Archive for the Q&A Category

Question

I may have an interview for a really great job (yay!).

I have braces on my teeth. Big ugly braces. They are not attractive. I could have them taken off (and then put back on again after the interview) for a few hundred dollars. I know I look a lot more grown-up without these damn braces.

At the end of my initial phone interview the guy I spoke with expressed concern that I might be over-qualified. I’ve got more experience and credentials than the typical fresh-faced college senior who might be going for this position. It’s an administrative position that would allow me to get a lot of exposure to the business. It would be a chance to work with some of the best people in the industry, so I really, really want it!

At 26 (geez, when did that happen?) I have been in the workforce for five years. As a woman I’ve seen some of the worst biases at work, but I do my job and make it clear I don’t tolerate anyone making assumptions about what I can and can’t do.

Do I need to change the way I look? Are the braces going to be enough of a negative to shell out the dough for temporarily removing them? If I’m lucky, I will be able to schedule interviews for more than one position during that week.

Nick’s Reply

Some will shake their heads because I’m publishing a Q&A about braces. There’s a lot more to this. What you’re really asking is, do you have to modify your face (or body) so you’ll look more “normal” in a job interview?

Some years ago, I worked with a company that had a very potent, respected manager who was 22 years old. She didn’t have much of a formal education, but she had more street smarts than managers twice her age. She could hold her own in any situation, and she brought a lot of profit to the company’s bottom line. During the entire time I was involved with the company, she wore braces on her teeth. BIG braces.

It didn’t matter one bit. It just revealed she was serious about what was important to her — in this case, nice, healthy teeth. And she wasn’t afraid to do what was necessary to achieve that goal, even if it meant walking around with a mouth full of metal for a couple of years. I always admired her — but I never think about her braces when I remember her. I think about how effective she was, and how much I respected her.

Don’t play games. Be yourself. Until the braces come off because they’ve served their purpose, they’re part of who you are. If a company can’t deal with that, then why would you want to work there?

This isn’t some trite lesson in “seeing beyond the physical” to “appreciate what’s within.” It’s basic business sense. There are indeed managers who will feel uncomfortable hiring someone who looks different. They’re dolts. It’s better to find out now who they are. If you’re good at what you do, a smart manager will hire you. Your braces will eventually come off, but a dolt will remain a dolt after they reject you for no good reason.

I realize you’re just trying to optimize your chances of getting a job you really want, and you’re willing to sacrifice some money to do it. My vote: save your money and save your self-respect. Let the braces reveal the integrity of the manager.

Managers, take note. If you don’t hire this candidate because of the braces, she will go to work for one of your better competitors. So, take a close look at the candidate’s abilities – and braces. Because one way or the other, you’ll have to face both.

Have you ever faced a choice like this? How much about yourself would you alter to land a job? Is there something else this young professional could do to improve her chances of success?

: :

Do you suspect that your job interviews — or your networking attempts — go nowhere because you just don’t know how to have the kind of great conversation that makes it clear you’re a great match for the job?

I’ve said it before: Nobody hires you for your “job interview skills.” Great conversation skills: That’s what we’re going to work on this week.

SPECIAL EDITION

If you’re a regular around Ask The Headhunter, or you’ve attended my presentations or workshops, you know that I believe job hunting isn’t about applying to job postings, or fine-tuning your LinkedIn profile, or even going on job interviews.

New jobs come from new friends

Finding the right job is about making new friends, because that’s where good jobs come from — other people. And to make new friends (and get the job you want ), you need to hang out with people that do the work you want to do, and you need to talk shop with them and share new experiences.

Of course, making new friends requires talking with people you don’t know (yet) and having meaningful conversations about the work they do and the work you want to do. This might be people who can lead you to a job, or a hiring manager or recruiter who can actually produce a great job offer.

So this week we’re not doing a Q&A. This special edition is about something that worries many, if not most, job seekers: their lack of great conversation skills.

Great conversation skills make great interviews

I have always contended that some of the best career-related advice and insight comes not from “career experts,” but from other content domains about relevant related topics, like the mathematics of poker. Of course, the main “career content” you probably read is the job boards. You likely devote most of your “study” time looking at thousands of postings about jobs you don’t really care about. But you already know that kind of career content isn’t likely to win you job offers.

It’s time to change all that and learn how to help the right people lead you to your next great job by learning the right way to talk with them.

Wired magazine has done us all a solid by teaching us how to talk to others in The Science of Having A Great Conversation. Or, as the author of the article puts it, “Making friends can feel daunting, but research shows there are many ways to build better connections.”

Amp up your job interview conversations

David Robson’s article is an excerpt from his new book, The Laws of Connection: The Scientific Secrets of Building a Strong Social Network. The article is chock full of research-based insights and tips for great conversation that no one can afford to miss — least of all the serious job seeker.

I’m going to summarize some of the key points Robson discusses at length. It’s up to you to read the full article.

Then, I invite you back here, to the Comments section of this column, where we can talk about how to put all this to work in your job search (or, if you’re a hiring manager, or even a recruiter, how to optimize the quality of conversation so you can fill jobs with the best people).

12 ideas for better interview results through better conversation

1.
Robson claims: “Whether we are on a first date or meeting a lifelong friend, [or in a job interview] each sentence we speak offers a new opportunity for greater connection.”

2.
“Tiny tweaks to our conversational style can bring enormous benefits.”

3.
Robson cites some famous authors who “were so keen to show off their wit and intelligence that they lacked the basic civility of listening to others.” Do you listen well enough to make a conversation go where you’d like it to go?

4.
“The simplest way of achieving this [being a better listener] is to ask more questions, yet surprisingly few people have cultivated this habit effectively.”

5.
Take a guess at what kinds of questions you might ask someone, to “demonstrate your wish to build mutual understanding and give you the chance to validate each other’s experiences.” The article offers six kinds of such questions. Try making your own list before you read the article.

6.
Want to make the interviewer so happy that they’ll be more likely to hire you? “People are acutely aware of whether they are being listened to attentively, and their perception of receiving active attention from another predicts their feelings of trust, and contributes to the well-being boost that typically comes from strong social connections. The more attentive we are to someone, the happier they feel.”

7.
“Unfortunately, many of us rely on the wrong cues to signal our interest in others. People can display their attention with nonverbal body language…” What body language do you display, and is it helping you have the kind of great conversation that can help you get hired?

8.
“…we might conclude that we should always allow our acquaintance to take center stage. This advice can be found in many influential etiquette guides…” But does that convey the right message and optimize the quality of the conversation?

9.
Time in a job interview is limited. How can you use “the fast friends procedure” to create an instant bond with the person who will decide whether you get a job offer?

10.
How many times has a “career expert” warned you not to open up personally in a job interview? “…scientists found that the amount of time someone spent in small talk about daily banalities made almost no difference… whereas deeper conversations involving the exchange of meaningful information about their circumstances and interests had a significant impact.” What kinds of personal information should you share?

11.
Should you discuss what the hiring manager already knows a lot about, or should you demonstrate that you bring something new and exciting to the table? This one completely got me! The Novelty Penalty: “a general preference to hear about familiar experiences… The informational gaps could create a feeling of distance that undermines the sense of a shared reality.” (Or what I refer to as shared experiences.)

12.
If you do need to discuss novel ideas, how can you do it successfully, to make the conversation pay off? There are good ways to increase the quality of conversation — and the odds the other person will like you — by sharing “additional information that would allow you to close the gap in understanding.”

Join us in the Comments section below

Read the article for the details, then let’s discuss.

Nobody’s going to hire you for your interviewing skills. Learn how to have the kind of great conversations that makes it clear you’re a great match for the job you want.

What kinds of conversation skills do you use to elicit advice, insights and referrals to the jobs you want? Are conversation skills and interview skills the same thing? Where does a job interview end — and a great conversation begin?

: :

Question

My husband, a manager, would like to find a good job in Washington state. We were downsized in Philadelphia, and then found work in New York, but the cost of living here is almost as bad as California. We felt that if we could get something that paid decently out in Washington, it would be better for us. We did experience several times being told by headhunters that, “The Human Resources people were really excited about getting him on board, but they just needed to get clearance from the upper management to make him a formal offer.”

I think they say this just to keep us from looking at any other jobs. This would then just drag on, and eventually turn into not hearing anything from anyone. But, I highly suspect that the headhunters are just saying that to be polite. One headhunter was honest with us and said, “If they do not make you an offer within two weeks, they are shopping around, and then you should be as well.” I sent off an e-mail to one Human Resources person, saying that we really wanted to move to the area, and wondered if he could just let us know, if there was the intent to hire, or not, so we would know where we stood. Can you help us? Can you recommend some good headhunters in Washington?

Nick’s Reply

Sorry, but I don’t recommend specific headhunters. This article has been helpful to many people: How to Screen Headhunters. Remember that headhunters don’t find jobs for people. That’s not our business. We fill positions for our client companies, and that involves searching through our networks, not responding to unsolicited resumes.

But this bit of oft-repeated advice is not why I’m publishing your question. Underlying your story is a cautionary example of crossing the line between job hunting and home life. I deal with people’s professional lives; not their relationships with their spouses. Sometimes, however, a spouse crosses that line, and the results can be disastrous. That’s why I believe your husband’s job search is going nowhere.

(This is reminiscent of another bizarre phenomenon, reported recently in The Hill: 26 percent of Gen Z applicants bringing parent to job interview: Survey.)

“We” are not looking for a job

I’m going to offer you some unsolicited advice. I’m going to be very blunt because this is something that I have seen hurt job hunters: Acute spousal interference. This is when the spouse gets too involved in the job search, to the detriment of the job candidate (the other spouse). I can see this throughout your note:

• “We were downsized”
• “We felt that if we could get something that paid decently”
• “just to keep us from looking at any other jobs”
• “One headhunter was honest with us”
• “I sent off an e-mail”
• “so we would know where we stood”
• “Can you help us?”

You were not downsized. Your husband was. We are not trying to get a job; your husband is. We are not looking at other jobs; your husband is. No headhunter ever talked with both of you or interviewed both of you. And so on. You are interfering with your husband’s job search, and with the employer’s hiring process. This is hurting your husband, and you as well.

Acute spousal interference

I think it’s wonderful when one spouse is supportive of the other’s career. But, a company is not hiring the two of you. They don’t want to hire the two of you. They want to know that the job candidate thinks independently and is not managed or hampered by a spouse.

Sometimes a spouse gets so involved in the interview process that headhunters and employers get turned off. It could be costing your husband job offers. (You are, in a way, competing with your husband.) When a headhunter or employer sees the spouse interfering this way, they worry about intrusion into the job and inappropriate influence at work from home.

I have rejected candidates because of spousal interference. It reveals a weakness on the part of the job candidate. Your husband is half the problem. He needs to respectfully ask you to back off. He is a professional who stands alone at work, without you. That’s normal and healthy.

When “we” interferes with a job search

Your references to your spouse as “we” is demeaning and unprofessional. It creates problems. There could be many reasons why your husband has been rejected; don’t let you be one of them.

Please reconsider your role in your husband’s career, and find a healthy way to be supportive. Stay out of the foreground. Let your spouse manage his job search. Do not refer to “we,” to “our job,” to “how we feel,” or say that “we got downsized.” Do not communicate on his behalf. Let your spouse do the talking. What’s discussed between the two of you is your family business, but communications with an employer must not include you.

When I’ve encountered this problem, it’s usually been a glancing one. What can I say about a spouse who is just trying to be helpful? But, your story is clear and inappropriate interference. When you took the liberty to send an e-mail to a Human Resources person to find out “where we stood,” you went so far over the line that I had to publish your story.

You are creating a risk

Compounding the problem is that you use your husband’s e-mail account when you write — his name is prominent in the address on the e-mail you sent me. I hope you now see this is a serious risk. Discuss your husband’s career with him any way the two of you see fit. But from now on leave his interactions with employers and headhunters entirely up to him. Spousal interference is likely what is hampering this job search.

I know you’re trying to help. And, I suspect, you get vicarious professional satisfaction from managing this job search. Please find something else you can manage for your own fulfillment.

Any good headhunter or employer knows that when recruiting a new hire, the spouse is a key factor — but one that we try to handle respectfully and deftly. The only time you should be in the picture is when the employer draws you in, but nowadays that’s quite rare. (For example, if a relocation is involved and the two of you need to visit the employer’s city to find a new home.) A supportive spouse is an added benefit to any employer who hires your husband. A spouse who intrudes on the job, or into discussions and negotiations with a prospective employer, is a risk.

When is it okay for one spouse to be directly involved with another’s job search? Where’s the line?

: :

Question

I head up a large sales team. Every year it’s harder and harder to attract and hire good salespeople. I’m fed up with HR’s lack of answers. HR posts our jobs on all the top websites from LinkedIn to ZipRecruiter and several specialty sites. I used to read your advice columns on Adobe’s CMO.com so I know you know something about sales. Where should we be posting jobs? What can I do to get our HR to wise up and make recruiting a priority?

Nick’s Reply

We covered a related topic last month but judging from the number of hiring managers I’ve heard from, I think it’s worth taking another whack at it.

Posting jobs doesn’t yield the best talent because the best workers expect what your customers demand: the personal touch. They don’t read job boards or respond to recruiters dialing for dollars. They want to hear from people like you — top managers who can talk shop, and who can attract exceptional workers.

That’s why — if you want to hire the best talent — you need to consider a few old recruiting rules that have never changed and that will serve you well if you follow them. The state of corporate recruiting is so bad today that I’m framing two of these rules as “do nots” simply because, before you can do this right, you have to stop doing it wrong.

Rule 1: Do not send a flunky to do your recruiting

Yes, I said a flunky. A stand-in. Don’t expect a personnel jockey from your HR department is going to impress a hard-to-get salesperson. Only you can do that.

It’s also an old rule that most jobs are found and filled through personal contacts, not by posting jobs. So, why would you take an impersonal approach to hiring while your best competitors are scarfing up the best people by making recruiting personal?

 If you want your HR department to do something useful to help speed up intelligent recruiting, assign them the task of figuring out where the best talent hangs out. Then go there and impress the talent with your motivation to reach out and attract them yourself.

Rule 2: Do not ask busy people to fill out forms

Do you launch marketing campaigns that require prospective customers to fill out five pages of online forms to qualify for a sales pitch to buy your company’s products? Of course not.

So what makes you think it’s okay for your HR department to treat sales professionals like they have to qualify to talk to you about a job? Your head of HR will explain that someone has to “screen” and “qualify” those people — that’s why they have to fill out forms and provide their experience and history.

Sheesh. Why is your HR department recruiting people whose experience and history HR doesn’t already know? Do you let your sales team chase low-probability prospects, or do you invest loads in big data analytics that tell you exactly who’s worth selling to? Why do you let your HR department post jobs that anyone can apply for? That’s not recruiting. That’s trying to drink from a fire hose.

When you identify people worth recruiting, wine and dine them like you do the customers you hope to land. Don’t ask them to fill out forms.

Rule 3: Be ready to close the deal now

When you have a high-value sales prospect in your office, someone who’s ready to buy your product after they’ve heard your pitch, do you thank them for listening — then explain that you’ll get back to them in a few weeks about closing the sale? Why do you let your HR department do that to job candidates?

This rule can actually be re-written another way: “Interview only candidates worth hiring.” It’s no different than qualifying a customer before you invest in selling to them. Of course, you know it requires a big investment to qualify customers. So, where’s your investment in real recruiting?

When you bring a job candidate into your office, you should already know whether they’re worth hiring. You should have made that investment in advance. The job board industry wants you to forget that step, because the more people you interview and the fewer you hire the more money the job boards make from you.

Before any interview, ask yourself, do I already know enough about this candidate to make a hiring decision at the end of our meeting? If not, your recruiting process is broken and you’re wasting enormous resources talking to essentially random people. Plan your recruiting so you’re ready to close the deal now.

Put down the fire hose!

This is not to say that job interviews are for making job offers every time. A job interview helps you determine whether a person is really worth hiring.

Now I’m going to blow up the unspoken rule virtually every hiring manager and HR jockey accepts and follows blindly: “Interview all the candidates then decide which to hire.” Wrong!

When an interview meeting ends, you should have the final bits of data you need to look the candidate in the face and say, “No, thank you — this won’t work out, but thanks for your time,” or, “I’m so glad we met to talk shop. I want you to work with us, so I’m going to offer you a job right now, before my best competitor snatches you up!”

I can hear the HR posse coming to torch my house. Hire on the spot? Nick, you reprobate! What about all the other candidates we got by posting jobs? But think about this carefully: You should be recruiting and interviewing only candidates that you have vetted first. Put down the fire hose! Stop posting jobs. Pursue only sales candidates that have already been highly recommended to you. Another way to think about this: check references before you decide to even approach a candidate.

Be ready at the end of any interview to do what candidates wish every manager would do: Say “REJECTED!” or “YOU’RE HIRED!”

Nothing has changed in sales and marketing or in recruiting. Know your target in advance. Pursue only high quality targets. Be ready to close a deal quickly — before our competitors get the jump on you.

It’s critical to remember that when hiring we’re not dealing in commodities. Our competitive edge is hiring only the best, and we cannot let HR do it. The basic rules have not changed: Do it yourself, respect your candidates, and be ready to hire them now.

What are hiring managers missing? Is the idea that job candidates deserve and need real attention so hard to grasp? Is the importance of “doing it in person” really lost on employers? What’s it going to take before hiring managers show respect to the people they need to hire?

: :

Question

As a new grad I think I’ve got the I can’t get a job blues! I remain unconvinced that a liberal arts major has transferable job skills in today’s job market. My experience in the workplace has been that I’m seen as overqualified and under-qualified at the same time. Is there a way for a generalist to market his or her skills in business and get out of the academic straitjacket? Thanks to all for your comments.

Nick’s Reply

The New York Times’ Peter Coy recently interviewed me for his excellent column, Why Can’t College Grads Find Jobs? Here Are Some Theories — and Fixes. (It may be pay-walled.) You’re not the only new grad that feels like you’re throwing your resumes into the void!

In my comments to Coy I emphasized that the real problem is the reductionist nature of recruiting. Employers own their hiring problems because the don’t recruit and assess people. They recruit and judge keywords! That’s why you’ve got the blues!

New grads have loads of relevant skills

The only academic straitjacket is often the new grad’s perception. It’s normal to feel at a disadvantage because you’re fresh out of school, but don’t fall prey to the idea that you’re lacking the right qualifications, or that a degree means you’re over-qualified. The ridiculous emphasis in the employment industry (job boards, ATS systems, HR) on lists of keywords and inflexible skills requirements is just that — ridiculous.

You have powerful, relevent skills that you acquired in school. The problem is, no one has shown you how to apply them to a job. Don’t expect anyone to. You have to figure it out for yourself and be ready to explain it to a hiring manager. And that means getting out of the academic mindset. You need to shake the attitude that your education is the chief determinant of success in the job hunt.

Identify your real skills

The chief determinant of your success is how you communicate and demonstrate your value. And that requires that you first understand the real requirements of any job — not the job description! It’s not possible to see the connection between your skills and a job until you first understand exactly what tasks you’d have to do in a job. (Before going any further, please read Does your job match its original job description?)

I was an English major who shifted to Psychology — and I’ll venture that I’ve used more skills that I acquired studying literature than psychology. The ability to write, in itself, is a powerful tool to use when job hunting: most people in business simply can’t write or organize information to save their lives.

Here’s your advantage: with a liberal arts degree, you possess many fundamental skills and attributes that your competition may lack:

• Writing
• Organizing ideas
• The ability to plan and execute research
• Knowledge of information retrieval systems (not just the Internet and ChatGPT but libraries, books, periodicals)
• A critical eye
• An open mind
• Good work habits
• Breadth of exposure to ideas and philosophies, and most important,
• A well-honed ability to learn what you need to in order to accomplish a task.

You sound pretty impressive, eh?

Select companies and jobs carefully — this is KEY!

Here’s your challenge: you now need to thoroughly study the business you want to work in. There is no way around this if you want to succeed. Your main obstacle is “all those jobs I can apply for”. But that’s illusory. There are no more than a few companies and jobs that are right for you. Start with companies, not jobs — just four or five of them, no more! Identify them and pursue nothing else. (See Pursue Companies, Not Jobs.)

Once you have learned enough to begin mapping your skills to the business, you will be on your way. Few businesses are so complicated that this is impossible. But few job hunters are diligent enough to do the exercise that yields the job. Few job hunters ever realize that they can choose their job targets and prepare to tackle them. You cannot do this for 100 jobs — so don’t take the job-board bait and snap at them all!

Lose the blues. Start with the basics.

The reality is that college students are at the mercy of their schools. I’ve seen precious few college “career programs” that help students apply their education to the real world. And that’s the sort of failing that should have you on the phone to the president of your school. The argument, “education is for its own sake” is a legitimate reason to go to school, but it’s a poor excuse for a school to leave you hanging when you’re done, because both masters (knowledge and work) can be served by a school that knows its graduates must be able to earn a living.

If you think you are fatally disheartened, I’ll try to show you why it’s probably not your fault — and what to do about it. Please see Why am I not getting hired?

Don’t have the blues. There’s another way to do this that works. It requires that you:

• Take off the straitjacket the employment system puts on you.
• Get to work choosing companies you really want to work for.
• Take time to study what they need help with — not those personnel-jockey-generated job descriptions!
• Figure out how the skills I referred to above enable you to do the work.
• Please check some of my other articles here on Ask The Headhunter, especially The Basics. They’ll help you get started.
• Then post additional questions in the Comments section below.

I’ll offer my advice, but you’ll get the best tips from the incredibly smart folks that make up this community.

I wish you the best.

What’s the best way for a job seeker to show an employer “this is why you need to hire me”? Is it any different for a new grad? What advice can you offer this disheartened reader?

: :

Question

I’m afraid I disagree with your objections to using a traditional type of resume. [See Resume Blasphemy.] Here is the basis for my misgivings. I am a hiring manager at a Fortune 50 company. If I want to fill a slot I must complete a job requisition. On the req I have to list the base requirements for the job (e.g., degree, years of experience). When the recruiting starts and resumes begin to arrive, the first person to see them is an HR clerk who screens the listed skills against the req. If you don’t match, I never see your resume. No resume, no interview! Keep in mind that I am a manager and hire highly trained professionals. These aren’t entry level people. I’d like to hear your thoughts on this.

Nick’s Reply

If you’re a manager and you hire specialized professionals, what does it say about you (and your company) when an HR clerk has the power to decide who you should interview and who you should skip? What qualifies HR to judge and filter candidates?

Who should do the recruiting?

I know managers who skirt the HR department every day. They don’t use req’s, and HR doesn’t touch their candidates. The reason is simple and compelling (if it’s no longer obvious in HR-heavy corporate structures). Managers know their business better than HR clerks do. Keywords on resumes are an abysmal way to filter job candidates.

These managers find their own candidates. Sometimes they turn to specialized headhunters; sometimes they use their professional connections.

I believe that any manager who isn’t devoting a couple of days a week to recruiting isn’t doing their job. To rely on HR to source executives is like relying on your mother to find you a date – she’s good at a lot of things, but this isn’t one of them. (See Recruiting: How to get your hands dirty and hire.)

Resume solicitation is not recruiting

Managers with good relationships in their professional community are scarfing up the best candidates in this competitive market because they go out and find them, leaving you with candidates who come along. Please think about this. When you interview only candidates who submit resumes, you’re dealing with a very limited field. Resume solicitation is not recruiting! Can you really live with that? Should you?

(Before you accuse me of pitching headhunters as the solution, I’m not. You don’t need headhunters. You can do it yourself. There is nothing mysterious or magical about what good headhunters do. They go out and actively search for the best candidates.)

The risk of false negatives in recruiting

Consider how many great candidates you may have lost because a clerk rejected their resumes. For example, some of the best candidates I find for my clients lack one or more of the specified keywords (skills, “experience,” credentials, degrees). This means HR would likely reject them, then pay me a handsome fee when I demonstrate why they’d be a great hire anyway. In probabilistic decision-making this is called a false negative — a costly rejection error. Beyond a handful of keywords, what does your HR clerk know about the right candidate for a job you need to fill?

By the way, what I’m suggesting doesn’t just apply to filling highly skilled jobs. If you were a manufacturing manager looking for production workers or a finance manager looking for cost accountants, I’d tell you the same thing.

Send your team to identify potential candidates

I’ll offer you a suggestion. Send one or more members of your work team to a relevant professional or industry event, with the instruction to attend the presentations and return with business cards or other contact information from notable presenters and attendees. No resumes. (Even just names and company affiliation will do!)  There is no reason to even intimate there are jobs to be filled. Just get the contact information. That’s more valuable to you than any resume, and you’ll get more for your recruiting buck than if your clerk posts a job to gather resumes.

Now your job is to call those people yourself — the people whose cards you’ve got. Ask them who they might recommend highly for one of the jobs you need to fill — if they’re not potential candidates themselves. At the very least, those people know far more about your business than your clerks do. Such referrals are what a good headhunter would bring you for a huge fee. Without a resume.

Why don’t managers take a more direct role in recruiting? If you’re a job seeker, how could you use what I’m suggesting to get a job without relying on a resume?

: :

Question

What are the prospects for a whole department toppling their boss? The boss is a typical “Management by Fear” practitioner. He is not liked or respected by his subordinates or by other employees including peers and some higher up in management. He is not technically competent and has been assigned the post for the mere reason of “retaining” him.

I would like to muster up some courage, get together a group and make a case against him with HR. How should I approach the matter with the authorities in an appropriate manner?

Nick’s Reply

You’re talking mutiny, and the price of failure is walking the plank. Are you sure you want to take that risk? I expect the group of you has already discussed the risks, and also your motives and justification for taking such an extreme measure. (Try to avoid behaving like a mob with torches and pitchforks!)

Is it even possible to dump the boss?

What you need to do first is find out what kind of support the boss has from upper management. Are they giving him lots of rope so he’ll hang himself? Does he have something they want, so they won’t touch him? Does he have a lord and protector who watches his backside? It isn’t so much how to go about getting him canned as it is finding out whether you stand a snowball’s chance of beating him.

Forget about courage. Get some smarts. Talk casually with higher-ups and find out what they think of this guy. Watch their eyes, listen for the pauses and hesitation in their responses, watch the body language. You need to judge whether other managers are waiting for someone to attempt a coup they can join, or if they’re in solid with him.

Identify support

It’s smart to talk not only to execs up your boss’s chain of command, but to others on chains that interact with him but don’t have a reporting link. For example, if he’s the head of engineering, go talk to managers at his level and above in manufacturing, operations and finance. These people may have the same concerns you do. Maybe they’d like to dump the boss, too — and they may be able to lend support from a level where there’s more power than you and your buddies have.

Look among your group and see who has the best contacts upstairs in the organization. Have that person poke around. If you can establish that the boss is vulnerable, you need to get support before you act. Go to the one top exec who is likely to back you, and ask for advice. This is best done one on one, not as a group. Then follow the advice.

Proceed with caution

It’s hard to topple a manager. It requires support from others more powerful than your target. You’ve got a lot of work ahead of you.

The only way HR can help is if you have several solid, documented violations of law, ethics or corporate policy. In my experience, they’ll back the manager every time, unless there’s such a preponderance of evidence against the manager that they’d be jeopardizing their own positions by ignoring it. (I hope your boss is not as bad as this, but take heed if it’s the case: Say goodbye to your psychopathic boss.)

We haven’t talked about you trying to talk this out with the boss, but your question is very direct so I expect this is not really an option.

You’ve got a battle ahead of you. Proceed with caution.

Can employees get a boss fired? How do the politics work in a situation like this? Is it worth going to HR about the problem? Are there other alternatives worth considering? Have you ever been involved in deposing your boss?

: :

Question

Your article about “What’s the best interview question?” to ask a hiring manager has served me well in many job interviews. Managers have actually complimented me. But that’s one question! What else have you got — questions to ask a hiring manager that will break them out of their “interview haze” and really talk to me, while giving me a chance to stand out?

Nick’s Reply

That’s a really good question for us all! I mean — I’ll bet other readers have excellent, insightful questions to ask hiring managers; questions that really make a manager think while also making the manager realize they’re talking with a candidate who reveals true insight and deep interest in the company.

You made me scratch my head, trying to recall managers who told me they were blown away by a particular candidate who revealed unexpected acumen.

Here are five of the very best questions that no one but the best candidates I’ve known have asked managers, thereby standing apart from their competition.

Questions to ask a hiring manager

1. A year from now…

…how do you hope your company will be better as a result of hiring the person you choose for this job? (Follow-up question: A year from now, how will the person who takes this job change for the better?)

2. What’s the one thing…

…you wish you could quickly figure out about every candidate in an interview?

The next two questions should perhaps be asked prior to the actual interview, perhaps at the end of a phone screen with the manager.

3. What do you wish…

…a candidate for this job would read or study prior to interviewing with you?

4. What concepts are a must…

…for the candidate to understand if they are to succeed at this job? What other concepts are critical, but can be learned on the job?

The next question seems to elicit a knowing grin from managers.

5. What do most candidates…

…routinely say or do in the interview that tells you they’re wrong for a job at this company?

What kinds of questions help you get hired?

Do you agree about the value of these questions? How or what does each question help a hiring manager learn about the candidate? How can these questions help you get hired?

Of course, what we really want is more questions like these from your personal experience! If this turns into a lively discussion and there’s interest, I’ll share a few more highly effective questions in another column.

(I’m sure that thinking about this also brings to mind some of the most over-used, banal questions you’ve turned up in your reading about “what to ask” in a job interview. Feel free to share the clunkers you’ve encountered, too!)

: :

Question

I’ve been working for company #2 for two weeks. I had interviewed at company #1 as well, but I thought nothing was going to happen there. It now turns out that I have a much better offer (and benefits) at #1, so I’ll take it. I know I’ll be burning my bridges, but I still want to approach this the best possible way. What do you suggest?

Nick’s Reply

This is one of those situations that cause pain. There is no win-win.

A company deserves that a just-hired employee will stay put. It also deserves the employee’s full attention and motivation.

Likewise, an employee deserves the most money and the highest-quality job that the market offers. If you’re going to be distracted and less motivated when you choose to stay for “ethical” reasons, then you’re not being ethical at all.

Integrity vs. more money?

Some will argue that you are obligated to your current employer because you accepted an offer and made a commitment. That’s integrity, they will say. And they are partly right. But they’re also party wrong, because it depends which foot this shoe is on.

I will point out that companies find themselves in the same quandary when they downsize because of sudden financial setbacks. Even recently hired employees get summarily terminated. In that case, it can be argued that integrity dictates no one should be fired — the company should suffer the financial loss and deal with it. Yet the conventional wisdom is that you can’t expect a company to compound a financial reversal by continuing to pay employees it cannot afford. No one’s happy, but “it’s a necessary financial decision.”

There is no win-win outcome. The fired employees are hurt and the company’s reputation suffers damage.

A better job offer… or your reputation?

Money is how our culture measures our success at our work. Like it or not, that’s the standard. It’s not crass. It’s reality. But so is pain and so is reputational damage. Unless you can demonstrate a more compelling measure of your success than money — e.g., the work at company #2 is more satisfying than the work at #1 — then you must act rationally and switch to the better offer. And be ready to accept a ding to your reputation.

Employers face the same choice and pay the same price.

If you’re jumping around for a marginal difference, then I say stay put. The other offer must be compelling.

What’s the best way to quit for a better job offer?

Now to your question. How do you handle this the best possible way? Look your boss in the eye, express your regrets and resign. You are under no obligation to disclose the details — just your regrets.

How to Say It
“I took this job after careful thought — it was what I wanted. But another, unexpected opportunity that is a better choice for me just surfaced. I can’t ignore it. I deeply regret that I must resign to pursue it.”

The only way you can try to avoid burning the bridge is to be honest and to take full responsibility for your actions. It’s good if you can leave any work you started in good condition, and offer to do anything that might help with the transition. Still, odds are high your boss will never talk to you again. You must deal with that. (Beware of other issues with Parting Company.)

A warning: Under no circumstances should you use the new job offer to leverage a salary increase at your current job. If you did that and I were the manager, I’d kick you out of my office.

If your ethical nature really needs to be sustained through this, you could return the salary you were paid for those two weeks.

I hate situations like this. They require an awkward choice, and there may be real reputational consequences. That’s the price. Be ready to pay it and move on.

Have you ever had to choose between a job you just started — and a better deal that suddenly appeared? What did you decide? How did it turn out? How would you advise this reader?

: :

Question

I’ve successfully searched for work for over 20 years. I always lead with what I can do for an employer and with my ability to learn quickly, and I get hired. But it’s getting harder to find a manager to explain that to! Now it’s ATS this and ATS that. Applicant Tracking Systems don’t ask what you can do or what you can learn. They just want you to dump your data into the bit bucket so they can sort you out. But data about your experience is not useful information until a qualified person reviews it, and the ATS is designed to keep qualified judges away from you as long as possible! No wonder it takes thousands of applicants to fill a job. You’ve written a lot about ATSes. Please give me your low-down.

Nick’s Reply

My good buddy Paul Solman at PBS NewsHour shared with me the most concise description of Applicant Tracking Systems that I’ve seen, an article by Wahyd Vannoni, What are Applicant Tracking Systems? How Do They Rank Potential Candidates? It’s nice and brief and although it wasn’t Vannoni’s intent, it highlights everything that’s wrong with ATSes and how they are used. (It also includes a list of ATS vendors. Bet you didn’t know there are so many!)

I think you put your finger on the fatal problem: Relying on an ATS to select and hire workers isolates the job applicant from the person best qualified to judge them – the hiring manager. That’s how employers miss some of the best candidates and why they frequently interview and hire the wrong ones. It’s why you’re frustrated.

It’s virtually impossible to apply for a job today without encountering an ATS, so it’s worth taking a close look at what we subject ourselves to when we let an ATS process our data. Let’s look at Vannoni’s key points about what ATSes are and how they, uh, work.

Lie #1: An ATS manages the entire hiring process.

“An Applicant Tracking System (ATS) is a software tool that streamlines the recruitment process for companies. It is designed to manage the entire hiring process, from posting job openings to screening candidates to scheduling interviews and hiring.”

If the promise of the ATS were fulfilled, who would need an HR department? That’s what the text implies. We know it’s not true.

Companies take their most important competitive edge — the ability to hire the best people — and turn it over to be managed by an ATS, which can be generously called a bag of algorithms that don’t work well, if at all.

Investigative journalist Hilke Schellmann has laid this out compellingly in her book, The Algorithm. (See The A.I. Job Interview: You need to know why it’s crap.) These systems are biased, indefensibly reductionist, and about as smart as a cocker spaniel pup that pees exactly where it peed last time because the spot smells like pee. In today’s competitive hiring market, ATSes can’t deliver as promised. If they did, we wouldn’t need HR.

Lie #2: An ATS is a database of candidate information that makes job matches.

“At its core, an ATS is a database that collects and stores candidate information. When a job opening is posted, the ATS will scan resumes and cover letters for relevant keywords and phrases, and then rank the candidates based on how closely their skills and experience match the job requirements.”

A database does not store information. It stores data. (“Data on its own has no meaning. It only takes on meaning and becomes information when it is interpreted.” -University of Cambridge) More accurately, data collected by an ATS is strings of ASCII symbols that have no inherent meaning like words do. It is a very simple pattern-matching system made to look “smart” because the computers behind it can process staggering numbers of patterns faster than we can conceive.

Matches are made based on how closely one pattern matches another. There is no information, there are no skills, there is no experience, and other than a list of ASCII characters masquerading as semantic entities we call words — and there is no “job requirement.” This is precisely why ATSes can process millions of candidate database records per second. They need millions of those records in order to demonstrate that pattern-matching can sometimes work.

Try an experiment: Give the ATS just 5 records that describe 5 people accurately but include none of the magic ASCII strings and the ATS fails. Try it with a million people and it will perform like a boiler room of monkeys tapping on old Royal typewriters.

Wharton researcher Peter Cappelli tells the story of a corporate executive who asked why, after 14,000 engineers applied to fill a couple of routine engineering jobs, his HR department’s ATS deemed none of them worth interviewing. I’ll bet any engineering manager could screen 20 of those applications, interview three and recommend a good one to hire that would perform well.

Lie #3: An ATS removes bias from hiring and ensures fairness.

“In addition to streamlining the recruitment process, an ATS can also help companies stay compliant with Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) laws by ensuring that each candidate is evaluated fairly and consistently. It can also help to reduce bias in the hiring process by removing personal information such as name, address, and age from the initial screening process.”

Here’s where naivete and ignorance about the ATS industry shine forth. I’ll direct you again to Schellmann’s book, and I can show you 10 more links like this: Amazon scraps secret AI recruiting tool that showed bias against women.

ATS and AI vendors market the hell out of “Eliminates bias!” We now know that algorithms can actually introduce more biases.

Lie #4: An ATS saves time and money and results in better hires.

“Overall, an ATS is a powerful tool that can save companies time and money by automating many of the time-consuming tasks associated with recruiting. By using an ATS, companies can more easily identify and attract top talent, ultimately leading to better hires and a stronger workforce.”

First, saving time and money and automating tasks tells us nothing about the single most important metric in a business endeavor like hiring: accuracy. ATSes sacrifice accuracy for volume. But more is not better.

You can build a machine to crush 10 tons of stone per hour, but how much will you pay for one of these if the output you want is wheat flour? ATSes do not produce hires; they produce matches of ASCII strings. No reading between the lines is possible until all of those 14,000 engineer applicants have already been rejected.

Lie #5: If we keep saying it, ATSes will actually work!

Vannoni did a nice job in his brief survey article about ATSes. He clearly gauged it for readers who want the basics. That’s why there’s not a word about the impacts on the job applicants who are subjected to the wonders of ATSes that save companies money and time.

But I do have a beef with Vannoni because he should know better. He’s a communications consultant and marketing professor. Having an MBA, it’s frankly stunning that he doesn’t apply the test all MBA programs teach their students: Where’s the outcomes analysis?

What does it matter how clever the ATS appears if we’re not going to discuss whether it works and how well? But we forget how good marketers are at selling benefits. That is, it’s all about what you can get a market to swallow.

• It manages the whole hiring process!
• It matches jobs with the right candidates!
• It eliminates bias and ensures legal compliance!
• It saves money and delivers better hires!

While I was writing for NewsHour, I interviewed CareerBuilder, one of the leading job boards. I asked about outcomes. What’s the job-filling and job-finding success rate? 57% of all jobs are filled by CareerBuilder, they said. Can I see the data? Well, we don’t release that. 57%. I’m still laughing.

My low-down is that I’ve had a standing challenge to ATS and job board companies: Where is your outcomes analysis? Show us the data about results. None have done it.

What lies have you been told about ATSes and how they’re going to help employers hire you? Do you have examples of how ATSes work or don’t work?

: :