What has been your experience of Core-Group Member/ Manager selection interviews for institute bodies such as Mood Indigo, Techfest and E-Cell?

TL;DR? Read it through and through!!! Don't be lazy! It'll help you put things in perspective, regardless of if you were/are part of an IB or not. My Credentials: I was part of one of the so-called IBs a while ago. Hopefully things haven't changed much from back then and what I have to say is still relevant. I am answering anon so I can afford to be candid. Criteria for selection: Let's be very clear on one thing. If you have worked your ass-off as a coordinator and are senti about the Fest, it in no way means that you'll necessarily make for a good CG/Manager. It is sort of a necessary-but-not-sufficient condition. To all people who think they have worked well but still didn't get through, the competition in some portfolios is pretty intense, you can lose out by a whisker. In my opinion, some of the things considered, in decreasing order of importance, are: 1. Are his motivations rite? 2. Is this dude a work-horse but inherently dumb? 3. Does he have the skill-sets required in the portfolio? 4. Is he a pain-in-the-ass to work with/sit in team-meets with? On the issue of perceived unfairness: The biggest reason an incompetent is unlikely to get selected is because the OC can't afford to fcuk up the Fest (Remember: failure is blamed on The OC, but success is credited to The Team). The current CG/Managers may want to push through their choices but the OC will always make sure that these are non-dickhead choices. -> But you say you've seen with your own eyes that competent people have not made it: Well, becoming a CG/Manager is like getting promoted at the job: Nothing beats competence, but when competence is equal, senior rapport matters. -> But you say you've seen people more incompetent than the candidate make it: Well, the guy who made it was probably in a different portfolio where the nature of competition was entirely different. -> But you say, an incompetent made it in the same portfolio: Well, they definitely have some over-compensating strength which is hidden in normal day-to-day life, but comes out when put under stress-conditions. If you don't make it through: So now you didn't make it through and you are a total wreck. What do you do? Cry it out, get your shit together, move on. I know it hits your sense of self-worth when u don't make it, but correlating CG-selection to self worth is super-stupid. Firstly, because u probably missed out by a whisker and are not that worthless after all. Secondly, not making it doesn't mean you'll never be successful in Life, just like not clearing IIT-JEE doesn't mean you are a complete loser. If you are worried from a resume point-of-view, try and secure good interns, they are weighted equal to or even more than a CG/Manager, depending on how good they are. That'll also leave you free to pursue and excel in whatever other thing u want to follow in-sem. The next question that pops up in your minds is, why then are CG/Manager posts so hyped? That is because all your peers think that these PoRs make you a certified-stud. Every post is contested 1:3. Also as a freshie you probably looked up to some CG/Manager and are trying to emulate him/her. That makes you perceive these to be super-god-damn-awesome posts and attach an unjustified holy-aura to them. So is it worth the effort then?: Did the above paragraph discourage you from putting in a fight for an IB PoR? You've started to think it isn't worth it? Don't be a pussy. Put up a fight. Once you get through, it is a great learning-curve. It helps you learn a thing or two about handling people and pressure, which comes in handy considering most IITians are socially inept. Not that u can't learn that elsewhere, but an IB PoR is a complete package of sorts. You'll forge some excellent friendships. Overall it helps you grow and mature out as a person. Of course, all this is assuming u want to become a CG/Manager for the learning and not just the resume value. Bottom-line: Becoming a CG /Manager only means you had all things working in your favor for that short duration of 6-7 months and is no guarantee of future success. Forget CGs even some of the OCs end-up doing mundane stuff 3-5 years down the line, like me. But if you've managed to become part of an IB, cheer-up! You have an excellent opportunity which you should make good of :) Hope this puts things in perspective!

Hard part is not selecting the best candidate, hard part is selecting the best combination. It may so happen that you have some very good people to pick from, but they are not complementary. You can't have all batsman in the team. This doesn't mean, you try becoming jack of all trades and ace of none. Just do what you do best, what you love doing. But if not selected, please think you can have a better place. This is just one opportunity lost, thousands open everyday. You need to keep doing what you like and you will eventually succeed, with no exception.

What are the interviews like? What is being judged? For the candidate - It is a process of self-introspection. For the interviewer - Is the person good for some useful work? Is the person good to work with? The 'work' is not very well defined. Is the process fair or not? This question does not has an answer. At some point of time, there is a judgement to be made by 1/2 individuals. It might be fair to give them some margin for error but unfair for the candidates. A selection cannot be made without somebody making a judgement. Actually, even an election(assumed to be the most fair form of selection) is also not fair. Length of interviews Have been on both the sides of the table multiple times. I have never taken/given an interview more than 30 minutes. An average length of interview should not be more than 20-30 minutes.

I gave interviews for Ecell, MI both. Gave them just for the sake of it, although I didnt intend to join them, and withdrew my nominations before the 2nd round. Some points that I figured out: 1. For MI, you should know how MI is conducted, and how things are done. For this, you will have to work with the current CG team. Secondly, even after this, you need to be presentable, smart, and someone who is actually enthusiastic about it. There are always 2 sets of cordies in MI. One set, they do whatever work their CG tells them to do, trying to make an impression that he has worked a lot and hoping that this will impress the CG. The other set, work on tasks as if they were CGs themselves, and work as if they were partners with the CG in their work. 2. For Ecell, again, you need to know how things work. Here, the operational knowledge isnt as important as it is in MI. But you need to know what is the motivation of conducting the events that Ecell organizes. Only then will you be able to come up with better concepts and new ideas for events/marketing strategies. Thinking of new events and marketing them is tough in Ecell, but the operational aspect isnt as hectic as MI. Hence in Ecell quality of the individual matters a lot. In the end, working for such IBs isnt an achievement. Ideally, if the work profile of an IB matches with your interests, only then it makes sense to work in an IB Otherwise you are simply wasting your precious time. (for eg: a friend of mine who is fond of journalism type of work,  is a media/marketing manager) An extremely enthusiastic trekker who has started a trekking club and organizes and executes treks brilliantly will be a better individual ( quality wise) than a normal MI CG who was just a workhorse and didnt do anything different than the previous CGs. If both of them sit for the same interviews for placements/internship, the former one will have an upper hand any day.  One should pursue whatever interests him or motivates him, because that is when he will do a great job in it and not give up.  I think the selection procedure is fair. Managers always want to select the best from the lot to represent their IB in the next year.

I'll answer this because unlike the other people, my answer is based on facts and not ideals. Yes, interviews should assess a candidate's motivation, his traits etc. But in IBs, what actually happens? POLT 1. Amount of work you've done: Yes this I would say matters to about 40%. 2. Your rapport with so called Baap Manager/CG: Dude its ob-60% That's it. Unless you're an asshole, you'll sail through if you could take care of these aspects. I have seen people being made Marketing Heads (well you'd guess the reason I used 'heads') with zero conversational fluency in english! This is not to say those who are not fluent in english are stupid or backward, but marketing head needs to have decent english speaking skills. What's interview gonna be like? 1. Why do you want to be manager/CG. This question tests your ability to frame lies! Even the interviewer (in this case, your 'Baap CG/Manager') knows you want a PoR. But you'd be expected to say-"Oh! as I saw MI, I thought my blood ran for this organization! Oh the day I saw RoboWars I thought I could take an initiative to take robotics to each school! (Dude learn robotics yourself if you're so interested). Oh! I saw XYZ at E-Summit and I thought, I will turn each IIT student into an entrepreneur! 2. A 'case' scenario Assume you are the services/F&B/Hospitality CG- Khaana khatam ho gaya, Lata Mangeshkar ko bhook lag gayi. Kya karega? In a lighter vein, (Assume the food is over and the guest is hungry, what will you do)? 3. Arbit Shit- This will depend a lot on your Baap than anything else. My Advice- Your actual interview matters little unless you make some sweeping statements and speak like a dumbass. You'll need to work more on aspects discussed previously (POLT) P.S. Those thinking that I am being too vocal may please note that I too was a 'Head' 3 years back, so am speaking from my own experience.

I have been closely involved with Mood Indigo for 4 years now. And the following answer is my perspective about Mood Indigo only, which may not be a fact. CG [Core Group Members, mostly referred to as Managers in other festivals] selection procedure for the last few years has been more or less the same. The coordinators from the last edition of MI [Mood Indigo, as it is fondly called] appear for interviews with a panel formed from the current core team. Based on a combination of their hard work & commitment towards MI and their performances in the interviews, a shortlist of candidates from every department is forwarded to the new OCs [An Overall Coordinator is the Student Head of MI]. The OCs conduct interviews in presence of a faculty member to finalize the team. More or less, every CG intimates the OCs of his preference order, but the final decision rests exclusively with the OCs. Every department scouts for different abilities in a candidate according to the profile. Hence, it is highly infeasible to list down concrete qualities looked for in a candidate, but motivation is surely a factor that can't be compromised upon. Every human being makes an opinion about things. He/She may even be influenced by personal bias due to relationships. But I have seen CGs make some tough decisions to choose the right candidate. And even then, if a bias is evident, the OCs keep a check because they are responsible to do everything possible to make the next edition a success. There have been instances where the most evident candidates did not make it to the core team, but never once has it come under my personal purview that the reason was a personal favor to another candidate. Such decisions surface when a compromise on a personal trait or quality of the candidate is not possible. I agree that this is not a perfect system, but has served MI well over the years. Suggestions to improve the same are always welcome to the organizing body.