Question
Employers claim they want the very best people. So why do they demand I conform like everyone else to their algorithms and keywords? Every LinkedIn expert and keyword resume writer advises me to learn how to play the game so I can compete with everyone else following their advice. Does anybody see that the job market is just a meat grinder? There’s no comfort to be found. Your articles suggest I should “stand out,” but isn’t that the kind of risk that will get me instantly rejected? Something isn’t working with this system, which is why I’m not working. If the job market really works then following the rules should lead to a job. To quote an old, stoned comedy troupe, are we all bozos on this bus?
Nick’s Reply
Consider this philosophical perspective about being the exception to all the bozos that shun risk:
“Resist the urge to arm yourself with uninformed cynicism masking as oh-so-wise pragmatism that’s really just good old fear of rejection… In an era when [people] are being treated like meatware in an anonymous employment algorithm… They face tremendous pressure to take the first thing available, the highest possible salary, the “safest” choice. But careers rarely go anywhere interesting without risk.”
I’m leery of journalists that give career advice. So I’m still giddy after stumbling into Jodi Kantor, a New York Times reporter who wrote a stunningly good column offering a tough-love perspective to recent college graduates: This Is a Hard Time to Start a Career. These Two Words Can Help. Every job seeker needs to read Kantor’s insights on why you must take risks to get the job you really want — and why you must be the exception. (The Times requires a subscription. It’s worth finding a way to read the article.)
Resist fear of rejection: be strange
Most people avoid risk by clinging to job ads like life rafts. They scroll, click, apply, repeat, hoping the algorithm smiles on them. A smaller, stranger breed ignores the cattle chute entirely. They cultivate personal contacts, get close to the companies they admire, and make themselves known long before a job is posted. They’re the exception.
Risk your resume
Most job hunters get vaporized at the resume stage. Their carefully formatted document lands in the digital grinder without so much as a human glance. A few renegades take a risk and skip the resume altogether. They show up with proof instead of prose — demonstrations of ability, samples of work, conversations that reveal insight. They don’t explain their past; they reveal their value. They’re the exception.
Risk rejecting a job offer
A lot of people take the first job that’s offered. They’re flattered — validated that someone, anyone, wants them. But a rare few turn down plenty of offers while grinding relentlessly toward the one job they actually want. They’re not flattered by attention; they’re focused on fit. They accept the risk. They’re the exception.
Resist quick money: think bigger and make more
Most candidates obsess over squeezing a few more dollars into an offer. They negotiate like they’re haggling over a used car. The exceptions think bigger. They choose the right company, the right manager, the right environment — because they trust their ability to produce profit once they’re in the door. And because they produce profit, they earn raises, promotions, and opportunities that dwarf whatever they might have negotiated upfront. They build equity in themselves. They’re the exception.
Resist the trap
Most people read job-market statistics and sigh. They accept their fate. They compare themselves to the masses making the same mistakes and feel comforted that they’re “not doing any worse.” But that’s the trap: comparing yourself to the average guarantees you’ll stay average.
Resist the rules: risk standing out
And here’s the contrarian truth the so-called career experts won’t tell you: standing out is risky, and that’s exactly why it works.
The best companies don’t want the safest candidate. They want the character — the one who breaks the pattern, who refuses to be processed like everyone else. Yet the experts warn you not to take risks, not to deviate, not to make waves. They tell you to follow the rules that keep everyone stuck in the same line, waiting for the same automated rejection.
Don’t seek comfort in the job market. Don’t look for reassurance in statistics. Don’t let yourself become a data point in someone else’s spreadsheet. Don’t consent to being treated like meatware.
Live like an exception. Hunt for a job the same way.
(Did you say bozos? Firesign Theater fans are a scary bunch!)
How does risk fit into the job and career equation? Can you be the exception without taking meaningful risks? We all know job seekers need to pay the rent or mortgage — but does fear of rejection subject you to being treated like “meatware” by employers?
: :
As companies use more and more AI tools, the success in standing out as well as the ability to identify true creative excellence decreases. Why? AI is pattern matching. AI interpolates. When you ask AI to extrapolate, you get hallucinations.
An AI based search for the perfect candidate pattern matches to what existing people who have performed the job. It cannot identify creativity. It will reject the uniqueness of job candidates who will think differently and in ways to improve a company because they don’t match the pattern. Ironically, in an AI world, those are the people you need most. AI can help you think and explore inside the box. But if you always stay inside the box, how can an organization dramatically improve?
@Just Me: An overlooked but huge part of the problem is that HR is too easily sold on “HR technology” as an “easier, faster, better” way to recruit and review candidates. There’s little critical review of the tech, and that’s disastrous.
All I can say about job hunting these days is that I’m extremely glad I’m retired, even though I was always the exception to the rules.
Nick, your response was very much to the point. No matter the circumstances, job hunting is an unsettling place to be except maybe for those who have enough finances to put aside the worries of mortgage or family. I never made a lot of money (because I was a woman, and because of the fields in which I worked), and there were times I was on unemployment and even homeless. But when I did work, even as a file clerk, I was recognized as a standout – and that often led to better jobs. Finally I started my own sole proprietorship that lasted for 21 years. It boils down to having the kind of personality that is comfortable with risk. If people are Asking the Headhunter for advice, they probably have enough gumption to take these risks.
I should be out of the job market these days, but I’m not.
From newspaper ads to AI gauntlets, nothing has changed: Companies want decades of experience, and preferably decades of experience in the latest ‘Shiny New Thing’ delivered in a package that is fresh out of college and 22 years old. If this package shows up in a size zero kogal skirt, so much the better.
@LT: “HR tech” companies promote the silly fallacy that “Whatever, whoever you need, it’s in our system! Perfect candidates are available! Just keep searching our database!”
NOT.
Twenty or more years ago, I read an article regarding the disconnect between the type of employee chief executives want, and bemoan that they are looking for people like themselves (generally standouts). HR, on the other hand were delivering “average”, or “safe” candidates. It seemed top execs valued the “risk-taker”, but HR was more concerned about avoiding risking their jobs by proposing a candidate who later failed; both HR and the candidate would be out of a job. In other words, “the system” protects itself.
I was blessed to be in the career transition business back when flinging resumes at job listings was a viable approach.
@Sam: Few managers, execs and members of boards want to deal with the “icky” task of doing what HR does. So they let HR do it, without really defining what IT really is.
Excellent observation, that.
I got an interview for a job I really wanted, and at the last hour before the interview I got a meeting cancellation and the thanks-but-no-thanks were going with an internal candidate.
A month later the job reposted so I took the email of the HR recruiter, and the person I would be reporting to and sent them emails saying that in the two months since my original application I had been doing the exact work they were hiring for in the same industry as a contractor.
I got my screening interview on a day we were both affected by an AWS outage and I was talking their language. I got another round of interviews and today have that job. Edging out 500 other applicants.
Sending those emails seemed out of character for me but ultimately it worked. Really well.
@RN: Nice work! Persistence counts!
“It’s not personal…it’s strictly business.”
– The Godfather (1972)
An employer or a potential employer is not your friend. Rather, it’s a party to business transaction. Not every deal gets consummated. It can be helpful to view rejection not as failure on your part, but rather as an inability to secure “a meeting of the minds.”
Never allow fear of rejection or failure to impede your quest to achieve an objective. As Nick suggests, dare to be different rather than just another one of the sheeple.
“You miss 100 percent of the shots you don’t take.”
– Wayne Gretzky
@Garp: WHAT YOU SAID! I hope people get their hands on the NYT article I linked to above. It’s worth it!
I was able to find the article in hard-copy form at my local public library. The article is adapted from Kantor’s forthcoming book which should be a good read, too.
FWIW the NY Times article linked to is wrong; the link is concatenated twice. Correct link is https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/19/business/career-graduation-jobs-gen-z.html and for those who know of the archive.today site, and lack NYT subscriptions, there are several versions of the column readable on it.
@Dave: Thanks! I (think) I fixed it! Kind of you to point it out!
re: The Times requires a subscription. It’s worth finding a way to read the article.
Check the library.
OT, but consistent with ATH philosophy. I came upon an article in The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/wellness/2026/apr/23/burned-haystack-dating-method) that included this quote:
“Much online dating advice describes dating as a numbers game, where you increase your chances of a good match by going out with as many people as possible. Dating is indeed a numbers game – but one about identifying a small, focused number of people. ‘You want to appeal to the narrowest minority of people who would actually be a good match with you, and only spend your time with them.'”