and the conclusions drawn by employers will be that you tidied store rooms and swept the warehouse.

[Just Some Bloke]

OK, it's about time someone put the other side of the argument so here goes:

 

* The candidate took the time to find one company who'd take him then sat it out of eight weeks because that was the easy thing to do. He has one useful reference and is asked back whenever they have a particularly big truck to unload.

* The candidate took the time to find 4 different companies, made sure that each placement gave him a different angle on his possible career, has got good references from 4 different employers and now works as a casual for 2 of them.

 

I'd go for the second candidate.

[paulears]

The guy doing sound for me at the moment is in his late thirties - really good, great ear for balance, and he has just mentioned he has only been doing it a few years. Used to be a head chef at a posh London hotel. Much happier now! Saw the corporate events go through and thought he would have a go!