Archive for the Q&A Category

Question

Getting a job today is all about how to work effectively with the job boards, the ATSes, the algorithms and the A.I. Except when it’s about how to beat the job boards, the ATSes, the algos and the A.I. Are people stupid? When the two dominant strategies for getting a job are in direct opposition to one another, then — as I’ve heard you claim for years — the system itself is the problem! By the way, you’re the only one I hear saying this! So, how are we supposed to think about it all? How are we supposed to approach making a living? Is there such a thing as a philosophy of job hunting?

Nick’s Reply

I can’t blame anyone for thinking, Just tell me how to use or beat the system but don’t bother me with your big philosophical analysis!

I believe that’s self-defeating because you can’t use a system that doesn’t work no matter how many times you try.

What’s job hunting really about?

Hunting for your next job is a very personal and a very practical task. It’s kind of a Zen answer: To get around that daunting mountain you must understand there is no mountain. Getting a job has little to do with A.I, job boards, ATSes, interviews, résumés, networking, thank-you notes, personnel departments, or recruiters.

Don’t let anyone confuse you. Hunting for your next job is about one thing: doing the job. That means understanding the job, being able to do it, doing it the way the employer wants it done, and doing it profitably for you and for your employer. Everything else just gets in the way of getting a job. Anyone who tells you there is some trick to finding your next job is wrong. Employers today are tired of people who want a job they can’t do or don’t care about. There’s too much focus on following the established steps for getting a job and not enough on proving you can do the work.

One of my aims is to help undo most of what the employment industry has taught you. Make no mistake – the employment process in the United States has become an industry of its own. To undo what it has taught you, you must change your attitude about companies and jobs, and about how you view yourself and your work.

Ditch the personnel jockeys

The first thing you must do is to approach interviewing from your standpoint – the standpoint of a person trying to land a job – not that of the people between you and the person who’s going to hire you.

You will encounter many people who are not really the person who will hire you – they are the go-betweens who want you to hunt for a job in a way that’s convenient for them. These employment industry intermediaries include career counselors, human resources representatives, recruiters, job description writers, job-posting composers, résumé preparers, A.I. interview bots, algorithm creators, ATS designers, database programmers, and personnel agencies. I call them all personnel jockeys.

No personnel jockey will ever be as concerned about you or about the job as the hiring manager. You’ll encounter some good ones, but understand that most personnel jockeys are zombies. They go about their work mindlessly focusing on abstractions because they don’t understand the work you do. So they push automation (we used to say they “push paper”) instead. Stay away from them, because their way of doing things centers on getting you to play their game.

Their game is all the garbage they keep in their ATSes, like job posts, résumés, forms, applications, job descriptions, keyword lists, questionnaires, rejection letters, contracts, federal guidelines, and legal mumbo jumbo. What personnel jockeys want is for you to help them keep their own jobs automated. They need to convince you to act like every other job candidate, so that they can turn you into another database record. That makes it easy for them to cram you into a file. If you act like every other job candidate they will file you and you will never find your next job.

Do the best headhunters have a secret?

If you think I’m being too harsh on personnel jockeys, consider that companies devote huge budgets to HR departments, but they still turn to headhunters to fill job openings. I have placed candidates in jobs and earned fees when the HR manager already had – but ignored – the candidate’s résumé. Nowadays, HR departments and internal recruiting functions are among the first to get chopped when a downsizing occurs. They’re just not doing the job. That’s why you can’t get hired.

As a headhunter, I learned to approach the job hunt very exactly and very ferociously, skirting the automated systems. I do all my work in advance, before I schedule an interview. Since I’ve usually worked on contingency, I only make a living if I fill the job and, due to the guarantees I give my clients, I keep my money only if the candidate is right for the job. So I work very carefully. And, because I’ve always competed not only with other job applicants but also with other headhunters, I’ve had to be ferocious and fearless. That describes all good headhunters.

Being a good headhunter (or a good job seeker) means going straight to the hiring authority, the person who is spending money from their budget to hire someone. It means understanding the job behind the description and exactly what the manager needs to make their department more successful. It means finding out what the politics are. Working fast. Making sure I understand the job before I do anything else. Making sure I have the right candidate. Making sure the candidate is completely prepared for the interview. Making sure the candidate is the solution to the manager’s problem. (If the “headhunters” you’ve “worked” with don’t do all this, you’re not working with real headhunters!)

Your paycheck depends on your job hunting philosophy

These are the good headhunter’s methods, and you can benefit by using them. Be exact. Be accurate. Don’t send out 400 résumés and apply for 400 jobs. There are not 400 jobs out there for you. Don’t waste your time. Do what a good headhunter does, and do it like your next paycheck depends on it, because it does.

Find the few right companies and jobs and go after those exactly and fearlessly.

Be ferocious. Don’t be afraid of, or waste your time with, people and systems whose job is to automatically screen and reject thousands of candidates. Push them out of the way. Let them work on the other candidates for the job. Blow every other candidate out of the water. Go after the job as if you already have it. Get in front of the manager you would be reporting to and show you can do the job and do it profitably.

If you want a job hunting philosophy, that’s what Ask The Headhunter is about. Most other “methods” and advice are created by personnel jockeys. Human resources experts. Corporate stuffed shirts who spend their lives managing other people who spend their time pushing automation, diddling databases and reading “reports” from interview bots! They don’t hire anyone. They would have you think they do, but all they do is process candidates.

Those self-proclaimed experts will teach you how to play their game.

Learn what you need to do to win the job offer so that you can decide whether to hire yourself a new employer.

The 6 Secrets of the New Interview

There is nothing special, or even very useful, about the traditional interview or the bot that “interviews” you. However, in what I call the New Interview, there are 6 Secrets you should be aware of. Every good headhunter understands these basic tenets of their work and uses them every day – you should, too.

We’ll cover 3 today and 3 more in the next edition.

1. Insiders have the best shot at the job.
2. The real matchmaking is done before the interview.
3. The interview is an invitation to do the job.

Let’s look at what the 6 Secrets of the New Interview really mean.

1. Insiders have the best shot at the job.

Other things being equal, a boss will hire someone familiar before hiring someone they do not know. Why? Because there’s more information about familiar people, like other company employees, than there is about you, and that information is more reliable.

Part of the headhunter’s job is to build their candidate’s reputation within a company before the candidate goes on the interview. You can accomplish this for yourself. In the next edition, and in the Comments section, we can discuss how you can make an employer perceive you as a valued employee rather than an outsider.

2. The real matchmaking is done before the interview.

The challenge of matching a worker with a job is addressed before the interview, not during the interview. Just as a lawyer never asks a witness a question in court unless the lawyer already knows the answer, a headhunter never sends a candidate to an interview unless the headhunter already knows the candidate can do the job. You must ensure the same fit for yourself. You cannot match yourself to a job unless you know exactly what the parameters of the job are before you walk into the interview.

3. The interview is an invitation to do the job.

Most people treat an interview like an interrogation. One person asks questions, the other gives answers. This is wrong. Headhunters go out of their way to structure interviews to avoid this very unfavorable scenario.

An interview is a meeting between you and the employer – you are equals. The traditional notion of the all-powerful interviewer and the deferential candidate is hogwash. Unfortunately, this notion is promoted each time someone says that a candidate was interviewed by an employer.

The root of the word interview means between; it does not imply that one person is doing something to another, or that the employer has power over you, the candidate. An interview is an exchange of information between two or more people. The only power either of you has is the power you have each granted to the other. If you grant an employer the power to intimidate you and interrogate you under a hot light, then that’s your decision. Just realize that you’re exacerbating your fear and anxiety – and the employer can smell it. Employers don’t hire fearful candidates.

It’s all about showing up to do the job

There is one power you and the employer share. If you can capitalize on it, you will turn the interview into a decisive problem-solving experience that will make the employer view you and treat you like a member of their team. This power lies in your choice to work together with the employer to get the job done. This means avoiding interrogations. It means doing the job in the interview. We will talk more about how you can put this power to work and thereby avoid getting interviewed in the traditional sense.

It is crucial for candidates to recognize how important they are to the employer. I want my candidates to see interviews for what they are: opportunities for skilled people to demonstrate to an employer the best way a job can be done.

These ideas will change your job hunt in some very important ways if you put them to work. Freed from the banality of the traditional interview (and I now include interviews with bots), you will form a relaxed attitude about interviewing and develop the confidence and power that a talented worker should have. You will blossom from a job candidate into the solution to a manager’s problem.

Is that what you were looking for?

What’s your job hunting philosophy? Or do you let the employment system dictate how you look for a job? Is it possible to follow my suggestions and still rely on the employment system for work?

: :

Question

Do you want insightful perspectives on your job search?

Nick’s Reply

This is where I answer my own question!

Of course you want meaningful job hunting ideas and perspectives! That’s why I’m going to share what I’ve been reading — and hope you will find these articles as thought- and action-provoking as I do.

Needless to say, the ideas you’ll find in these articles — some of which are presented as NEW! — are all old hat here on Ask The Headhunter, and still worth your attention.

I’m sharing these as a way to keep you busy with good ideas while I take my summer vacation. The next newsletter will be September 8 — see you then, and I hope you’re having a wonderful summer!

What is doomjobbing? What it means and why it matters for job seekers

33-year-old landed a $165K tech job after sending this with her thank-you note: ‘Nobody expected’ it
(Really? We’ve been discussing how to “do the job to win the job” for years! Still — some good ideas here!)

The jobs apocalypse: a (very) short history: Mass unemployment induced by AI would be unprecedented

I’d love to read your take on the three articles above! See you next month!

: :

 

Question

I’ve made hundreds of job applications. My wife accuses me of being depressed and full of pessimism because my 5-month-long job search has yielded nothing but frustration. I don’t like her thinking of me this way. Your website is all about what to do and what not to do to find the right job. I haven’t tried everything you espouse but I’ll try more. But I’ll be honest with you about what I cannot say to my wife: All the job search advice in the world is useless when I feel so helpless! There, I said it. You wrote somewhere that you’re not a therapist but I see you have a degree in psychology from Stanford. Is there SOMETHING you can tell me to help me out of this hell of pessimism? Sorry if this is the wrong venue for job-search depression!

Nick’s Reply

Psychologist Martin Seligman taught dogs and people to feel helpless and to be pessimistic. It explains why your job search is failing.

Learned pessimism and learned optimism

Seligman put dogs in an enclosure that delivered mild shocks through the floor. Nothing the dogs did would stop the shocks. They were helpless. A control group could stop the shocks by pressing a panel, which the control dogs did. The next day Seligman put both groups back in the shock cage (one dog at a time in all cases) but this time he installed a low partition the dogs could jump over. The first group curled up in the corner, whined and endured the shock. These dogs had learned to be helpless. The second group quickly learned to jump the partition to escape the shock.

Related experiments have been done with humans using loud noise instead of shocks. One group had access to a control switch to stop the noise, another could not stop it (the helpless group). Then both groups were given tests to assess coping behaviors. The first group demonstrated learned optimism. The second had learned to give up.

Why job hunting gets you depressed

People experience staggering rates of failure when job hunting. This teaches them that nothing they do matters, so they keep doing what doesn’t work. Helpless job seekers learn to be pessimistic and they get depressed.

They:

• compulsively apply to jobs
• get quick rejections
• feel powerless
• keep applying anyway
• become more pessimistic
• rinse and repeat.

Seem familiar?

Seligman’s book, Learned Optimism, leads us to understand that job seekers develop a pessimistic explanatory style that keeps them addicted to job boards and other repetitive and ineffective job search methods. Here’s how they explain their failures at getting a job:

• “It’s all my fault. I’m not good enough!”
• “No one wants me.”
• “I’ll never get hired.”
• “Job hunting is hopeless.”

Sound familiar? You feel defeated —> you apply to more jobs —> you get more rejections —> your pessimism deepens —> you become depressed.

Accurate optimism defeats learned pessimism

What do you do to change your deep feelings of helplessness? Well, you’re on a good start by spending time here, in a community where we dare to dispute what the job boards, HR and applicant tracking systems have taught you. Challenge those beliefs with evidence:

• “This rejection was automated.”
• “The company probably never saw my résumé.”
• “Job boards produce almost no hires.”

“This method doesn’t work!” Not “I don’t work.”

Instead of “This rejection proves I’m not good enough,” apply an accurate interpretation: “This rejection proves job boards aren’t a hiring channel. I need a different strategy.”

It’s not your fault: Take control of your job search!

Please tell your wife you’re depressed because you accepted a lie. The broken employment system has taught you to be helpless. When I teach Ask The Headhunter methods “live” to groups of people, I immediately explain why they feel so down: “Everything you know about job hunting and hiring is wrong!”

It’s not your fault!

This reframing is the psychological pivot that frees job seekers from pessimism and from compulsively applying randomly for more and more jobs. Learned optimism restores the belief that “My actions can influence outcomes.” It helps you take back control of your job search. This is the opposite of learned helplessness.

Learned optimism isn’t about proving Ask The Headhunter is right. It’s about thinking more accurately so you can act more effectively. Job seekers like you get depressed and demoralized because they blame themselves for failures caused by a broken system. Once they stop personalizing job-board rejection, their confidence returns — and so does their ability to use methods that actually work.

Of course, that’s what Ask The Headhunter is all about!

Can you think of a “job opportunity” that messed with your mind? I wanted to step away from what will get you a job to discuss what will fix your frame of mind after the employment system drives a truck through your self-confidence. Learned optimism, helplessness and learned pessimism are important topics in psychology that apply directly to job hunting. Was this helpful to you? What gems of psychology can you drop on us?

: :

Question

I just caught up with one of your recent articles, Is an exit interview worth $25? Or is it a cockroach? I couldn’t agree more. I think I’d rather have a cockroach for a pet than see another exit interview report! And this brings up the problem of management training.

Management without management training

I spent most of my 40-year career as a technician and the last 17 years in supervision and management. I was promoted to management because of my skills as a good technician and work ethic. I got a management job as a reward, not because I was ready to manage. In other words, I was promoted for the wrong reasons. Through my own diligence and hard work, I became a better manager and I feel I’m a pretty good one. But it took a long time and the effort was mostly on my part — not because my company taught me.

As a senior manager and former Director of Operations, I’ve seen quite a bit. For example, the entire concept of exit interviews is embarrassing. In these meetings employees usually view themselves more positively than their company and manager do, and I suppose that’s natural, but it points to the biggest problem in the workforce today — the lack of leadership and management training.

I do the management training

Today I work hard to mentor my staff. I try to promote people into management because they are ready to manage, not to recognize their technical accomplishments.

The real problem? Companies don’t train managers to manage. They don’t teach them how to develop people, evaluate talent, or help employees grow. They don’t teach communication, coaching, or leadership. They just hand out titles.

It’s really tough being a manager today. I’ve taken Organizational Behavior courses to fill the gaps myself. I personally provide the management training. I promote people only when they’re ready to manage — not because they’re good technicians.

But most managers? They conduct performance reviews using HR’s canned scoring sheets. They communicate only when HR requires them to. They wait until the exit interview to ask the questions they should have asked every month.

Your article hit home. Companies need to invest in management training and real communication. Exit interviews and canned reviews accomplish nothing.

Your thoughts?

Nick’s Reply

Thanks for pretty much writing this column for me. All I did was add some subtitles for you and my own spare notes.

You’ve nailed the core dysfunction in modern business: companies don’t train managers to manage. They train them to fill out forms. And then HR wonders why employees leave.

Lack of employee development

Companies keep promoting top technicians, engineers, analysts, and specialists into management because they’re “good workers.” That’s not a qualification — it’s a shortcut. It’s also a way to avoid investing in real leadership development. All those pretty managers won’t save the company.*

You’re right: most managers are promoted for the wrong reasons. And once they’re promoted, they’re left alone to sink or swim. Some figure it out. Most don’t.

My buddy Peter Cappelli at Wharton has been hammering on this for years: companies have abandoned employee development. They’ve outsourced it to “self-directed learning,” “online modules,” and “HR frameworks.” (See Why Good People Can’t Get Jobs.)

But developing people is a manager’s job. And companies don’t teach managers how to do it. (See The mark of a promotable employee.)

You’re doing what good managers do: mentoring, evaluating, coaching, and promoting based on readiness — not technical achievement. That’s leadership.

Now we need more managers to follow your lead.

Polling all managers: Did any employer ever teach you how to manage people? Did you learn on your own? Does your boss actually communicate with you and manage you and act as your mentor for career growth? Does your employer provide training and development? Is there a management vacuum?

*With apologies to Cormac McCarthy’s excellent novel!)

: :

Question

Bloomberg just published an article about a problem I’m having interviewing and selecting job candidates: Job Hunters Are Using AI to Cheat in Interviews, and Failing at the Office. I’ve suspected some applicants are misusing A.I. and Bloomberg confirms it. From the article:

“In retrospect, the interview had gone too well. The candidate’s answers were polished, if a little scripted. He seemed more than capable for the… job, so a New York City [organization] hired him. Within a month, his boss realized he couldn’t do the project he had interviewed for. He froze on basic decisions and was far less nimble than he’d seemed from behind a screen.

“The manager, who asked not to be identified discussing personnel matters — and because, she says, it’s embarrassing to admit you got duped by artificial intelligence — now feels almost certain the candidate had been covertly consulting a chatbot like ChatGPT during the virtual interviews.”

A manager is more likely to encounter this in a Zoom meeting than in person, but the reality is we do most of our interviews online now. Is there any way around it?

Nick’s Reply

This is so easy, As long as managers keep asking questions that can be gamed by applicants using A.I., they’ll keep hiring the wrong people. It’s easy because all a manager needs to do is focus the meeting on doing the work vs. doing the job interview!

Are your candidates using chat-bots to cheat in interviews?

Try this. Ask the candidate to use the “white board” in Zoom (or whatever meeting tool you’re using). Ask them to outline their understanding of your department.

What are the department’s 3 main functions or objectives, based on what you know about our operation? Give the person some leeway here. They may be able to talk only very generally. That’s okay.

Then explain, Here are a couple of the problems or challenges we are facing right now. If we hired you, how would you help tackle these? Don’t be hypothetical. Be specific. Ask the candidate to sketch out a simple diagram describing their approach. It’s good to get a picture, no matter how crude.

Then, Could you please outline on the board a brief plan of how you would do the job? In other words, what tasks would you do day 1, week 1, during the course of a month, 3 months and 6 months? What tools would you need? Who else in the company would you need to talk with in order to get the job done?

Finally: Please take a stab at this for me. Knowing what you do about our business, about the work you would be doing, and how it might affect other departments, how much do you guess you might contribute to our profitability?

For more ideas, see Much Smarter Hiring: Rules managers keep forgetting.

Ask questions A.I can’t answer

A legit candidate should be able to broadly explain and justify their guess. Don’t judge their number. Listen for thoughtful questions and their logic (however weak!). Listen for how interesting they find the question, even if they stumble. Most important, help them along!

The point is not to embarrass the candidate or to make their palms sweat. It’s to see how they would work with you. Don’t quibble with their details. Instead, ask questions about the work that chat-bots can’t answer and follow the logic of the candidate’s approach.

• Can they talk about profitability?
• Can they reasonably defend their estimate?
• What questions do they ask?
• How smart are they?

Ask questions about doing the work

Unlike dopey behavioral interviews, which ask how a person did something at their last job, these questions focus on something no one can fake: How will you do this job here?

No one can fake a discussion about the work that needs to be done. Either they can demonstrate motivation, enthusiasm and ability, or they can’t. To me, that’s what a job interview is all about. Of course, if your company is itself using A.I. tricks to game job interviews, you can’t blame candidates for responding with A.I. — that’s not interviewing!

Make it hard to cheat in interviews

While the candidate on the other side of the Zoom might be able to quickly use an A.I. to gin up answers, the more specific you make your questions about the actual work the harder it will be to cheat. The more you make this about rolling up your sleeves and talking about doing the work together, the more readily you will recognize the best candidates.

So, ask the candidate about doing the work. I think you’ll quickly pick up on signs someone is cheating. However, this approach also reveals a really good candidate’s enthusiasm and ability to think fast on their feet — even if their answers aren’t perfect.

And, those relying on A.I. will reveal they can’t work their way out of a paper bag.

The interviewer’s job is to hire someone who can do the work, not the interview.

And one last thing

Consider doing all your interviews in person. No matter the cost, it’s worth it.

How could a manager conduct interviews to avoid this problem? What questions are best to ask? For candidates, have you used A.I. tricks to game job interviews? Did it work or backfire?

: :

 

Question

My employer of nine years is getting ready to fire me for ginned-up reasons because the new manager doesn’t like me. They’re going to give me a PIP (Performance Improvement Plan) to cover their legal tracks and a lousy “severance” deal that will also prohibit me from working for any competitors. I did nothing wrong and my excellent performance reviews and salary raises tell the real story. I can’t afford to hire a lawyer, not yet anyway. I know I should keep impeccable records but what else do you suggest?

Nick’s Reply

Welcome to an old story: Smug employer flagrantly abuses the purpose of a PIP to screw over a good employee and counts on the employee’s fears to get away with it.

Be alert and be careful but don’t be afraid. Then get a bulldog!

Do you need an employment lawyer?

I sometimes advise readers with problems similar to yours to at least do an initial consultation with a good employment attorney for a nominal sum — right after I offer my routine disclaimer that I’m not a lawyer and don’t give legal advice!

I occasionally quote the best lawyers I know on various employment matters. For example, one of my own lawyers (retired, so please don’t call him!) shares excellent insights about employment contracts. Another (also retired) discusses the finer legal points about rescinded job offers. Another, active, attorney I often turn to when I need tutoring on some arcane aspect of employment law is Mark Carey, who works only on the employee side of cases. (See Confusion about employment at-will.)

A.I. created by a top employment lawyer

Mark Carey actively markets his legal services but he also gives away loads of valuable insights and analysis about how put-upon employees can use the law to their advantage. You can learn a lot on his website for free without ever hiring him, just like you can learn a lot on Ask The Headhunter without ever paying me a dime for a private consultation.

Mark revels in giving errant employers a hard time by educating employees via his website, blog and podcasts. In fact, Mark recently introduced an A.I.-driven version of his archive of over 200 episodes of excellent, in-depth employment-law advice. I suggest you type your questions as prompts into his Employee Survival Guide A.I. After digesting the A.I.’s answers, dig into the linked original sources from his blog and podcasts for even more help. It’s all free.

After reading your concerns about PIPs and severance, I submitted prompts about them myself. Here are just two of the many responses from the A.I.:

Tie Payment to the Non-Compete
Let your employer know you’re willing to consider a non-compete, but only if they provide additional compensation specifically for that restriction… For example, you might say:

“I’m open to agreeing to a non-compete, but given the impact on my future employment, I would require additional severance or compensation for the duration of the restriction.”

. . .

Do NOT Sign the PIP
Signing a PIP can be interpreted as accepting its terms and the alleged performance issues, which can weaken your legal standing later. You are not required to sign it. If pressured, you can state that you acknowledge receipt, but do not agree with its contents.

Clicking through to the source documents and podcasts may give you all you need to deal with the challenges you face. If you decide to consult with Mark, please understand that I’m pointing out the resources he offers because I think the material is excellent and immediately useful. I receive no compensation or consideration of any kind for this. In fact, Mark doesn’t even know I’m writing about his new A.I. tools for employees. I just think what he’s giving away for free will help my readers. Mark Carey is the kind of aggressive advocate I respect.

The next best thing to hiring a bulldog employment lawyer is using Mark Carey’s Employee Survival Guide A.I. for free.

Have you ever hired a lawyer to protect your interests when dealing with employers? What happened? Are there good online legal resources you like?

: :

Question

My company’s culture is laden with distrust. There’s no teamwork, but more backstabbing than you would believe. The behavior of the top performers is reprehensible. In other companies, some of these behaviors would be termed harassment. There is no debate that I need to leave this company. How can I honestly describe my current situation with a lousy employer without scaring off potential employers?

Nick’s Reply

There’s a lot of conflicting advice about how to handle questions about why a person left their last job — including when the last employer was “lousy.”

Don’t talk about a lousy employer

Like how to explain many things, the less said the better. (“Never complain, never explain.” – Benjamin Disraeli) By controlling the conversation, you can avoid awkwardness. And you can control the conversation by shifting to a discussion about how you will focus on doing the new job.

I think you will find that most employers don’t expect (or want) a lengthy discussion about why you want to leave your present job. Keep your comments about this tactful and brief. The tactfulness will score you more points in an interview than the explanation itself.

Talk about what counts

Respond by telling an employer that you’re looking for a better job with a better company. Do your homework on the new company, and:

• Launch into a discussion about how you are going to help them meet their challenges and solve the problems they face. (You can even ask what these problems and challenges are, but it’s better if you know a bit about this in advance!)
• Keep your enthusiasm high and focus on discussing the work.
• Reveal your intelligence and motivation.
• Focus your interview on how you’re going to add to this company’s bottom line. (This will take some significant preparation on your part — but that’s what a good interview is all about!)

That’s what counts. Leave your negative feelings and bad experiences behind. The people in your old company will continue to wake up each morning having to face one another. You’ll be gone. Relish that!

How do you handle questions about why you left a job and a lousy employer? Is there any way that going into details can help get you a new job? Does deflecting the question pose problems? What should this reader do?

: :

Question

After years of frustration with corporate America and the way professional services firms generally treat their clients, I decided to launch out on my own. I have had some modest success since the inception of my business six months ago to the point where I am exploring adding an employee. I am running into the problem of granting an equity stake.

Although I have sufficient clients to immediately place the new hire into a challenging project, the individual that I am interested in has expressed concern with the added risk of working for a small business. He would like an added equity stake to offset the risk but I don’t want to give away too much too early, considering the competitive nature of the marketplace and my own business vision. Am I looking at this wrong?

Nick’s Reply

No. I’d find another candidate.

There are two kinds of people in your world (other than clients): employees and investors. You don’t fill a job with an investor. You fill it with an employee. Don’t confuse the two.

A simple equity stake test

You can test this person’s attitude and motivation. Tell him to forget about the job. Then ask him if he’d like to make a cash investment in your business. He’ll say no. If he’s not willing to invest cash, why would you give him an equity stake if he takes a salaried job with you?

You can also ask what he believes he would contribute above and beyond what the salary would compensate him for.

Balance equity participation with “key person” value

He’s clearly averse to risk. If you’re offering him a salary and can pay him, there is no more risk to him than with taking a job in a mature, well-established business. Every job is at risk in today’s world! I’d never hire anyone who is looking for a slice of the pie unless he’s a “key person” and absolutely critical to your business’s success. But I imagine if this person fit the bill you wouldn’t be asking my advice!

The one counter-offer you might suggest is that if in fact this new hire contributes materially to the success of your business you would consider granting stock or stock options after, say, six months or a year. (I’d consult your attorney about how to package this.)

In the future, when interviewing candidates, I would avoid discussions about investment in your company. Focus on employment and salary. Talk about investment to investors or possible partners. But don’t confuse them.

I wish you the best.

Have you ever asked for an equity stake as part of a job offer? Would equity compensate for risk like the job seeker in this story suggests? If you’re a small business owner, what would induce you to include an equity stake in a job offer?

[This Q&A is based on a previous column on the same topic.]

: :

 

Question

I am a Product Manager at a small company with dream of going IPO. My compensation consists of base salary, bonus, and stock options, all of which is pretty standard. Recently a former manager I had worked for moved to another company to become their director. He called me and wanted me to come and help him out. All the interviews went well and I received an offer from HR. The offer was a joke. They offered me a $2,000 raise, 750 stock options, and $10K sign-on bonus. Do you think that is fair? I want to tell them, if you really want me, PAY me!

I never applied for the job, they came looking for me knowing full well how much I was making. Do you think this is a standard HR ploy to try to get you to come as cheap as they can get? I was actually offended, especially when the director told me that he will be able to make it worth my while. I have not decided to take or reject the offer. But I am inclined to reject it.

My question is, when a company comes to you asking you to work for them, shouldn’t they be prepared to make it worth your while before they waste your time? Thank you.

Nick’s Reply

Should they have been more aggressive because they came after you? Probably. But it’s entirely possible the HR department has no idea the manager approached you first. The offer you’ve been given could be a standard offer. But, you can’t think about job offers in terms of what’s “fair.” There’s no referee who slaps players with penalties for rude behavior in this game. Participants take their shots, and if they do something truly stupid, word gets around and that makes it difficult for them to keep playing the game.

Pay me!

It may help you negotiate the kind of deal you want if you can find out why they made the offer they did. Your former boss could be a big help here. Without indicating your dissatisfaction with the offer, you might ask him why it’s “structured the way it is.” (You may learn he hasn’t seen the actual terms of the offer yet.) This is a good way to open a negotiation — and that’s the only way you’re going to find out whether they’re willing to spend what you think you’re worth. This is one way to say “Pay me!”

Choose the dance.

If this company has wasted your time, you might want to consider whether you contributed to the situation. There are things people can do when they’re approached by an employer the way you were. Usually, the person being recruited is so flattered and excited that they don’t realize that the dance doesn’t change just because the other party asked you. Indicate you’ll dance but only if it’s your kind of dance — or pay. Choose the dance you step into because it’s still up to you to make yourself attractive when the music starts — and to control what happens afterwards.

Keep perspective.

Unless you’re a star, remember that exorbitant compensation packages are rare. Maybe your expectations aren’t exceptional, but if you’re going to say “Pay me!” you must indicate that up front. A company that recruits you should be ready to reward you for saying YES, but they may also just be filling headcount. An indication that they want you doesn’t imply they’re willing to pay a lot. Read on: you might have been able to find this out sooner.

Control the agenda.

Your agenda is to land a great job with great compensation. Lay down some ground rules (especially if they approach you first) before you interview. For example, when they first call you, ask for a detailed idea of the job on the phone.

• Find out what it is about you that they want so much.
• Can you meet with key members of the team that wants to hire you?
• Who would you like to meet?
• What information about their business do you need to know?
• What kind of salary do they have in mind? (For suggestions about to say “Pay me!” tactfully, see Fearless Job Hunting – Book 9: Be The Master of Job Offers.)

Set a mutually acceptable deadline for an offer/decision from them. If they’re in hot pursuit, they’ll go along with much of what you request if it’s reasonable. If this is a run-of-the-mill recruiting effort, you’ll find out soon enough. Better to know now than after you’ve invested a lot of your time.

State your requirements.

When you assume the employer has an idea of what it will take to hire you, you’re wasting your time already. It’s not uncommon for an old boss to call with an offer of a job. Usually that doesn’t mean much more than when the company’s recruiter calls.

Chances are, your old boss will not really be much in the loop when it comes to the offer itself, and especially if he’s new to the company. Set your requirements as early as possible: “Our discussion of compensation would have to start in the $90K-$100K range for the base. It would have to include a signing bonus, and any stock options would have to represent an improvement over what I’m holding now. If that’s in your range, let’s talk. If it’s not, no hard feelings.”

Do regular “level checks.”

I used to know a guy at IBM who always used that expression. It kept him out of trouble. When the interview process is under way, stop and re-state your agenda and expectations. Make sure everyone’s on the same page, or on the same level. During the hiring process, it’s common to get passed off from one department to another. Don’t assume anyone has shared your requirements with anyone else. That’s your responsibility.

Demonstrate your value.

I won’t get into this in detail here because I’ve covered it in my articles here on Ask The Headhunter. It’s still up to you to show the employer why they should hire you, and how you’re going to deliver profit to their bottom line. Being pursued to do a job is not much different from being pursued as a potential spouse: the pursuer can lose interest pretty quickly if you’re not producing sparks that will keep their interest.

My best advice: treat an employer who’s pursuing you as you would one you’re pursuing. The best matches are made when both parties are enthusiastic and candid about their goals from the start. If you kick back and trust flattery, you’ll lose.

On the other hand, some employers are really out to get what they can for less, and they count on the job seeker’s inexperience or reluctance in negotiating. Learn how to say “Pay me!” so they’ll want to — and to avoid wasting your time!

Ever get an offer that was a joke? Was it because you mishandled the negotiation, or because the employer was trying to pull a fast one? What’s the best way to avoid such a quandary?

: :

 

Question

Hello Nick, I have been reading your e-mails for many years and have learned a lot. It seems you always have such great advice.

I wanted to get your opinion on something I have seen more of recently. A recruiter contacts me with an opportunity. After my initial response, they ask if I have a Signal or WhatsApp account. If I don’t they want me to get one or the other to “make our communication much more convenient and secure.” My reaction has been no I don’t have either and do not intend to use either. If they want to talk to me about a legitimate opportunity, please call me. Otherwise I figure they are the ones with something to hide. Am I just being paranoid or am I right to be completely skeptical?

Thanks for your honest assessment.

Nick’s Reply

That’s a good question. I don’t have WhatsApp or Signal on my phone, either. I won’t even install Facebook Messenger. Signal may be cleaner but anything associated with FB is a version of spyware. It could be you’ve stumbled onto a pretty good way to judge headhunters.

I believe when a good recruiter has good reason to talk with you, they will call. If your salary is, say, $120K, you’re worth about a $25,000 fee to that recruiter. That’s a lot of money. They’ll call.

Every digital, automated recruiting tool is designed to help a recruiter process higher volumes of jobs and people. Not to make good matches. That’s why in general recruiters are lousy at what they do. They’re playing a numbers game. Technology (which I love and rely on) makes it easier for them to process more jobs and resumes faster. And to waste your time more.

If someone is worth $25,000, a good headhunter will make contact the most personal way possible. They want to get as close to you as they can because not doing so could cost them a big fee.

Everyone else is dialing for dollars. (Hah – poor choice of expression! They’re not dialing!) Those guys who want you to communicate their way know the odds of placing you and earning a fee suck. So that’s a pretty good way to filter them out. If a headhunter really thinks they can place you, they’ll use a Dixie cup and a thread if that’s what it takes. What’s up? Good question.

Follow your gut. This may be helpful: How to judge a headhunter.

Thanks for your kind words!

Can it really be that simple? If they don’t cooperate with your simple wish to have a phone call, are they probably lousy recruiters? I say yes. Follow the money. Headhunters that insist on “their way or the highway” betray poor business practices. Am I nuts? What silly requirements have headhunters tried to lay on you?

NOTE FROM NICK: There hasn’t been a newsletter in a few weeks because I’ve been moving to new digs and the move was more complicated and took longer than expected. Have to admit — it was great being without my pc! But I’d rather write and be with you folks than move!

: :