A serious argument ensued in my office after we conducted an interview for new entrants into our firm, while some of the people interviewed said they will 'work for us', one or two persons said they will 'work with us'.

One of the interview team members rather saw the use of the word, "work with us" as form of pride and that such people should not be employed in the firm, while the others are of the view that they do not see something wrong in the use of the word 'work with'. Different people gave different interpretation to the words.

House, I just want to hear your opinion on this, as that will serve to stop the lingering employment crisis generated in my firm since after the interview yesterday.

Naija don come again!
There's really no difference. As far as I am concerned, employees are not slaves. They're working for a wage. So in effect, they are working with your firm.

The 'working for' is a silly ego trip; those your colleagues who said so, are they the owners of the firm? Which one be their own?
If you really need those people, you would not bother with silly semantics.

both looks attractive.

na wah 4 all dese slave drivers masquerading as employers.

I would prefer to say "work with" as it shows I'm willing to work as a team and not a slave.javascript:void(0);

i will rather be an employer than been an employee. but if i work wit somebody that means we are partners, that is not bad

i stand for 'with'

work with and work for defined

work with: when someone says work with, such persons recognises him/her self as a professional who is coming to the add value to the system. Technically, it means both parties( employer and employee) are collaborating to achieve a goal.
However, it is an appropriate phrase to adopt when you are like a consultant and not a bloody employee on the payroll.

Work for: here, u humbly agree to be seen as an employee, on the payroll, working your butt to get paid. sefini

Bros that question is out of context for people you are interviewing. They are coming for an employed job and you ask them if they prefer to be employed or not. What do you expect? they will say they don't want to be employed? so that you will show them the exit door? You will not get an honest answer from desperate people. Are your people even trained in body language or are you depending on the street smartness of your colleagues to guide you on the answers you get from these people. Abeg, try and ask relevant questions. Know what you are doing if you deviate from relevant questions. Don't waste their time, they got more job applications to write.

For your information people that are seen as proud sometimes may be people who are sure of themselves and their capabilities. Confident people. Any confident person will want to be self employed. They may or may not tell you that if you ask them that question in an interview. Their answer will depend on their character make up and factors like deceptive abilities, openness, desire for that job etc.

Don't let your company be so proud (funny enough) to ask job interview questions that are out of context and see people that want to be FREE as proud as a result.

You need proud people who are confident of themselves.

In fact let me tell you, everybody wants to be something even bigger than self employed. Everybody wants somebody else to their work for them. Don't you think so. Those that told you they prefer to be employed are liars. Don't take them. Remember that.

work with and work for defined

work with: when someone says work with, such persons recognises him/her self as a professional who is coming to the add value to the system. Technically, it means both parties( employer and employee) are collaborating to achieve a goal.
However, it is an appropriate phrase to adopt when you are like a consultant and not a bloody employee on the payroll.

Work for: here, u humbly agree to be seen as an employee, on the payroll, working your butt to get paid. sefini

I think fizzybaba answered correctly to the question. It all depends on what interviewer want to achieve.

This is a test case!

Dont blame their language on them blame a school system that produces employees.

working with somebody is exceptional.
such a person has a lot to offer and will make a good team player.

I think there are subtle differences as one connotes a sense of equality and the other, a submission of will.

Work with – suggests that there is a mutual benefit to be derived from both parties and neither party has control over the other. If you say “work with,” you better be sure you have a lot to offer (business partners) as it sounds arrogant.

Work for – implies some level of submission of the interviewee.

Overall, I would think you want to sound humble but also let the interviewer know that you’re not just there for the paycheck and you do have something to offer.

fredo648:

work with and work for defined

work with: when someone says work with, such persons recognises him/her self as a professional who is coming to the add value to the system. Technically, it means both parties( employer and employee) are collaborating to achieve a goal.
However, it is an appropriate phrase to adopt when you are like a consultant and not a bloody employee on the payroll.

Work for: here, u humbly agree to be seen as an employee, on the payroll, working your butt to get paid. sefini

I think fizzybaba answered correctly to the question. It all depends on what interviewer want to achieve.

Yep he said it all. When one "work with" someone or a company, both entities are working together to achieve a common goal. Companies work together to achieve goals and objectives, Fortune 500 companies hire big 5 consulting firms who work with them to achieve a goal. However, an employee work for a company and "NOT" with a company. That phrase was totally wrong and I side with the interviewers who agree it was wrong. Although I agree it was wrong, but I disagree the person interviewed had any form of pride. Anyway that's what we call interview blunders that cause people a wonderful job; when you trying to impress not knowing you're even damaging.

What is said by a candidate during an interview doesn't always justify the output of the candidates once he becomes an employee

Mkpotu it's been a while. I hope you r good

It depends on whether you have a choice or not. Desperate job seekers like me don't mind working for somebody, and it's simply because I don't have a choice.

Highly skilled, independent and sought after fellows might not want to work for anyone, but won't mind working with them.

Damnnn niggar
Isoright

Brighter grammar

2010 thread?

If they work for you, they will never give you their 100% loyalty. They look for ways to manipulate things especially if they work in an unfavorable condition or not satisfied with their pay.
But if they work with you, it might be based on a percentage, commission or wage.. The person knows if he or she doesn't put in effort, the pay or whatever form of exchange may not Come or might not be constant.. He or she realizes that the more effort or productive they are, the more they tend to gain

As an employer, I refer to my employees as colleagues and working “with” not “for” me. This is a healthier attitude to have towards working relations as everyone ought to be bringing something to the table.

I prefer to work FOR people who see me as working WITH them.

Mkpotu:
A serious argument ensued in my office after we conducted an interview for new entrants into our firm, while some of the people interviewed said they will 'work for us', one or two persons said they will 'work with us'.

One of the interview team members rather saw the use of the word, "work with us" as form of pride and that such people should not be employed in the firm, while the others are of the view that they do not see something wrong in the use of the word 'work with'. Different people gave different interpretation to the words.

House, I just want to hear your opinion on this, as that will serve to stop the lingering employment crisis generated in my firm since after the interview yesterday.

Submit not your Temple to VaaSin.

2010 Thread.

I will"Work for" the owner of the company but will "work with" my fellow employees.

Both comes with a price...And of which I don't wanna see myself paying such prices.....I've worked for different people and as well equally worked with just one person (my very good friend) whom both of us managed the recent bakery I worked at, before the high price level of ingredient made us to shut it down temporarily...

Working for others really opened my eyes and made me to learn many lessons about life,as well regarding to business-wise....... "Before you go turn boss on your own, it's not compulsory but very necessary to first of all work for someone"

My take tho..

Work and get pay.As long as u have PEACE of MIND,put food on Ur table.who cares ?

RTR

It really doesn't matter as long as the youthful entrants are productive members of society.

Job - Good

Joblessness - Not so Good

If they work FOR you, then they will take orders from you and do exactly what you tell them to do. Nothing more.

But if they work WITH you, then they are allowed to take initiatives and bring with them their previous work experiences and bring such to bear to achieve company goals.

Your choice.

I would have argued in favour of working for someone cos I earned quite a lot when I worked for a boss. However the Serenity, no bossy attitude, no daily, weekly or monthly target that comes with working for someone, or even the stress of waking very early to get to work early which comes with working for someone cannot be compared to working for yourself.
Even though what I earn now is still considerably lower than what I earned while working for someone , the peace and stress free life I enjoy now has really improved my productivity. Btw it's only a matter of time before I surpass my previous earnings.


Do you want to work from home, office or anywhere without any stress and still make at least 200k a month. Check my signature for the right plug.

In the actual sense, both mean the same in the sense that it both brings effectiveness and efficiency in you to achieve set down goals and objectives of the firm. Those having issue with both phrases are translating it with Nigeria languages perspective which is wrong.