How to screen all those headhunters

On January 17, 2023
How to screen all those headhunters

Question

How can we screen headhunters? I know you’ve spoken at length about the difference between a real headhunter and those that are just casting a huge net and hoping to find someone to apply. Do you have any advice about what to look for, or what types of questions I can ask these headhunters off the bat to know whether they’re worth my time or not?

Nick’s Reply

screen headhuntersYou already know the odds that a job solicitation is a real opportunity are tiny, and that it’s far more likely you’re dealing with someone who will waste your time — again! Most job solicitations are about as helpful as an e-mail pitching a tinnitus cure.

If the solicitation e-mail or text reads like boilerplate, delete it. If the caller is a fast-talking salesperson, hang up. It’s that simple.

“Uh, Nick, how does that help me?” you’re wondering. “I don’t want to miss out on any good opportunities.”

If you’re going to work with a headhunter, first you must qualify them — and that means you’ve got to test them before you can believe anything they say, and before you put yourself in their hands.

How to screen headhunters

If the caller sounds like an earnest business person politely asking for your help with an assignment to fill a job, you should keep talking — because there really are a few good headhunters out there. If you pay attention, you’ll find the best headhunters demonstrate high standards of conduct and reveal the same qualities they look for in candidates.

  • They are easy to work with because they are straightforward. They speak clearly and directly. They are not secretive or cagey.
  • They don’t waste time playing games or putting on airs. They make you feel special, rather than imply they are.
  • If they start with an e-mail or text, they quickly follow up with a call or Zoom.
  • They are not in a hurry. They take time to talk. They pay attention. They answer your questions.
  • They are knowledgeable about their business, their client, the job they’re trying to fill and about you.
  • Good headhunters don’t call on anyone blindly. They already know quite a bit about your background — not just what they found on LinkedIn — or they wouldn’t contact you.
  • A good headhunter reveals integrity by being honest and trustworthy. They will do what they say — including returning your e-mails and calls.
  • A good headhunter is conscientious. You’ll see this in the questions they ask. Rather than ask for your resume, the headhunter will learn about you by talking with you extensively.
  • They will exhibit a sincere interest in your work and abilities, and in your interests and goals.
  • They will give useful advice if you ask for it.
  • Finally, a good headhunter is effective. If you’re a possible candidate for their client, you’ll get an interview in short order. If you’re not a fit, they’ll say so. They won’t lead you on.

Does that sound like any headhunter who has solicited you? I’m sure you’re shaking your head: What headhunter is going to do any of what’s in that list?

Right-O. Just a very few will. That’s why it’s so important to test or screen headhunters for those rare qualities immediately and every time. Most will fail, and that’s why you should test them all.

Try this test

When you’re done communicating (hopefully, talking) with a headhunter who contacted you, ask yourself, Could this headhunter write an adequate resume about me based strictly on our phone call?

I sometimes write a candidate’s resume just like that, after a phone call, and I provide it as a summary to my client. It’s a good test of my own grasp of a candidate’s credentials and value.

If a recruiter’s call is so cursory that you don’t think they could write your resume from it, that reveals an unskilled headhunter or an inadequate recruiting call. A headhunter who merely requests your resume or just asks you to fill out an application is no better than a job posting on the Internet. They’re going to waste your time. You don’t need them.

When you meet a good headhunter, you’ll know it from the characteristics listed above, and you’ll recognize someone with whom you’ll want to cultivate a long-term relationship.

Let’s get real: screen headhunters

You are likely shaking your head and maybe laughing at what I’ve said. “Nick, Nick, Nick! Let’s get real! The good headhunters you’re talking about don’t exist!”

A few good headhunter do exist — but they’re quite rare. So, why do most people who get bombarded with job solicitations respond to virtually any headhunter solicitation and waste time? (Loads of people fall for out and out job scams.)

The answer is easy, and embarrassing:  It’s lazy, wishful thinking. People don’t want to do the hard work of finding the right job. They want Mommy — a headhunter — to serve it up to them. But they don’t bother to screen headhunters. So they comply with too many silly solicitations and complain when these turn out badly.

Let’s get real. There really are very few good headhunters out there. That’s no excuse to entertain the worst ones when you know better. Think of the hours you’ll save that you could better invest in actually finding the right job opportunity yourself!

(For more on this thorny topic, please check out How to Work With Headhunters… and how to make headhunters work for you.)

What percentage of headhunters (or recruiters) that contact you offer good, realistic job opportunities? How do the best ones behave? What behaviors tip you off to the worst?

: :

Back to Top

Blowing Through Ageism: How to get hired at 70+

On October 26, 2020
Blowing Through Ageism: How to get hired at 70+

ageismI have experienced ageism and blew through it — several times. Pretty much solidly employed all my life, I usually changed jobs by my own choice.

A short history of my careers

I was not terminated until 56 years old. I found a job a few months later, lost that, and then found another relocating from North Carolina to Texas. Then the terminations became relatively frequent.

By Don Harkness

I was laid off at age 63 and spent many months job hunting, taking a part time job in retail at 64 while still looking. At this point, I changed direction and decided to try recruiting. I networked into a new job and career path at 65. I was terminated at age 66. The next day I started a new recruiting job and was terminated three years later. This time I aimed for a part-time recruiting job, and quickly networked into one at 69 and worked until age 76 when I left on my own.

I would still be there if I’d not moved.

Lessons about ageism

There are some lessons about dealing with ageism I’d like to share based on my experience.

Most important, through all I’ve described, I got all my jobs but one via networking and personal contacts. The only successful job application I ever filled out was for the part-time retail job at 64. That was just to keep busy while I job hunted!

1. The personal-contact method is the best and most manageable way to go.

And for now, in this economy, it is the way to go. Any time spent acquiring, restoring, helping and growing your personal contacts is time not wasted.

Remember, when you get an interview, not only do you have a job opportunity, you have a networking opportunity. And that applies to both sides of the table.

2. Damn right, there’s ageism.

The best way to deal with ageism (or age discrimination in hiring) is to ignore it and work your plan the way you feel you need to, and do it via personal contacts. Personal contacts cut to the chase. They know you’re long in the tooth, so the people they refer you to know as well! If the employer doesn’t want older workers, your contacts wouldn’t refer you. So in essence, your contacts are running interference for you, vetting their contacts.

Learn from that. It means that if you are job hunting on your own, without contacts, you must add one key thing to your search criteria. You must limit yourself to employers who don’t give a shit about your age and, even better, those that actually value it and recognize your age is firmly bolted to experience they value.

How do you do that? Adjust your mindset. You are interviewing them with an aim to finding out their attitude about age. If you don’t like what you see and hear, move on.

3. If you want social justice and to eliminate ageism, bless you.

That’s time consuming, expensive and gets strongly in the way of the main objective, getting meaningfully employed. Taking your time to battle ageism fits perfectly into one of my favorite mantras: “Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig.”

More resources

Age 70, working and job hunting again

Age Discrimination: Help me market my dad!

I’m 64: Will you hire me anyway?

How Can I Change Careers?

10 facts about age discrimination

A really good way to combat ageism is to find your niche and, from there, help others land. In your new job, you can be a walking example that ignoring age is good business. You can ease the way for other “oldies.” Yes, I did this, as a recruiter for a company.

I think the best way to fight ageism is from the inside. Think about this the next time your employer asks you to interview a job applicant — and they’re an oldie.

4. Ageism swings both ways.

Keep this in mind: Ageism is a door that swings both ways. Be prepared to work for younger managers, possibly much younger.

Treat them as you want to be treated. Treat them as your boss. Look at them eye to eye, not down your nose. Park your ego.

If it works out right, your young boss will be perfectly aware you know more than they do. That’s why they hired you! I started working for younger people when I was 39 and it changed little after that.

5. Re-tool.

When I was laid off at age 63 from the computer industry, I did some thinking. High-tech is addicted to youth. I doubted my chances of re-landing in it. It would take intense effort and leaning hard into ageism. I worked 50+ years in software engineering and had ample personal contacts, but I knew this would be a grind.

The truth is, I’d had my fill. I took Social Security at 62. But I didn’t want to retire retire. So I decided to re-tool myself.

Rather than try the same-old thing again, I turned myself into a recruiter. That worked. Again, I did it with the help of personal contacts. This change in direction brought much into focus.

6. Focus.

Once focused on my new objective — to become a recruiter — not only did I make better use of my time, but I could help my contacts to better help me.

Despite much grumbling about recruiters, just about everyone knows a few recruiters. Talking with them got me in the door. The pace of my transition picked up. Was this easy? No, but it was doable.

In my case, I’m a 10th degree black-belt introvert. In a million years I’d never see myself doing this. But I did it. I’m not saying be a recruiter. I’m saying you can move out of a rigid habitual comfort zone. Focus on where you want to go next. If I can, you can.

7. Leverage your age. Pursue smaller companies that value expertise.

I not only changed my primary vocation, but eventually I changed industries. And size of employers, from mega-corporations to small and medium sized businesses. The last one was privately owned.

Both as a job hunter and a recruiter I can tell you that, if you are an older worker, give serious thought to focusing on small businesses. In a huge corporation you’re a statistic. In a small company you are a person, known by name.

And to quote the man who hired me, “I can’t understand the concept of ‘overqualified.’ Why would I turn aside someone with a lot of experience to offer?”

He did not give a hoot about anyone’s age.

If you go this route, you can turn age into an advantage. If, like me, you took Social Security early, you’ll find it not only frees you from chasing benefits, it will free a small business that hires you from messing up its health insurance costs. Believe me, for a small company the words “I don’t need your insurance” can be music to their ears — and for you, it’s a bargaining chip younger people can’t play.

8. Decide what you need.

I understand if you need a paycheck of a certain size. If that’s the case, this is a different discussion because it’s not specifically a problem of age. If you need money, my advice may not be for you.

But if you have some financial flexibility and what you need is to get back into the game, then do your financial homework. Know the difference between what’s nice to have and what’s necessary.

In my case, the “content” of my job has been more important than money. High on my list is an environment where I can work while being “retired” from B.S., stress and company politics.

I was pleasantly surprised at how shoving money and benefits out of the way empowered my job search and strategy. I hope you experience the same thing. I believe life is a trade-off. For everything you give up, you get something in return. Yeah, you may give up some pay, but you’ll get something in its place. If you decide what that is and what it’s worth to you, you may be able to find your way past ageism so you can work as long as you want to.

[UPDATE Feb. 18, 2021]

9. Get in shape

“Get in shape” physically, mentally, spiritually, emotionally — but particularly physically. Get off your ass and get your mojo going. That really applies to all job hunters, but more so for oldsters! And don’t be surprised if you are talking with interviewers and hiring managers who need to do likewise.

There’s a lot of things in job hunting out of your control, which is why it can be so discouraging and energy draining. But getting and keeping in shape for the hunt is completely under your control and as such offers a sense of accomplishment. And that sense of accomplishment will greatly fuel your search.

If I can do it, so can you.

Sorry for pontificating. The gist of it is, age is an issue if you make it an issue. Stop chasing jobs, and start pursuing companies. Look for ones that equate experience with age. It won’t help you to apply — along with hordes of competitors — to job postings that will use a computer algorithm to select or reject you based on your “keywords.”

People who know you can help you. I’m now 81. Hold that thought. At 76 I was still working because I chose to work, and because I worked with employers that wanted the value of my expertise and age. If I can do it, so can you. Persist.

One more thing. At times I’m bored, drawn to using my business brain again, with urges to set up another part-time gig. My age never enters my mind as a reason not to. I still enjoy the fun thought of contacting someone and saying, “Hi Joe or Joanne, I’m 81 and…”

Don Harkness has been an active participant on the Ask The Headhunter discussion forum since 2004.

Don is a seemingly retired 81-year old warrior from a number of trades. A job hunter, hiring manager and recruiter, both domestically and Internationally, Don can relate to about any career situation you can name.

He worked 35 years for three Fortune 500 computer companies in the bowels of software R&D, mostly on the dark side as a Software Quality Assurance Manager. He lightened that up with tours as Program/Project Manager, Software Development Director, and sundry supporting functions in the computer industry. Don put frosting on that cake with 10+ years in I.T. recruiting. In addition to the school of life, he spent 4 years in the University of Science Math and Culture (U.S.M.C.) and holds an A.A. in Accounting and a B.A. in Business Administration. Don got off the merry-go-round and stopped working when he decided to, at age 76.

Copyright © Don Harkness 2020.

: :

Back to Top

Headhunter demands I quit my job before his client will interview me

On June 15, 2020
Headhunter demands I quit my job before his client will interview me

In the June 16, 2020 Ask The Headhunter Newsletter an executive gets an ultimatum from a headhunter.

Question

headhunter demandsI am an executive at a large U.S. bank. I was approached by a headhunter and have had serious and positive discussions with a company he represents. We were at the next stage of me speaking with the CEO of the company. However, it turns out that the company is a business client of my bank and the CEO of the company is good friends with my boss. On account of this, the CEO is not comfortable meeting with me. The headhunter informed me that the CEO has asked me to resign or notify my boss of my intention to resign before he will meet with me and resume discussions. While they have indicated that they would then “fast track” the process immediately after that, it’s not a guaranteed offer. This seems absurd to me. The headhunter tells me this is not unusual at my high level, but I have never heard of such a practice. What are your thoughts?

Nick’s Reply

This is a good example of the headhunter’s version of mixed signals. “Let’s talk about a job!” Then “We can’t talk to you about a job!” Not unless you quit your job first. Go, then stop, then go? What’s behind all this? The headhunter’s naivete or the CEO’s incompetence?

You’ve had multiple interviews with the company. They have undoubtedly read your resume and know where you work. So does the headhunter and the company’s HR department, which knows the company’s recruiting policies. Now the CEO interjects and implies there’s some sort of conflict in even talking with you because he’s your boss’s friend and the company does business with your bank.

What a mess. How absurd. How unprofessional. Why did they bring you in to interview at all?

Recruiting conflicts?

Perhaps the CEO thinks he’s a paragon of ethical behavior in not hiring anyone that works for any of his friends or who works at any company his company buys from. He has manufactured a significant and risky constraint on who his company can hire.

Podcast

Last week I chatted with Mac Prichard on his “Find Your Dream Job” career podcast. Have a listen: Choosing your target companies, with Nick Corcodilos.

I might understand if you worked for a customer of the CEO’s company. Then the CEO might risk losing the account. But would the CEO forego hiring an employee of the electricity provider that services his building? A lawyer from the company’s law firm? An employee of a restaurant the CEO frequents? A programmer from Apple if the company uses iPhones? Where does it end?

The only true conflict would be if the company’s contractual relationship with the bank forbids the company from recruiting its employees. I’ve never heard of such a thing. (However, it is common for a contract between a headhunting firm and its client company to forbid the headhunter from poaching the client’s employees. But that’s a different story.)

Friends and fiduciaries

If the friendship between the CEO and your boss is the issue, then that CEO should stop recruiting anyone. How many friends does he have and at what companies?

The CEO has a fiduciary obligation to his company. This means he must act entirely on his company’s behalf and best interest. That includes when hiring. Unless there is some contractual or legal obligation preventing him from recruiting and hiring you, the CEO may be violating his obligations to his board of directors. His duty is to hire the best candidates, whether his friends like it or not.

Do you think the CEO disclosed to his board all the companies where he has friends, and from which he will not recruit candidates (like you)? Does HR know which companies represent forbidden fruit? Apparently not. That headhunter certainly doesn’t know.

The CEO’s company will have no access to all those potential candidates (like you). The company would be foolish to limit its access to good candidates.

Headhunter demands it

Far more bizarre is that the headhunter demands you resign your current job just for the chance to meet with his client. Absurd? It’s insane, irresponsible, kooky and the sign of an employer you should cross off your list and warn your friends about.

Additionally, the headhunter’s explanation is disingenuous. If the company has a no-recruit list and your bank is on it, why doesn’t its headhunter know about it? Why did he recruit you from your bank, on behalf of the CEO’s company,  and put you through multiple meetings? The headhunter is wrong. He owes you a big apology for his and his client’s unprofessional conduct. (For more about how to deal with headhunters in such situations, please see How to Work With Headhunters… and how to make headhunters work with you, pp. 26-33.)

Off the rails

This is so far off the rails that you might consider having some fun with it. Tell the headhunter you’ll quit your job if the CEO will write you a check for a year’s salary if he doesn’t hire you for at least a 15% compensation increase within 3 months. You want the check now. You will refund the money if the CEO hires you.

Alternately, tell the headhunter you want to hear this directly from the CEO. You want to see the “no-poach” agreement the company has with your bank. You’ll get none of this, of course, but it’s a conversation I’d love to hear!

Good for you for stepping back for a reality check. You’re dealing with a very naïve headhunter and with a CEO that’s mismanaging his company, from the HR department up to the C-suite.

Perhaps he should hire his friend (your boss) to protect their friendship. Maybe that’s what he’s planning anyway.

On to the next!

What do you make of this bungled recruiting episode? Has a headhunter ever issued bizarre demands like this? What would you do if you were the candidate? What would you say to the CEO and the headhunter?

: :

Back to Top

My headhunter is competing with me!

On August 19, 2019
My headhunter is competing with me!

In the August 20, 2019 Ask The Headhunter Newsletter a reader is confused about how a headhunter operates.

Question

headhunterIs it an ethical or typical practice that a recruiting agency submits more than one person for the same position? A headhunter contacted me about a management role in information security. I went in for the interview first, and while following up with the headhunter afterwards I did a bit of a brain dump about the way it went and what their personalities were like. As I was telling the recruiter my experience, I heard her clicking away at the keyboard and instantly I was thinking who is helping whom? So I asked, are you submitting someone else, and she said yes, the agency was, but she was not personally. The information I shared was used to help the next person they sent to interview after me.

It seems there is a conflict of interest and cannibalization when you send two people for the same position.

Nick’s Reply

That’s exactly how recruiting agencies (headhunters) work. Unless this is some unusual situation where you are paying the agency a fee to get placed (Please don’t ever do that!), the agency’s customer is the employer, not you. The employer pays a fee to get a job filled.

On a typical assignment a headhunter will submit several candidates to an employer, not because the headhunter is gambling, but because the client wants several candidates from which to choose. The goal is to fill the job, not to get you a job. Even if this is an employee-fee agency, I doubt your agreement with the agency prohibits them from submitting other candidates anyway. But at your level, it’s safe to guess this is a traditional employer-fee deal.

One headhunter, several candidates

Because this is how the business works, there’s nothing unethical about it. An agency will use whatever information is available to help them get one of their candidates hired, including anything you told them during your debriefing. When you think about it this way, there’s no cannibalization or conflict of interest. The objective is to fill the job with a candidate, any candidate.

I wouldn’t hold it against the recruiter, but in the future I would refrain from telling her anything that might help another candidate from the firm to compete against you. Don’t compete with yourself or with the headhunter’s other candidates.

How the headhunter gets paid

This reminds me of a learning experience I had when I first started headhunting. It illustrates how headhunters get paid. I submitted a candidate to a company and they hired him without telling me. When I complained, they said they had received the same candidate from another search firm that was paid the fee. I was livid. My boss sat me down and explained the rules. I learned my lesson. Headhunters don’t have any exclusive control over a candidate. (See How long does the headhunter control me?)

When I confronted the candidate I had “lost,” he sheepishly admitted he’d already interviewed at the same company in another department. Did he behave unethically? I’m not sure about that, because his goal was to get a job. Did he know he was putting me in competition with another headhunter? Let’s call it an error of omission. Sure, he should have told me, but not for the reason you might think. In this case, the candidate was lucky. He might have gotten rejected for both jobs if the company realized it was interviewing him through two sources at almost the same time, because employers don’t like getting into the middle of fee fights between headhunters. If I’d started a legal battle for that fee, I would have lost — but the company’s lawyers probably would have advised that the employer stop dealing with both search firms!

I became more careful about submitting candidates, and always asked whether they’d already talked to company X.

Understand headhunters

I’d have a talk with the recruiter. Decide whether you trust her. Ask her to explain how the firm operates. If they’re going to refer you for another position, ask whether you’ll have competition from other candidates from the same firm. Keep in mind that even if you’re the headhunter’s only candidate, you’ll face competition from other candidates anyway.

There’s nothing you can do but decline the interview or avoid headhunters altogether, but why would you do that? More important, now that you’ve been rejected by that employer, and now that you know other headhunters at the agency work on similar jobs, ask about other opportunities they may be working on. Optimize your chances of getting placed by learning how headhunters work. But please remember that the agency’s business is to fill a job — not to find you one.

Additional resources

I know you’re frustrated. This is why I tell job seekers not to rely too much on headhunters! These articles might be helpful:

Headhunters find people, not jobs

Why do headhunters act like this?

If you need in-depth advice about headhunters, please check my PDF book, How to Work With Headhunters — and how to make headhunters work for you.

Hope it goes better next time!

Have you ever had a rude awakening when working with a headhunter? Do the rules of this game confuse you? What would you like to know about how headhunters operate?

: :

Back to Top

Age 70, working and job hunting again

On August 12, 2019

In the August 13, 2019 Ask The Headhunter Newsletter a reader fends off age discrimination.

Question

ageI am 70 years old and still actively working. I have been a consultant for an energy company since early this year, serving in an interim role. The company had a disastrous last year. I was brought in to help turn some of this around in the first quarter and “stand in” until a full-time person arrived. This was to have been a 4-5 month assignment; I am still here. I know I will not be brought on because of my age and I accept this.

I have started searching again, now that the assignment is drawing to a close. I had a recruiter locate me on Monster.com and ask for my “full” resume, which I sent. Later in the day I received a text asking for “your DOB.” I responded “16 July,” to which I received a note saying, “Before I submit your resume to my client I need the year.”

I told her to remove me from her database and thanked her for bringing ageism into play. Is there anything I should have done? Just because I am 70 doesn’t mean I’m senile or moving around using a walker!

Thank you for your column. Even in my “advanced age,” I get what you teach.

Nick’s Reply

I collect stories from people who continue to work well into their 60s, 70s and even 80s. Thanks for yours! They all have one thing in common: They are forthright and spirited.

The age question

No recruiter needs your date of birth (DOB) for any reason I can think of, so I’m glad you told that one to take a hike. But please consider that if you’re going to swim in shark-infested waters, you’re likely to get bitten. Monster.com and its ilk are thick with recruiters like the one that found you. It’s up to you to avoid risky waters.

You could be discriminated against anyway, but job hunting online makes it even more likely a person will be rejected due to their age. The impersonal, rapid-fire Q&A that recruiters can do via e-mail, chat and texts with eager job seekers makes it easier to discriminate.

So, no, there’s nothing else you should have done. You avoided wasting your time further. If you expect to get hired because of your qualifications, then it’s up to you to control how a recruiting exchange occurs.

Show them the green

The only way I know to test a recruiting pitch is to expect the recruiter to evaluate you for what you can do to make the employer more successful. That’s also how you will get past biases. In the case of age, you want to arrange it so you can show them the green — how you will benefit their business — before they get distracted by the grey of your hair or your birth date. (See Age Discrimination: Help me market my dad!)

You don’t say how you’ve gotten your jobs during the past ten years. Whatever it is, keep doing it. My guess is that you rely on your reputation and abilities, not on random queries. Don’t be distracted by recruiters demanding to know your age. Fast-paced, high-volume, automated online recruiting doesn’t permit you to communicate the information that will get you interviewed and hired. That requires a one-to-one dialogue.

So ask yourself, no matter who is recruiting you, do they take time to talk with you about the job and about how — exactly — you might be able to help do the job profitably for the employer?

If the recruiter declines a substantive discussion about those two topics, you know you’re not being recruited. It’s just a cold call that’s not likely to go anywhere.

Personal contacts

If a recruiter indicates they don’t really know anything about you, don’t waste your time because that’s not really a recruiting call. I strongly suggest you rely on your personal contacts – and develop more of them – for your job search. Here’s a four-step outline for how to leverage this: Ask The Headhunter in a nutshell.

You’ve been doing this long enough that you probably know everything in that article. I just want to remind you that it works, and that the likes of Monster.com don’t.

Are you still working in your 60s, 70s or later (hopefully by choice)? How do you do it? How do you handle queries from recruiters? Have you encountered age discrimination? What can we do about it?

: :

Back to Top

Why do headhunters act like this?

On May 13, 2019

In the May 14, 2019 Ask The Headhunter Newsletter some readers get fed up with headhunters who waste their time.

Question

headhuntersMy friends and I are successful IT (information technology) types and receive calls about positions from headhunters often. We are all experiencing the following:

  1. The initial salary range presented is higher than what the employer discusses or offers and thus, everyone’s time is wasted. The recruiter then weasels out of the lie.
  2. The headhunter calls with a “hot” opportunity, gives us the details, finds out if we’re interested and then tells us that interviews will be conducted very soon. We never hear from the headhunter about that particular position after that and our phone calls go unanswered, until another opportunity comes up and the process starts all over again.
  3. The headhunter asks if we will interview but he doesn’t know any specifics about the job, like what the company specializes in or what technologies they use.

Are these really legitimate positions? Why don’t headhunters take the time to research the position in order to convince the candidate to pursue the opportunity? Why don’t they return our calls or explain what happened to the “hot” position? Do they really think we will recommend potential candidates when they are so unreliable and inconsistent with their stories? (We are called upon to refer candidates to fit entry level and lateral positions.)

What’s going on? We don’t have time to waste talking about positions that don’t exist, or to interview for positions not in our specified salary range. Many thanks for your input!

Nick’s Reply

Most “headhunters” are no better than most personnel jockeys. They’re ignorant of their own business, they have no clear business goals (other than to make money), they don’t understand the jobs they’re trying to fill, their strategy is to “dial for dollars,” and they lose their credibility quickly.

The problems with headhunters

You must understand two things.

First, the cost of entry into the headhunting business is so low that anyone (and I mean anyone) can give it a shot. All it takes is a cell phone and a free LinkedIn account.

Second, turnover in most of these firms is very high because they do next to nothing to train new headhunters (I shiver to even call them that) properly. The result: the experiences you describe.

You hit the nail on the head. Refuse to have your time wasted.

Play hardball

The solution is to grill the headhunter. Play hardball.

Get references: Ask to talk with three people in your field that the headhunter has placed and three managers that have hired the headhunter’s candidates.

Issue a warning: Assuming you get those names, tell the headhunter that if she doesn’t call you back when she says she will, her name will be mud among your associates.

Know headhunters from telemarketers

Fast-buck artists who talk a good line, make little sense, and don’t keep promises aren’t headhunters. They’re telemarketers playing long odds to get a fee every now and then. Most of them don’t know the first thing about dealing with the professional community they recruit in. If they sound like they don’t know anything about your work, it’s because they don’t. Heck, most don’t even recruit — they copy and paste keywords, job descriptions and resumes.

Make them earn their money.

(To any “headhunters” reading this, if this describes you, don’t send me your complaints. You get no sympathy from me for treating candidates like this.)

Good headhunters

Should I give a headhunter my references?

If a headhunter presses you too soon for the names of references, politely take control of the discussion.

How to say it: “I think you’ll enjoy talking with my references — have you already talked with people who know my work? If not, then first we need to talk about the position you’re working on. If you decide I’m a viable candidate, and if I decide I want to pursue it, then we can talk about my references. So, tell me more about the position. Who is the manager?”

From How To Work With Headhunters, p. 84

Good headhunters are few and far between. Remember my advice to ask for references? The “headhunter” who contacts you is very unlikely to give you any because he doesn’t have any. That’s the first sign you’re going to waste your time.

  • Good headhunters will share references.
  • Because they circulate in your professional community, they probably know people whose names you will recognize.
  • They will treat you with respect, and they will do what they say they’re going to do.
  • They will also instantly reveal that they know a lot about the work you do.
  • They will ask intelligent questions, and they can answer yours.

It really is that simple. For a good primer about headhunters, please read Joe Borer’s How to Judge a Headhunter. Joe is a good headhunter, but please don’t try to contact him. Good headhunters don’t field unsolicited calls from job seekers. (See Headhunters find people, not jobs.)

Be your own headhunter

The purpose of Ask The Headhunter is to teach you how to be your own headhunter — even when you’re not actively seeking a job. Cut out the middle man when necessary. But when you meet a good headhunter, you’ll know it – they’re worth your patience and your attention, because they’ll treat you with respect and negotiate a deal like you never could on your own.

I usually rant about personnel jockeys and career counselors and coaches. Did I ever tell you the one about the inept headhunter…?

How do you judge headhunters? Give us three signs that quickly tell you who’s for real and who’s going to waste your time. Let’s compile a list everyone can use.

: :

Back to Top

6 signals to reject an employer recruiting you

On February 18, 2019

In the February 19, 2019 Ask The Headhunter Newsletter something tells a reader it’s time to reject an employer’s recruiting come-on.

Question

recruiting

After multiple interviews with managers and team members, a well-known company made me a job offer that I refused. The offer was good, considerably more than I earn now. But the deal was unacceptable because, from one meeting to the next, the team showed me the company is undisciplined, disorganized and incapable of conducting business with someone they want to hire. And they recruited me! I didn’t go to them looking for a job! This of course tells me they are not worth doing business with, period. I’m writing to you because I’ve concluded that I should have cut the meetings off sooner. I was so focused on performing at my best that I didn’t calculate the problems that now appear so obvious to me. Can you poll your readers and ask them what signals during interviews tip them off that a company is not worth working for, much less continuing interviews?

Nick’s Reply

I’ve been saving a story I read recently about just this problem — employers that aren’t worth interviewing with. Don’t feel bad, because in the throes of the evaluation process, a candidate is understandably trying so hard to impress that he or she dismisses signals that suggest it’s time to walk away. Nonetheless, there are indeed signals you should be looking for early in the process. You should not wait until after you’ve invested many hours and loads of effort to calculate whether an employer is worth it!

6 signals tell you to reject an employer

San Francisco recruiter Ken Hansell posted this story on LinkedIn, from a job candidate who rejected a job offer and declined to negotiate further. Like you, this candidate probably waited too long to tell the employer to take a hike.

I declined the offer… I’m staying where I am.

The recruiter called me and asked why? This is one of the top companies. What’s the counter offer?

Me: No counter offer.

  1. I had 6 rounds of interviews.
  2. I was grilled with questions but nobody took the time to explain what the job is like and did not even ask if I have any questions.
  3. Lots of questions did not make sense – like why I am leaving my employer. I was not, your recruiter approached me and convinced me to come for your interview. Where I see myself in 5 years. They could not tell me where they see their company in 6 months.
  4. The hiring process is too long, too disorganized.
  5. The offer took too long.
  6. The interviewers did not compare notes because during the 6 rounds of interviews they were asking the same questions. This should not look like an interrogation. They also looked tired and stressed.

If you want to hire talent, fix your basics. Treat candidates as people, not as applicants.

This job candidate has outlined six clear signals that they were interviewing with a wrong company, that is, one not worthy of consideration. All these signs are important, but the third one is key:

The interviewers behaved as if the candidate is chasing the company when,
in fact, the company is recruiting the candidate.

Who’s recruiting whom?

This critical distinction is lost on most people. Applying for jobs you’re pursuing is one thing. But when a company finds you, pursues you, solicits you, and convinces you to come talk about a job — then the calculus changes entirely. (See Reductionist Recruiting: A short history of why you can’t get hired.)

As you and the candidate in the LinkedIn story both noted, you were not looking for a job, so asking you why you wanted to leave your old job is not just presumptuous and rude — it reveals a totally misguided approach to hiring.

When you are recruited, an employer should do three things:

  • Roll out the red carpet.
  • Present compelling evidence about why you should listen to its pitch.
  • Work very hard to impress you.

When you are recruited, an employer that fails to treat you as an honored guest reveals a profound ignorance of how the world works. That’s simply disrespectful. It’s the sign of an uncouth, uncultured, stupid organization that’s bound to fail — one you’d be wasting your time with. (See Stupid Recruiters: How employers waste your time.)

Blind recruiting is spam

I’ll repeat that: When a company — whether its manager, its recruiter or its headhunter — comes to you and suggests it is interested in you, it should treat you with special respect and deference.

  • It must not ask you to fill out job applications.
  • It must accommodate your schedule for a meeting.
  • It must send the hiring manager to court you from the start — not some personnel jockey whose job is to check your teeth prior to your meeting with that hiring manager.
  • It must treat you as an object of desire.
  • It must show it knows exactly why it wants to meet you.

Blind solicitations are not recruiting; they’re spam. The trouble is, most people don’t understand this. They allow companies that recruit them to treat them like beggars. Don’t. You’ll save a lot of time if you separate employers you pursue from those that come to you. This is not to say all employers should not treat you respectfully. But when a company or recruiter solicits you, expect to be treated as an object of desire — or walk away if you’re made to feel like somebody who applied for a job.

What the 6 signals really tell you

The six signals above tell you that an employer is wasting your time. Here’s why.

  1. It should not take six interviews to assess you. Two, perhaps three. An employer that needs more has no idea how to properly assess a job candidate.
  2. A company should not interrogate you. It should open its own kimono first, to prove there’s a wonderful, desirable opportunity in there for you. (If this idea seems foreign to you, you’re either brainwashed or you work in HR.)
  3. The interviewers should not test your motivations. They should justify theirs to you.
  4. An interview process should be a carefully tailored production — a compelling pitch designed to impress you favorably. If the employer uses interviews to test you, then it has no business inviting you in to talk because it clearly has no idea whether you’re a good candidate. Listen up, employers and HR managers and recruiters: If you have not researched a person in enough detail already to confirm they are a viable candidate, you have no business contacting them. Interviews are not for selecting candidates. They’re for selecting hires.
  5. An employer should make an offer almost immediately after interviews are done. Hesitation reveals doubt, and doubt reveals poor judgment, and that’s the mark of failure.
  6. Those job interview meetings are the employer’s show. If the employer comes off looking bad, it means it’s not prepared, which means it’s not worth working for.

The job candidate in the LinkedIn story didn’t even consider negotiating the job offer because the employer signaled six different ways why it’s not worth working for at any salary.

Know when to reject an employer

The best way to land a great job is to focus your available time on employers worth interviewing with and worth working for. (Yes, some employers do it right. See Smart Hiring: A manager who respects applicants (Part 1).) That’s why it’s critical to know who’s going to waste your time. Those six signals are crystal clear. But they’re not the only signals that should give any job candidate pause — or perhaps make them head for the door immediately.

What additional signals from recruiters and employers tell you the “opportunity” they’re dangling at you will be a painful waste of your time? Please be specific — let’s create a test kit that helps everyone distinguish opportunity from agony.

: :

Back to Top

Employee quits, boss wants her to refund employment agency fee

On September 10, 2018

In the September 11, 2018 Ask The Headhunter Newsletter an employee placed by an employment agency quit, and the employer wants the placement fee refunded.

Question

employment agencyAn employee quit without notice after five months. Her explanation was that she never wanted to stay at this job from the start. We paid a hefty agency fee for this person. She never signed any paperwork with the agency, and the contract stated that employment is “at will.”

Do we have the right to go after the employee to pay us back for not being truthful? Or do we have to go to the hiring agency to see if we can get our money back?

Nick’s Reply

An awful lot of readers are laughing at your story right now, rolling their eyes, and thinking, “Serves you right!”

Why would anyone laugh? Because the recruiting and hiring process usually blows up in the job seeker’s face — not the employer’s.

But I’m not here to laugh at you. The rise of intermediaries in the hiring process has introduced mass confusion, frustration and finger-pointing on every side — employers, agencies, employees. I’m afraid everyone is culpable.

You paid the employment agency, not the employee

I can’t believe you’re serious about recovering the fee you paid to the agency from the employee. I doubt you have a contract with the employee that provides such recourse. If there’s a contract at all, it’s between your company and the agency. Take it up with them.

If the agency does a good job for you in general, don’t blame them. Once you’ve got the hire for five months, whatever happens next is a management problem, not a placement problem. You chose to make — and keep — the hire.

But first consider the pickle you’ve put yourself in.

The problem with middle men

Employers expect someone else is going to handle recruiting and hiring for them, then are shocked when things go awry. Most agencies play fast and loose because they get paid to fill a job, not to deliver the best hire, and everyone suffers for it. Job seekers suspend their common sense when someone they don’t know dangles an “opportunity” in front of them. The introduction of middle men in hiring creates chaos, poor management and terrible decision making.

In this case, everything depends on the contract you have with the employment agency, and on whether there is a guarantee on the placement that provides for a refund.

The number of employment agencies — which go by all kinds of monikers — has exploded, with the result that employers often have no idea who they’re dealing with. (See They’re not headhunters.) It’s an unusual occurrence, but it’s possible the recruiter and your new hire were in cahoots and planned the “placement” to last only until the fee guarantee expired. Then they split the fee you paid and moved on to the next sucker company. I always explore this possibility when a new hire lasts just past the guarantee, which is usually between 30 and 90 days.

But I repeat: If your agency does good work in general, then they may not be the problem at all.

There are some measures you can take to avoid the most obvious problems with agencies.

Get a guarantee from employment agency

Always have a written contract with the recruiter that includes a pro-rated guarantee period. That is, if the new hire “falls off” for any reason — whether you fire them or they quit — make sure you can get back some or all of the fee you paid. Such guarantees usually run 30-90 days and will offer a refund or replace the employee. Good agencies will negotiate reasonable terms with you.

If the contract suggests the hire will be responsible for any refund to you, run. That’s unethical and unscrupulous, and possibly illegal.

Get a no-poach agreement

Your contract with the agency should prohibit poaching. That is, the agency cannot recruit the person it just placed with you — or any other employee at your firm — for a year or more after the last placement the agency made at your firm. This can be even more restrictive if it prohibits placing anyone who has left your firm in the past year or more. Some headhunters don’t like such clauses, but they promote healthy business relationships.

I would nose around. Did the agency that placed the employee with you recruit her out or place her elsewhere? Good agencies never do that.

For job seekers:

Can an employer charge you for quitting?

How long does the headhunter control me?

Understand that “at will” employment cuts both ways

As I said above, it’s usually employees who complain about being terminated without any explanation in states where employment is “at will” by law. What’s your company doing to make sure it’s a good place to work?

Barring some kind of contractual obligation or regulation, you can no more prohibit someone from quitting a job than you can be prohibited from terminating them.

Check the agency’s references

For employers:

How to Judge A Headhunter

Recruiting: How to get your hands dirty and hire.

Check the employment agency’s references as well as the specific recruiter’s references before you do business with them. I’ll estimate that 90% of pitches you get from recruiters will end when you ask them for references. Work only with recruiters whose skills and reputations you have confirmed, or don’t be surprised at the consequences.

What to do next

At the very least, I’d call the agency in for a face-to-face meeting to discuss what happened as well as the terms for next assignment. Assess whether you trust the recruiter. I would not necessarily blame the recruiter if they did everything else right.

If your relationship with the agency is at e-mail’s length because they’re not in your city, then consider the value of working only with local agencies.

But don’t expect any agency is going to refund your money after five months. Read the refund deal in your contract. Some of this falls on you, but I understand your frustration. New employees feel the same way when they quit a job for a new one — only to get fired suddenly a few months later without explanation.

If you learned too late that the employee didn’t really want the job from the start, I suggest you improve your recruiting and interviewing processes — and how you manage. Always remember that while you can fire at will, an employee can quit at will. (This depends on the laws in your state.) I’m not a lawyer but my guess is, if she did the work and you paid her for it, no one is obligated to continue the employment — you or her. It’s up to you to get to know your workers well.

You should check with a lawyer so you’ll know better next time, but chalk this one up to experience.

This is one reason why it’s worth cultivating your own pipeline for recruiting through your own trusted sources who will put their own reputations on the line when they recommend someone. If you’re going to use an agency, it’s best to meet a good one through your trusted sources before a lousy agency takes advantage of you.

If you’re an employer, what’s in the contracts you sign with employment agencies? How do you protect your company? If you’re a headhunter, recruiter or employment agency, how do you help ensure your client’s (the employer’s) satisfaction? If you’re the hire who was placed by the agency, would you consider refunding part or all of the recruiter’s fee if you decided to quit the job?

: :

Back to Top

When to decline an employee referral for a job

On February 26, 2018

In the February 27, 2018 Ask The Headhunter Newsletter, a reader questions how meaningful an employee referral is when it’s impersonal.

Question

employee referralA friend at a company I’m interested in working for referred me for a job. I have a phone interview scheduled with a “technical recruiter” later today. I asked if there was any special preparation I could do for the interview. I was told no, that we would be covering my previous experience and projects during the call.

You always recommend using a job interview to demonstrate how the applicant would actually do the job. Since the interview is with a recruiter, not the hiring manager who runs the technical team, I somehow doubt there will be an opportunity to demonstrate I can do the job.

I’m surprised at the way they’re handling this. I already have a strong recommendation from an employee. Why should I talk to a recruiter first? Nobody needs to recruit me — I’ve already been recruited and referred!

[A reader posted a shorter version of this story as a comment on another column. I edited it so it would stand on its own.]

Nick’s Reply

This is a good example of a truly stupid move by an employer. You’re absolutely correct: There is no need for a recruiter to screen you because you’ve already been screened and recruited!

Why do companies even have employee referral programs if they’re going to treat referred job candidates like some unknown applicant?

Employee referral or bureaucratic process?

In fact, the intervention of the recruiter should give people like you pause. This tells you the company’s hiring process is broken. The company can’t tell the difference between random applicants and desirable job candidates — or doesn’t care.

We see another form of such foolishness when a recruiter interviews a random applicant (who was not referred personally), then tells them to go to the company website to fill out a lengthy form about their qualifications. But, what was the point of the interview if not to judge the candidate’s qualifications?

The problem in both cases is that the selection process is thoughtlessly bureaucratic and unduly stretched out after a candidate has already been scrutinized. This redundancy turns off the best candidates and often results in the employer losing them.

The purpose of any recruiting and selection process must be to get good candidates to the hiring manager as quickly and enthusiastically as possible!

(When it doesn’t work that way, it may be prudent to politely decline an employee referral for a job.)

Personal referrals deserve personal attention

I think you’re right to harbor doubts and to question how you’re being treated — and to be concerned that the upcoming interview with the recruiter is not worthy of your time. You won’t be able to show what you can do. Only the hiring manager is qualified to have that kind of exchange with you. Why waste your time?

When an employee makes a personal referral (it should have been made to the actual manager, by the way), the manager should personally jump on it and make the call immediately. The employee, after all, has done the manager a favor, and so have you. The manager should treat this trusted personal referral as a gift. Otherwise, it’s a huge dis to the employee — because why else would they ever make a personal referral again, if it isn’t handled personally by the manager?

Why bother?

We won’t even get into why you’d ever accept a referral from your friend again, if this is how you’re going to be received. The friend has an obligation to make sure the hiring manager welcomes you enthusiastically and gratefully. Unfortunately, employees of companies that have referral programs know they’re usually a bureaucratic nightmare. (For a better way to make a referral, please see Referrals: How to gift someone a job (and why).)

Of course, any job candidate should be thoroughly interviewed and assessed. A personal referral is no guarantee of a job. But it should be a guarantee of the best treatment a company and a manager can offer.

Sheesh, employers are stupid. Then they complain they can’t find good candidates. (See Referrals: How employers waste proven talent.)

My advice is to call your friend the employee and explain you’d be glad to meet with the hiring manager on the friend’s recommendation — “which I really appreciate.” But add that you didn’t apply for the job from off the street, and you’re not going to spend your valuable time getting grilled by a recruiter.

How to Say It:

“Look, I appreciate the personal referral. It was kind of you, and I hope I can return the favor some day. But if the manager isn’t ready to talk with me on your recommendation, then it’s not worth my time, either. I’m glad to invest time to show a manager how I’ll do the technical work properly and profitably. But I don’t have time to chat with a recruiter about my resume. If the manager would like to meet with me, I’m ready for that discussion any time. Thanks again for your faith in me.”

If I were the employee who made the referral, I’d go talk to the manager and suggest the manager make the call promptly. “I’m trying to help you fill a job, but I need you to help preserve the respect this candidate has for me and for our company. I made a personal referral expecting this individual would be treated personally and with care. Is there anything I can do to help move this along?”

Should a personal employee referral be treated personally? What’s your experience been when you’ve been referred for a job? Does your company have an employee referral program? How does it work — and do you participate?

 

Back to Top

The worst job hunting advice ever

On February 19, 2018

In the February 20, 2018 Ask The Headhunter Newsletter, an HR pro warns unsuspecting readers to avoid getting hurt by bad advice on Ask The Headhunter.

Question

adviceI’ve been in Human Resources 12 years and I have to say your article Resume Blasphemy is probably the worst advice I have ever heard anyone give to a job seeker. The best evidence of future performance is past achievement. I need to know where you worked, where you went to school and what you have accomplished. If that is not on the resume, I don’t read it.

I highly recommend you remove that article before you hurt any more unsuspecting job seekers.

Nick’s Reply

I’m hurting job hunters, when you’re the one tossing their resumes, unread, in the trash?

I help unsuspecting job hunters avoid getting hurt by teaching them how to get past personnel jockeys like you altogether.

The best HR people I’ve known don’t rely on resumes any more than I do. But they’re few.

A job hunter is lucky to encounter an HR person who knows how to read between the lines, both literally and figuratively. The best HR folks manage to avoid blinders when recruiting. They don’t approach candidates (or resumes) with preconceived notions. Like I said, these HR people are few, but they know who they are.

You’re entitled to your opinion, and I’m glad you’ve shared it. I’m publishing it because job hunters need to see firsthand how some HR representatives deal with resumes. (I stand by the Blasphemous Resume.) You make two statements that prove just how dangerous it can be to blindly send resumes to HR departments.

HR Advice: “The best evidence of future performance is past achievement.”

I’m always astonished at how horribly recruiters are hobbled by such claptrap. Here we have an employer who can ask job applicants for any information he wants. So, what does he ask for? A lame, one-size-fits-all recitation of “past achievements.”

First, what constitutes an achievement is subjective. I’ve met job candidates with achievement awards up the yin-yang from companies where showing up in clean clothes every day earns them a regular promotion and a raise. I’ve also met candidates whose resumes are nothing more than lists of tedious job functions, but who underneath all that are outstanding workers.

Second, a clever resume-writing service can apply “action verbs” to turn the most mundane worker into a seeming powerhouse of a job candidate.

Finally, I’ve known people whose resumes showed they were good performers again and again in their past. Unfortunately, they could not translate their abilities to handle the next job.

It took me only three months to land my dream job. It was advertised absolutely everywhere, so I’m sure they received a boatload of qualified candidates.

In thinking back as to how I grabbed this job, I’m 100% positive it was because I followed your Ask The Headhunter advice and did the job in the interview. That simple maneuver set me apart from all the others vying for the job.

Thank you, Nick. Being a member of this community has literally changed my life.

— Elizabeth Weintraub

But, can you do this job?

The outcomes in all these scenarios are problematic. Good candidates are lost and lousy ones are hired because the best evidence of future performance is not past achievements. (I’d go further and argue that past performance is not sufficiently predictive of future performance, no matter where it is described.)

When an employer can ask for any information he wants, he should ask for a demonstration of a candidate’s ability to do the work at hand. That means the candidate should show, right there in the interview, that she can do the work profitably, or learn to do it in short order. (I offer reader Elizabeth Weintraub’s quote as just one example.)

But it’s impossible for a job candidate to do the job in the interview with an HR representative, because no one in HR is expert in the specific work of any department of a company (other than HR). A job hunter wastes her time when she gets caught in the “HR filter” before she establishes with the hiring manager that there are good reasons to meet and talk.

HR Advice: “If that is not on the resume, I don’t read it.”

“I need to know where you worked, where you went to school and what you have accomplished. If that is not on the resume, I don’t read it.”

This statement is a good tip-off to job hunters: HR doesn’t read all resumes.

Any resume that’s missing what titillates the keyword algorithm gets nixed. And, who’s to say what might or might not stimulate your (that is, a personnel jockey’s) rejection reaction? Pity the poor slob who went to a school that pummeled your alma mater’s football team. Who wants to take that chance?

It’s also important for job hunters to remember that an HR representative is not the hiring manager. I’ve never met a hiring manager who would reject a candidate who provided a detailed plan of how she would do the job profitably. However, many are the managers who’ve said to me, “Just because she did a job at another company doesn’t mean she can do this job here. Our needs are unique.” (Mind you, I’m not arguing that history is irrelevant; only that it’s not the best way to introduce yourself to an employer, and that it’s not an adequate basis for screening candidates. See Tell HR you don’t talk to the hand.)

The rejection question

It seems you refuse to read resumes that you don’t immediately understand, in spite of the fact that you can’t possibly be an expert in all the disciplines that are important to your company. The smart job hunter will thus wonder, What’s on my resume that might get me rejected? and conclude that it might be anything.

The better risk for a job hunter is to deal directly with the hiring manager, who is likely more interested in the value of the candidate than in words on a resume or in the HR department’s (or some algorithm’s) binary judgement. (See HR Technology: Terrorizing the candidates.)

I advise job hunters to skip, avoid, have nothing to do with the HR department until they have talked with the hiring manager.

Resumes: Too much noise?

There is not a single good reason for a filter at the HR level when a company is hiring. A good manager (these are few and far between, too) recruits, interviews and hires on his own. HR’s job is to provide support, not to decide which applicants the manager gets to see.

(The manager who argues that HR is needed to filter the thousands of incoming resumes should consider that he might be better off not relying on ads that generate tons of resumes that need sorting to begin with.)

noiseMy suggestion to most businesses is that they can relieve their HR departments of recruiting, candidate selection and hiring functions without any significant loss. The HR function is Human Resources, not Human Recruiting. (See How HR optimizes rejection of millions of job applicants.) Recruiting is best left to people who have skin in the game: managers and headhunters who specialize in specialized talent markets. (Yah, I know, maybe we should exclude headhunters, too. That’s another debate.)

Blasphemous advice

Your warning confirms that my advice is indeed blasphemous. (Whew. Thanks.)

I contend that resumes include too much noise. Too many good candidates are lost because HR clerks rely on words in resumes to filter them out. Too many inappropriate candidates wind up getting interviewed just because they have the right buzzwords on their resumes. And it’s all just so much noise that hides the signals that truly matter.

I suggest you read Resume Blasphemy again, more carefully. Perhaps your resume-sorting habits have made you so accustomed to blocking things out that you missed something that matters. The point of the article is explicitly stated:

“In fact, once you have produced a Working Resume, you will likely have done the kind of research and made the kinds of contacts that will probably make a resume entirely unnecessary — you will already be ‘in the door’. (That’s the point.)”

No need to rag on HR, but let’s discuss the two assumptions this personnel jockey made. (1) Is past achievement really the best evidence of future performance? (2) What information on your resume does HR really need in order to judge you?

: :

Back to Top