And I spent most of Tuesday eating junk.

Today I'm planning my next moves. Especially given grad schemes all close up this week. On the plus side, I'll have more time to draw and lift weights again. Plus be a hobo!

It made the rounds on two major banks in the last few weeks. Won't name them, because I've noticed whenever someone mentions their names or what they did at their assessment centres their blog/journal dissapears. However they both have the same surname in their banks name, so you should be able to work it out.

I got upto the final round assessment. So on Monday I was either gonna hear If I got the job.

I was pretty sure I wouldn't get it at one of them, as they had thirty people testing when I was there, and knew they were doing a morning session and an afternoon session for the next two weeks. They also ran lots of testing and while I'm not weak in any departments, for some reason I've always struggled with verbal reasoning tests. I get around 70%. Have done since I was 11 years old. I know a lot of people can do better than that, so was expecting that to be a weak spot. I got a rejection and they said they can't give feedback because of the high numbers via e-mail.

The other bank was at least respectable enough to give ten minutes of feedback via phone.

I scored 87% on the numerical test.

We then had three tasks, each assessed by a different judge.

They said I performed exceptionally in the individual case study and was the most refreshing presenter they and even seen. I used tactics and skills that no one had ever used apparently. They ranked this with their highest mark.

They also said I was strongest in the interviews. No wonder. Considering by the time I did my final interview, I'd already done 3 previous with that bank alone. I was pretty much on auto-fire. Again their highest mark.

The reason they're not hiring me, the group task. They claimed I didn't speak enough and didn't appear like part of the team. Despite, interesting they stated everything I said was relevant and I noticed a series of significant risks that the rest of the had not considered and missed. Surely that means I served a function right? I'm not the kind to play to the camera, so I'll admit I did analyse the situation a bit when I probably should've been show boating with no intelligence like most the others.

After the team exercise, there was an interview where I reviewed my performance which led into the final interview. That person interviewing me agreed that they felt I'd been very analytical in the group task and gave me their highest scoring.

The one person throughout the whole process who I didn't speak to: the judge who watched the group task. I have no idea who it was. Yet, this person's voice has managed to elminate me from a job.

We all exchanged numbers after the assessment and agreed we'd tell each other the results. Three people were hired out of six.

I understand one of them without question. I was shocked that one person wasn't hired. She had another bank's offer anyway. The two remaining who did get hired, one guy wasn't overly spectacular, but if he hit their level 3/4 in each task, I get how he'd get through.

The one that shocks me: in the group task, one guy proved he was incompetent. Sure he spoke a lot. However, he analysed the facts and drew the wrong conclusions. Team members constantly corrected him through out the task, even on simple things like "an increase in the number of IT support calls" is not a positive thing for a business. Even the guy who interviewed me in the end called him "The guy who kept getting things wrong". Yet this guy gets employed for an international bank?

No wonder we got credit crunched.