Philip: So, what did you think?
Marcia: Well, between Sarah Timms and Daniel Watson, I think the choice is pretty obvious!
Philip: Yes, so do I. Watson looked so good on paper ...
Marcia: But he seemed very good when I first spoke to him too.
Philip: First impressions often lie!
Marcia: Indeed. I think a lot of his CV was – how shall we say? Counterfactual.
Philip: Yes. It just wasn't true. You should never lie on your CV!
Marcia: He had very good references, though. Very strange.
Philip: I guess some people just like that sort of style, but he wouldn't fit in with us. I mean, it's important to be confident but he was overconfident.
Marcia: I couldn't agree more. His body language was all wrong. He came across as arrogant.
Philip: Then he gave very vague answers – no specific details of what exactly he'd done in his job.
Marcia: Whereas Sarah Timms ...
Philip: ... knew exactly what she was talking about.
Marcia: Yes, she was very convincing, self-assured, but not arrogant.
Philip: She'd clearly done some research on the company and knew what she was talking about.
Marcia: Oh, I thought her presentation was excellent.
Philip: Yes, it was. But I am a little worried about how much experience she has.
Marcia: Yes, true, but she seems very ready to take on the challenges the role would offer her.
Philip: So, who do we give the job to?
Philip: Yes, I agree entirely!
Marcia: Great! I'll phone her straight away offering the post and I'll write a rejection to Mr Watson.