One of the really infuriating things about modern day job hunting is the prevalence of job announcements which don't even give the courtesy of acknowledging applicant submissions.

I'm not just talking about the so-called "blind box" ads, but the ones from companies big and small that say directly in the announcement, "Only applicants which meet our criteria will be eligible for a response."

If you are the applicant, you're sure your credentials far exceed the criteria in the ad. So why didn't you get an acknowledgement?

The answer, my friends, is the dreaded "gatekeeper" who screens the applications and makes the preliminary decision whether your application gets viewed by anyone who can say "Yes." The problem is the gatekeeper can only say "No!" and drop your application in the "circular file."

The basics:
Let's start with some basic truths:

No one gets hired from a resume.
A person only gets hired from an interview (even just a phone interview.)
The task of a resume and cover letter is to provoke enough interest to get an interview.
The task of the interview is to get to the person who has the power to say yes.
Seems simple, right? The problem is complicated by the fact the job ads you see rarely list the REAL criteria the gatekeeper will use to dump an application in the circular file.

The person who finally has the power to say yes will rarely cross-examine you on your technical expertise. He or she has two main questions in mind when you first meet:

I am sure you know the most important question in the reviewer's mind will be, "What can this guy do for me and my organization?"
The second most important question will be, "Can he fit in with the rest of us?"
The most important question in your mind will probably be,

"Can I fit in and be comfortable here?"
So if these are the most important questions, why do they list all that stuff as criteria in the ad? Those, my friends, are the "knockout" questions for the gatekeepers who can only say no. Miss one of the criteria and the gatekeeper has no leeway - your application is toast. In addition, the gatekeepers may have "secret criteria" which ought to be in the resume. If you weren't able to guess and put it in yours - more toast.

Even though we joke the gatekeepers aren't HUMAN, sometimes that's literally true, the gatekeepers are software programs which scan resumes and reject for a number of reasons ranging from important to petty (examples might be missing dates on education [a sneaky way to learn applicant age - why applications often ask for high school dates when requirement is an MBA or Phd.], gaps in employment, missing salary disclosure, poor spelling, wrong typeface, missing buzzwords , failure to list supervisor name and contact data and countless other pitiless reasons which have nothing to do with the worry the guy who can say yes has: "What can this guy do for me and my organization?")

The million dollar question:
We call it the million dollar question because it is how much you'll make over the next ten to fifteen years if you know the answer.
[i]"How do I get past the soulless gatekeeper who keeps me from interviewing with the guy who can yes?"

In my opinion, it all comes down to the same sort of research we do when tracking a root cause.

We have to identify the hiring company (tough when the ad is blind or they use an agency,)
We have to identify the individual within the company who CAN say yes.
We have to find how to contact the individual who can say yes.
We have to convince the yes guy we have the best and most desirable answer to the question, "What can this guy do for me and my organization?"
In order to give the best and most desirable answer, we have to research the company itself to make our best guess at what it needs most and whether the hiring guy is aware of it. If he's aware of it, it is just a matter of crafting our communication to him that we have the answer he wants. If the hiring guy isn't aware of what he really needs, we have to back into it, often using a question and answer format:
"Is your company experiencing a problem with customers returning shipments for quality issues? I was able to increase acceptance of shipments from 82% to 98% in one year, resulting in a net profit increase for the company of 22%! If you need an experienced problem solver, who works well in team situations, able to lead and motivate people, let's talk about how my combination of experience and education can help your company achieve similar results."

Note that nowhere do I talk about certifications, salary levels, graduation dates, previous supervisors, job titles, buzz words, or any of the myriad things the gatekeeper is trained to look for. I talk about solving a real or perceived problem. Remember, the goal of the application process is to get an interview with the guy who can say yes, NOT to provide work for gatekeepers. The guy who can say yes wants his problem solved. Only gatekeepers and bureaucrats care about the other stuff.

If you deal with CEO of a company who wants to hire you, he says to the HR folk, "I want to hire John Doe. Take care of the paperwork." After that, the gatekeepers no longer look for reasons to say no, they look for ways to say yes.

In future posts, I'll talk about ways to figure out who blind box ads are for and how to find out who has the power to say yes and how to determine the missing factor which you can supply for that company.

Questions or comments so far?

If you deal with CEO of a company who wants to hire you, he says to the HR folk, "I want to hire John Doe. Take care of the paperwork." After that, the gatekeepers no longer look for reasons to say no, they look for ways to say yes.

In future posts, I'll talk about ways to figure out who blind box ads are for and how to find out who has the power to say yes and how to determine the missing factor which you can supply for that company.

Questions or comments so far?




Dear Wes:

Thanks for starting this thread. Let me address just one point here. I have dealt with some CEOs directly, for different reasons (only once to get hired), and also several upper management folks close to the CEO. Amazingly, it is my considered opinion (based on these contacts) that they never do anything as simple as "I want to hire John Doe. Take care of the paperwork."

I wish corporate America, especially the Fortune 500 companies, actually functioned in that simple and effective manner. Instead, CEOs often simply forward things and seek action by their management team. This pushes decision making further down the ranks. In other words, one has to deal with the whole team - or the phenomenon called management by consensus - which includes hiring decisions. I have seen this happen several times. At least that's my experience and my humble opinion. Any other experiences to share?

Charmed :)

P. S. You have raised many other very good points, which will take some time to study and are extremely important for things seeking a job in the current labor market. This should be a very interesting thread and am looking forward to the discussion.

Amazingly, it is my considered opinion
. . . they never do anything as simple as "I want to hire John Doe. Take care of the paperwork."

Instead, CEOs often simply forward things and seek action by their management team . . . . or the phenomenon called management by consensus -
At least that's my experience and my humble opinion. Any other experiences to share?
An organization that does things by "consensus" is, to all intents and purposes, LEADERLESS. I would consider that one of the "problems" to be solved. (perhaps with the Board of Directors) Carly at Hewlett Packard certainly doesn't do things by "consensus." Google ("Carly Fiorina" +axe) for some interesting reading.

Simply stated: my experience is different. Leadership qualities may be grist for a different mill. The main topic is how to get past gatekeepers to interview with the person who can hire. (A large part of the research is deciding whether the target company is one you really want to work for.)

Good subject for discussion. This thread deserves a 4 star.The discussions from this thread will also provide some input on my other thread on “how to find job in the automotive market”.

Back home, four of my early jobs; we went through steps in the order:
Written aptitude test, subject test, Interview, Medical test, Psychological test, Reference check, Salary negotiation discussion, and placement. Starting from over 250 applications down to final three at Salary negotiation stage!

I was surprised that in North America significant % of the jobs are filled through “contacts”. There are advantages in this approach also. However, this approach does not give enough opportunity for the organization to see what is available outside.

Some organizations already have their internal candidates. Therefore, for policy reasons they post the job for public. One can actually feel those jobs by reading as they are so “custom crafted” to meet only that particular individual within the organization. This is a waste of time for everyone.

I think the empowerment of the “gate keepers” differ from organizations. We recently placed an advertisement for a “Software Engineer” position with requirements and responsibilities. Yet, we received couple resume from night shift security guards and Janitors! I have no idea what saw in common. Well, gatekeepers should filter this type of totally unrelated resume so that the functional manager assigned to perform the second level screening can save some time.

On the other hand, one of the candidates took every responsibility from the advertisement, linked to his/her previous experience and contribution, matched how he/she fits the requirement description and presented in the form of a tabular column. This approach had no issue getting past “gatekeepers” and functional Manager performing the second level screening. He/she got to the final interview table.

I don’t think HR and or gatekeepers should filter subject specific technical resume. We could lose a candidate who is very good at the Subject but not so good at writing attractive resume.
Regards,
Govind.

Some good insights, Govind.

The screening process (gatekeeper) is only as good as it is designed to be.

How would the gatekeeper have dealt with an honest software engineer who worked as a janitor to keep food on the table while he sought a job in his field?

In a non-technical field, how would a gatekeeper deal with an applicant for a management position who worked nights as a security guard for 2 years to pay his way through a daytime business school to get an MBA?

See, the problem of gatekeepers is akin to folks who swear by employee assessments, but never seem to have a method to take bias out of the assessment process.

If you are the applicant, you don't care about "WHY" the company uses gatekeepers, you just don't want to take a chance you'll get eliminated by one.

Consider this analogy: If you are going to play baseball, you don't study the rules and techniques of cricket. In the job hunt scheme, gatekeepers do NOT hire. Therefore, why deal with them if you can "leapfrog" over them? Don't spend time and energy figuring out how to make the gatekeeper like your application. Spend that time and energy getting to the real dealmaker. Spend more time and energy finding out what the dealmaker needs to hear or read to get his interest.

If I run an ad for Certified Quality Managers, I'm really only hoping to limit the number of resumes where I can look for someone who can solve MY problem. Even I don't really believe ONLY a CQM can fill the job. After my gatekeeper eliminates all the non-CQM folks, I'm going to eliminate a lot more. I don't care about solving the applicant's problems, so I'm going to discard any sob stories about how much the applicant needs the job or my sponsorship to stay in the country. I'm going to eliminate any that merely list the certifications with no "pizzazz" about what those certifications did to help in his last job. My gatekeepers should have eliminated all the ones with bad spelling and grammar, since I expect perfection, and poor spelling and grammar don't give me confidence the applicant will be perfect in writing reports and procedures.

What's left? The ones that tell me what they can do for me! If that list of things seem like what I need, my choice is then to pick the one that will fit in smoothly with my organization. We may send the final guy through two or three interviews to confirm that he can get along with the folks he'll have to work with, not just me.

Will I look at an application that doesn't come through the normal channels? Probably, because I value innovation and gumption - so do most top executives. In fact, any application that comes directly to me without going through my gatekeeper has a higher probability of me reading at least the first paragraph of the cover letter than ANY of the ones that go through the gatekeeper.

What does that mean? That means the first paragraph has to be a "grabber" to get my attention to read more.

Later this week, we'll discuss a basic outline for the "grabber" cover letter.

More comments?
Any particular points about the job hunting process that have you perplexed?
Govind talks about “custom crafted” job ads. Is there any value to trying to get to the front of the line for consideration? (I have some firm ideas about this, but I'd like to read more comments before I address the topic.)

One of the really infuriating things about modern day job hunting is the prevalence of job announcements which don't even give the courtesy of acknowledging applicant submissions.Blind Ads are typically used for several reasons: 1) If it is an extremely popular company, they may want to make sure you are responding to the job and not the image (I have seen this with very popular non-profit organizations, like Sierra Club and Ducks Unlimited). They want to make sure people aren't just interested in the cause (although that's important, too). 2) Some companies don't want the competition to know they are hiring (or trying to steal some of their best people). 3) On the darker side, some companies use blind ads to check on whether or not their current employees are looking for jobs. This is one of the many reasons I would caution anyone against answering a blind/blind box ad.. Obviously, if you answer your own company's ad, they aren't going to tell you, but they'll be keeping an eye on you :evidence:. 4) On a similar note, the one and only blind box ad I ever answered turned out to be a company that was looking to replace their current Quality Director and didn't want to give him a heads-up! While I might be able to understand this to some degree, what made it even worse was that they said he was the consultant who had worked hard over the last 2 yrs. setting up the QMS, had done a good job and now wanted to replace him ?!!! :confused: They offered me the job, but I declined. My thought was, if they would do this to him (after all his hard work), what would stop them from doing this to me??? Another good reason to avoid blind box ads.

It is my understanding that a blind box ad can be revealed. According to federal/postal law, if you call up the local post office where the blind box is listed (a post office in that city), they are SUPPOSED to give you the box holders' name. (I have never tried this, so I don't know if it actually works, but I understand that's the law). Of course, if you don't call, it won't be volunteered. Another method, is just to try asking. Some years ago, ASQ put out a pamphlet of job opportunities on a monthly basis (you had to sign-up for it, but it was free with membership). I recall several ads I was interested in which gave no company info, but an ASQ box identifier. I wasn't interested in relocating and the ad gave no information as to state/city. Since I didn't want to waste my time responding to an ad requiring relocation, I called the ASQ helpdesk, explained why I was asking and they answered my question.

Overall, I would caution folks from answering blind ads. My feeling is I have to completely reveal myself, so why can't the company be forthcoming with a little information, so we can both make an intelligent decision. If they can't do that, then why would I want to work for them?


:topic: On a side note, I have noticed in the last 20 years, that companies are now demanding your references, sign-off on background checks, etc. EVEN BEFORE A FIRST INTERVIEW!!!! While I have nothing to hide, I consider this a gross invasion of my privacy. Furthermore, it doesn't take into account the fact that I may decide I don't want to join the company. But I think companies have become quite arrogant and paranoid about hiring. (I thought the old method of submitting the applicant a letter stating a job "..was being offered, contingent upon references checking out." was just fine and legally gave the company an "out", if req'd). I've also noticed the demand for a complete credit check, again, prior to an interview. Again, while I have nothing to hide, I don't understand why this is necessary if I'm not in a managerial position, requiring budget handling, P.O. sign-offs, Requisitions or access to petty cash boxes (if there is such a thing anymore). If you are going for a Purchasing or VP position, I would completely agree a credit check is needed. Unfortunately, I think companies are over stepping their boundaries and will continue to get away with it because you want the job. The only plus side to these checks is, if you're background is clean, you're the one left standing and it makes you look better to the potential employer.

It would be interesting to hear from an HR Reps's point of view on this. JMHO.

Good points for everyone to keep in mind when considering answering a blind box ad, jcbodie!

As a biology student 40 years ago, I was awestruck by the sex habits of Oysters. Males and females spray millions and millions of eggs and sperm into the ocean on the off chance some will meet, fertilize, grow, and survive to spawn for the next generation. Answering a blind box ad has about the same chance for success as one of those oyster sperms or eggs. Evolution has come along with more efficient methods of fertilization; it only stands to reason there are more efficient ways of getting a job than answering a blind box ad.

Speaking of efficiency, why would anyone waste time money and energy checking out every applicant's references BEFORE interviewing the applicant?

:topic: sometimes the blind boxes are maintained by newspapers and private blind box companies which forward the responses on to the employer or recruiter, or anyone else who wants to buy an ad and get private info about the people who respond. This added layer of security prevents you from finding out who placed the ad.

IT DOES NOT PREVENT YOU FROM NARROWING THE POSSIBLE TARGETS BY USING INFO IN THE BLIND BOX AD

We'll explore how to do this in future posts.

More comments?

When I engage in conversation with folks looking for a job, I am amazed at the lack of knowledge about sources of information about job openings and even more amazed that job seekers have little knowledge of how to exploit the sources they do know about. This is an area I know a lot about, but not EVERYTHING. I welcome any additions to the list or comments about additional ways to exploit the ones we list.

In no particular order, many folks can usually list most of the following sources:

newspaper or web ads placed by the hiring company
newspaper or web ads placed by employment agents
"blind" newspaper or web ads placed by ???
signs posted in front of the hiring company
a list posted at the unemployment office or website
headhunters who call or write directly
bulletin board listings or other announcements at work
word of mouth at associations, church, neighbors, and friends
direct nepotism from a friend or relative who can "control" the hiring
formal "networking" with acquaintances, referrals, and strangers
"cold calling" companies who announce expansion, new contracts, etc. by inferring they will need additional employees
"cold calling" companies by learning a need and offering a solution
registering with one or more employment agencies
paying someone to do the job hunting for you
mass mailing (emailing or faxing) resumes to hundreds of companies indiscriminately (all machine shops; every company in a city; every company in Fortune 1000; etc.)

Got any more to add to the list? When we have a comprehensive list, we'll examine the pros and cons of each source and list some startegies to exploit each one. LIKE [/B]the coined word "startegies" better in this context than "strategies!"]

As you look at the list (and any additions we come up with), think about

whether you have ever used any of the sources
whether they were successful for you
what you would have changed in your approach
which ones have the greatest chance of getting you in front of an interviewer who can actually hire you [I](getting past a "gatekeeper")

Job hunting is like any other job:

you should do it effectively
you should do it efficiently
you should be adequately compensated for your work

Being adequately compensated means getting a viable job offer, negotiating the best possible combination of pay and benefits, and enjoying the job when you get it.

Comments so far?

We'll wait one more day for any additions to the list for job sources, then we'll tackle each one on the most efficient way to get through to the interview with the person who can actually hire you.

Once we get through the various ways to get to the interview, we'll cover how to prepare, what to say, and how to act DURING the interview.

Finally, after a successful interview, we'll cover how to negotiate the job offer when it comes, especially what to do when the written offer does NOT match the verbal one.

Any comments so far?

We'll wait one more day for any additions to the list for job sources, then we'll tackle each one on the most efficient way to get through to the interview with the person who can actually hire you.


Wes,

As a recent grad and even more recent employee, I have to add one that most may not have access to, but was quite fruitful for me - university postings. My "alma mater" (Waterloo) is known as the pioneering school for co-op education. As a result, the campus has a lot of great relationships with various companies in industry...and those companies often come hunting at campus for new recruits. I never worked for my present employer on co-op, and they've only recently started posting for co-ops, so I'm not sure why they posted for a full-time on our boards. I will say this, though - I put out about 15 applications for work after grad, and got three interviews - all with companies that posted on our school's graduating students' job board. I like those odds. :)

Again, not everyone has access to these sources. I do, as an alumnus - and the case may be similar for other alumni of any number of schools. (Oh, and they're not all entry-level postings, either - there are intermediate and senior positions as well.)

Cheers,
-R.

Wes,

As a recent grad and even more recent employee, I have to add one that most may not have access to, but was quite fruitful for me - university postings. My "alma mater" (Waterloo) is known as the pioneering school for co-op education. As a result, the campus has a lot of great relationships with various companies in industry...and those companies often come hunting at campus for new recruits. I never worked for my present employer on co-op, and they've only recently started posting for co-ops, so I'm not sure why they posted for a full-time on our boards. I will say this, though - I put out about 15 applications for work after grad, and got three interviews - all with companies that posted on our school's graduating students' job board. I like those odds. http://elsmar.com/Forums/images/smilies/smile-a1.gif

Again, not everyone has access to these sources. I do, as an alumnus - and the case may be similar for other alumni of any number of schools. (Oh, and they're not all entry-level postings, either - there are intermediate and senior positions as well.)

Cheers,
-R.You are correct! Thanks, Rachel. I really didn't think of that one, even though I have been a life member of my alumni association for about 40 years. A quick phone call assured me I could register with my alma mater's job placement office the same as a new grad.

That avenue really does cut down the odds of getting an interview with a gatekeeper (the folks who come to campus rarely have the power to hire) and subsequently with a person able to hire.

Similarly, folks who are out of work as a result of mass layoffs may have access to outplacement services - USE THEM! Those university placement offices have lots of good tips (and some hokey, outdated ones) for how to craft your resume and prepare for an interview. If any of you have ready access to a university placement office list of tips, please post it if you feel you can without violating any nondisclosure agreements.

As more and more folks return to school to finish a bachelor's or advanced degree after being in the workforce for a while, it certainly makes sense for recruiters to have a list of job openings for students with real world experience.

We'll wait one more day for any additions to the list for job sources, then we'll tackle each one on the most efficient way to get through to the interview with the person who can actually hire you.
Here is my contribution to the list of job sources and sneaking past the gatekeeper.

I have had 4 jobs in 25 years.


The first 2 jobs I had were found through sending a targeted letter/resume to the President of the company (not to the HR hiring preventer).

I work in the foundry industry and they publish a list of all members with names and job titles. So I sent a nice custom letter direct to the President of each company describing my skills. In both cases, he was just beginning to think about hiring someone when he read my letter. Result – no one else got a call, HR got told to get this guy here for an interview, and I got the job. Luck and timing is everything with this approach.

The third job I got was found from the World Wide Weird. My trick to getting past the corporate gatekeeper in this case was to make sure my cover letter/resume included every possible key word from the job description. I assumed a computer was making the first cut by brute force matching. Of course, you better be able to back up the skills you claim when if they call.

My current job, I saw a new plant being built, found them on the Web, and sent a resume and heard nothing. Then I e-mailed HR and said I would be in the area on other business, would they like to see me at no cost or obligation? They weren’t going to staff my position for a few more months, so after they talked to me, they stopped looking and I got the job. The early and aggressive bird gets the worm.

I’d also like to mention the trade magazines, and professional organizations you belong to. ASQ has a jobs list. SAE does too.

Also all those trade magazines we get for free have jobs in the back and usually on their websites. Inside Quality, Quality Digest, etc.

This is a really useful topic and I look forward to seeing more ideas.

Caster

The answer, my friends, is the dreaded "gatekeeper" who screens the applications and makes the preliminary decision whether your application gets viewed by anyone who can say "Yes." The problem is the gatekeeper can only say "No!" and drop your application in the "circular file."

The problem is complicated by the fact the job ads you see rarely list the REAL criteria the gatekeeper will use to dump an application in the circular file.


Those, my friends, are the "knockout" questions for the gatekeepers who can only say no. Miss one of the criteria and the gatekeeper has no leeway - your application is toast. In addition, the gatekeepers may have "secret criteria" which ought to be in the resume. If you weren't able to guess and put it in yours - more toast.[/color]

Even though we joke the gatekeepers aren't HUMAN, sometimes that's literally true,

"How do I get past the soulless gatekeeper who keeps me from interviewing with the guy who can yes?"[/i][/b]

Only gatekeepers and bureaucrats care about the other stuff.




Wes,

I look forward to learning some things in this thread, and you seem to be fairly well versed in the subject. Glad to see it.

But, you also seem to me to be almost obsessed with this "gatekeeper" concept -- and with painting this "gatekeeper" as a no-good who must be defeated. Can I assume you've had bad personal experiences with a "gatekeeper"?

FWIW, I never allowed anyone to filter the resumes for positions I hired for -- I looked at every one personally. I figured I owed the applicant that much. But, I was not a CEO, nor was I in a huge company.

I recently finished a 18 month job search (during which time I was unhappily employed), and found a fantastic company to land it. During the last bit of time, I read "What Color is Your Parachute?" This book discusses a lot of these types of issues. One main topic is the gatekeepers, but moreso how to go OVER them rather than just around them. It discusses focusing on your perfect career, and then on your perfect company. Next it tells you how to find someone who can get you into that company. I am REALLY summarizing here, but the beautiful thing about the book is that it walks you through all of these steps in great detail. It gives you a great opportunity for self-discovery and realization. I would recommend it to anyone.

Caster: Great! Good work! I hope when you moved on to each new job it was your choice to move. It seems you definitely got the idea of going as directly as possible to the folks who make the decision. The idea of getting in so early there is no competition is an important addition. Thanks for the input. I'm sure a lot of Covers will keep the tips in mind when they are "in the hunt" again.

Mike S. Actually, I have no idea whether I've ever been burned by a gatekeeper, but I deal weekly with folks who are at the point of tears from not getting ANY response to the applications they send off. In the late 60's and early 70's, I took a minority share in one of Chicago's largest employment agencies as part of a complicated barter involving real estate and stock loans. I made it my business to learn the business from the ground up in the event I had to foreclose on loans and run it myself. I am ashamed to say the entire trade was literally a "meat market" whether it was our company or not dealing with applicants. The worst part was seeing our own staff classify some folks as "cannon fodder" whom they would sacrifice in early interviews with hiring companies in order to make later candidates look good by comparison.

In that case, WE were the gatekeepers. If applications and resumes came in for lesser pay jobs and were flawed in any way, we never sent them on to an employer for consideration. We also never bothered to tell the applicant what was wrong. Our theory was: "There's always more applications."

On the big pay jobs, where the commission was substantial, and the qualified candidates much fewer, we would make an effort to recast the application and resume to fit the position. We would spend time "role playing" with a candidate so he would make a good impression in the interview with the hiring company. (All stuff a candidate should do on his own.)

The primary reason to avoid a gatekeeper is not "emotion," just efficiency. Caster is living proof that odds of getting a job improve when you eliminate the stage of being compared with many other candidates.

The reason I use the term "souless" is precisely because the gatekeeper, whether human or computer software, has no personal stake in whether any particular candidate ever gets hired. The gatekeeper is employed to say "no" and not "yes." The guy with the hiring power, on the other hand, usually has a stake in getting a candidate hired sooner, rather than later. He is also conscious of the cost of gatekeepers filtering through hundreds of resumes and wants to eliminate that cost as soon as possible. This is all the more reason you want to present your credentials to the hiring guy as soon as possible. Unless you are applying for a CEO position, the reality is the hiring guy is looking for the first "good fit," not the "best." You want to make sure you are the first "good fit."

I recently finished a 18 month job search (during which time I was unhappily employed), and found a fantastic company to land it. During the last bit of time, I read "What Color is Your Parachute?" This book discusses a lot of these types of issues. One main topic is the gatekeepers, but moreso how to go OVER them rather than just around them. It discusses focusing on your perfect career, and then on your perfect company. Next it tells you how to find someone who can get you into that company. I am REALLY summarizing here, but the beautiful thing about the book is that it walks you through all of these steps in great detail. It gives you a great opportunity for self-discovery and realization. I would recommend it to anyone.Yes! Dick Bolles (the author of What Color Is Your Parachute) updates this handy book every year. He also has a website where much of the material from the book is presented: http://www.jobhuntersbible.com/ If you are looking for a job or looking to hire someone, you should at least browse his website.

I met him once about 20 years ago. A very straight-shooting guy!

Good call, mitsu11!

The reason I use the term "souless" is precisely because the gatekeeper, whether human or computer software, has no personal stake in whether any particular candidate ever gets hired. The gatekeeper is employed to say "no" and not "yes." Wes,

Your employment agency stories are, well, sad -- but I believe them. The job world can be quite cutthroat which I have seen and experienced firsthand. But a newbie reading your posts might wonder if it is ever possible to get a job without first getting a degree in job hunting. Not all "gatekeepers" are soulless, unfeeling people with no stake in the hiring process. Often they are HR people whose job is to get the resumes of qualified people in front of the boss so the positions can be filled as quickly and efficiently as possible. If this person can't get good people in front of the boss, and get positions filled, he/she will be replaced, so I think they often do have a stake in the process.

I guess I'm saying that I know getting hired isn't always easy or fair , but I also know it isn't always as difficult as you are portraying. The Bell curve still applies. JMO.

A lot of folks have a problem assimilating the fact that every job has skill sets that make the job easier once mastered. The kind of skill sets are different for every job, even some jobs that may seem superficially alike (taxi driving and long-haul trucking, for example.)

In both jobs, of course, you need good driving skills. The taxi driver may need more interpersonal skills to coax larger tips out of passengers. Taxi driver may need to know more alternate routes and traffic patterns by time of day in order to get from point to point quicker to satisfy customers. Long-haul drivers have to get used to being away from home and the loneliness of driving when the driving partner is sleeping in the back of the cab. Long hours fighting off highway hypnosis can be very scary the first time your wheels hit the rumble strip on the shoulder and you shout, " How the HE** did that happen?"

Similarly, job hunting is a job with certain skill sets that make the job easier once mastered.

Here's a brief list of the skill sets I know about. Can you add more? Are you adept in all of them?

Finding or creating job openings which meet your experience and ability
Attracting the attention of the hiring person to consider your candidacy
Writing effective cover letters and resumes tailored to the target employer to enhance your chance of being selected for an interview
Finding and coaching references who will boost your candidacy when contacted by potential employer
Interviewing well
Negotiating a good pay and benefits package when considering a job offer
Overcoming "seller's remorse" when everything about the new job is not what you envisioned
Overcoming "buyer's remorse" on the part of the employer when he thinks you aren't everything he bargained for
Adapting to the different company culture when you arrive at the new job.
Preparing to negotiate a good exit package if, despite everything, the new job doesn't work out.
What is on this list that surprises you? What's missing?

There is currently another thread running about resumes. Which do you think is more important in getting you an interview:

a good cover letter?
a good resume?

Which do you think is more important in getting you an interview:

a good cover letter?
a good resume?


Cover letter, hands-down. They're not going to see your resume if they don't get past the letter.
-R.

Cover letter, hands-down. They're not going to see your resume if they don't get past the letter.
-R.Would it surprise anyone to know that many gatekeepers (especially electronic ones) only scan the resumes and never read the cover letters? Note the use of the word "optional" after cover letter.
Resume Processing provides automatic extraction and data loading of key items from emailed and scanned resumes, routing, emailing, and faxing of resumes, flexible 'fuzzysearching' of complete resume text, and storage and retrieval of resume text, cover letter (optional), and image (if scanned). Resumes may be entered into the Greentree Employment System either through email, text or Microsoft Word documents, an outsourced scanning agency (http://www.greentreesystems.com/Products/outsource.htm) or through ScanStation (http://www.greentreesystems.com/Products/productsdetail.htm#scanst).

With Greentree Resume Processing you can:

Analyze and load resumes with a single click
Process emailed and remotely scanned resumes in one consolidated workstation
Process resumes received from outsourced scanning services
Manage multiple Inboxes easily
Process text and Word email attachments
Capture source information automatically for each Inbox
Automatically link to your Greentree Employment System for thesaurus-driven resume analysis
View resume text and image at any point in the process for easy tracking and resolution
Use with POP3 or MAPI compliant email
Easy to use Windows 95/98/NT/2000 interface
Contrary to candidate intuition, gatekeepers "know" that 90% of cover letters don't include as many of the buzz words they are keyed to look for as do resumes. Ergo, why waste time scanning a cover letter?

For the applicant: on the off chance the cover letter WILL be scanned, make sure you include a lot of the buzz words applicable to the position (usually variations on buzz words contained in the job listing.)

More reason to 'leapfrog" the gatekeeper, isn't it?

Who uses the software the most?
My research seems to point to employment agencies as the first big user because they seek and sort so many resumes for different positions. Next big user would be major companies with centralized HR recruiters who recruit and do preliminary screening for all locations. Least likely: small business or free-standing division that does its own hiring.

One of my mentees likened the scanning process to the "old way" some search engines used to work to decide which website to put first in a search.

Part of the "secret" of getting past the gatekeeper is making sure ALL the buzzwords contained in the job listing are also included in your resume. This ultimately means you should spend some time editing your standard resume to "spin" it or "slant" it to make you one of the most, if not THE MOST, appealing candidate on paper so you will be called for an interview.

Here's a question to consider:

Do you have a trusted friend (spouse works, too) who reviews your resume so that it makes sense to both Quality folk and non-Quality folk?

The are countless surveys which report poor typography, poor spelling, and poor grammar are major knockout factors in companies that screen a lot of resumes.

Here's my additional tip. Have the friend read both the job listing and the resume. Have him/her mark the points of congruence and of disparity. Edit content until you reduce or eliminate the points of disparity. Time enough to deal with disparities after you get the interview, then you can present them as "enhancements" rather than let them trigger the knockout bell at the gatekeeper.

Coming this week:
Dealing with blind ads!

Does it go without saying you should get a private, personal email address for job hunting, NOT your current employer's email?

There was an article today in a newsletter that some HR folk were surprised at the number of resumes they were getting from folks using current employer's faxes and emails to transmit. One HR guy said,

"Don't they realize the sending fax often automatically imprints the company name and department on every outgoing fax?"
"Don't they realize company IT administrators can read ALL email to and from company email addresses?"
"Don't they realize prospective employers will take a dim view of folks who jobhunt on current employer's time and pocketbook?"

So, if you are a prospective employer, what's your view of a candidate who uses johndoe (at) abccorp.com (current employer) as a return email address?

So, if you are a prospective employer, what's your view of a candidate who uses johndoe (at) abccorp.com (current employer) as a return email address?
Unless it is done with the employer's permission (due to impending layoff, downsizing, plant closing, job elimination, etc.) I'd day a "dim view" would be about right! If that were the case, I'd be sure to note it in my correspondence.

Unless it is done with the employer's permission (due to impending layoff, downsizing, plant closing, job elimination, etc.) I'd day a "dim view" would be about right! If that were the case, I'd be sure to note it in my correspondence.Even then, wouldn't it be better to have a "bulletproof" email address to have continuity once the current employer's "benefit" runs out? Often the job search outlasts the "outplacement facility" granted by the soon-to-be-ex-employer.

While we have raised the concept of "outplacement," does anyone have a view on the difference (if any) between a "job coach" OR an "employment adviser" OR "employment agent"?

A fellow I respected while he was alive once sent me a list of "characteristics" for being a "career coach." I'd be interested in your comments.

The 15 Style Points
Hallmarks of the Certified Coach
The StylePoints
...one of 5 components of the Certified Coach Coaching Process
clarifiers | proficiencies | deliverables | frameworks | stylepoints
1. Hears what is actually said.
Points off for misinterpreting, filtering, reframing.
2. Responds cleanly.
Points off for adding positive spin, responding to something that wasn't said, irrelevant comments, pouncing with a solution, trying too hard.
3. Takes client's concerns seriously.
Points off for being dismissive, not getting seriousness of situation, invalidating.
4. Speaks simply.
Points off for being long winded, long stories, convolution, repeating self.
5. Is light and neutral.
Points off for being heavy, significant, charged, flat.
6. Is collaborative.
Points off for lecturing, pushes for change, being 'on,' peppering with questions, pushes point of view/agenda.
7. Communicates in full-duplex mode.
Points off for not being to speak and listen at the same time.
8. Fully expresses.
Points off for holding back, not being themselves, tries to coach 'correctly.'
9. Keeps up.
Points of for falling behind, backtracking, missing a shift the client has just made.
10. Hears between the lines.
Points off for missing dissonance, subtleties, hints.
11. Uses commonly understood words.
Points off for jargon or technical terms unfamiliar to the client.
12. Is self-assured.
Points off for meekness, timidity, bravado, arrogance.
13. Is client-centric.
Points off for self-referencing, competing for attention.
14. Is comfortable with problems.
Points off for rushing to fix, pointing mostly to the bright side, trying to make the client feel better, positive spinning, providing medicants.
15. Is "with" the client.
Points off for being distracted, preparing for response, thinking too hard.
Total score (max 75)

Any of you Covers have an experience using a "career coach"?

Did you pay from your own pocket or was it free or subsidized by someone else?

If you didn't use a Career Coach, why not?

Did you know about them or not before this thread?

Dear Covers:

Just read the following on some tips to standing out in the competitive job market.

1. Research executive biographies.
2. Check out info on foundations/charities the company may have sponsored.
3. Check out links you might have with company's suppliers and clients.
4. Try to connect seminars/lectures that you have attended with speakers from that company.

The experts recommend highlighting these connections in the cover letter.

<broken link removed>

Any of you Covers have an experience using a "career coach"?

About 5 years ago, I had some exploratory conversations with a national organization specializing in career placement and coaching.

[QUOTE=Wes Bucey]Did you pay from your own pocket or was it free or subsidized by someone else?

Career coaches are different from recruiters. With recruiters, the fee is normally paid by the hiring company. With career coaches, you are paying for their career counseling, resume writing and advice on making contacts and networking. They make no promises or guarantees on getting you a job, where it is located, how much it pays etc. The cost can be in the thousands of dollars but it is usually decided by signed contract. They do not have clients like recruiters who are trying to fill specific job openings but they claim to have contacts for networking.

The first thing they want to do is charge you a fee to update your resume then you pay additional fees for job interviewing advice and the rest of the career counseling. They make their money up front and then let you continue to visit with them or they will set up occassional interviews.

If you didn't use a Career Coach, why not?

I was warned that it can be a scam and did some Internet search on the company. It was easy to find stories on how little value they provided. After talking to some individuals who had used career coaches in the past, I decided not to use them.

Actually the free advice that you are giving is not much different than what career coaches give. I also found out that recruiters are willing to assist on resume writing and interviewing techniques for free since they make their money on recruiting an employee for their client company. If they think you can be hired based on your story, they obviously have an incentive to package you well enough to get an interview. For either the coach or the recruiter, it is still up to you to do well in the interview and sell yourself.

Bill Pflanz

Coming this week:
Dealing with blind ads!
C'mon, C'mon!! :D

Just a few points - it's been hectic for me lately, with less time to indulge my "hobby" of visiting and posting at the Cove.

Background on execs and speakers and corporate charities, etc. - all fine advice, once you get to a hiring entity and past the gatekeeper. Gatekeepers are usually clueless themselves about most of that - remember, some gatekeepers are mere software programs that parse the language in resume and cover letter. The point is: if you have info on an executive or the person who is most closely associated with the charity, or the speaker at an event, then THAT is the person who should receive your first communication, in which you ask to be put directly in touch with a hiring entity and bypass the gatekeeper.
Does it say that in the article? I don't have time to look at it today.

Career coaches:
Yep! Going to a career coach is like going to a personal trainer for your health and fitness - this guy or gal is your "paid friend."
Many of us are not lucky enough to have a close, personal friend who is frank enough to tell us our needs for improvement AND experienced and intelligent enough to give us good pointers and techniques for achieving that improvement.

Yes. Some coaches are scams, many are simply incompetent to help a particular person because the personalities don't mesh or because the coach is completely inexperienced in the field you want to go into and therefore ends up giving generic advice. In my experience the number of incompetent "coaches" far outnumbers the scams. Consider this - a scammer has to be relatively smart to maintain the scam. In fact, most scams are merely "overpricing," versus outright fraud. I am aware of a national franchise of "employment advisers" who are consistently the subject of complaints on the internet and better business bureaus, but this outfit has been in existence since the time I was a major stockholder in an employment agency in the late 60's and early 70's. I don't apologize for them, but I do say I have talked to several of their so-called "victims" and can say factually they went into the transaction with a completely different interpretation of what they would receive than of the actual list of services as interpreted by anyone with a clear mind. Here's one example: the victim paid $3,600, expecting a guaranteed $150,000/yr job as vp of public relations "because he thought it was a cool job with long lunches and attendance at lots of society events." the first major problem was that the guy was practically unintelligible in oral communication in English, with an incredibly thick accent. His written communication was riddled with grammar and spelling errors. He looked and dressed like he'd been sorting garbage in the videos when he was told to come in dressed like for an interview to go through the mock interviews with the "advisor." The crowning touch was that his previous three jobs had been for cousins who owned motels where he was employed as a desk clerk. Two cousins had fired him because he "alienated" their guests. He quit the third cousin because the cousin wouldn't put him on the day shift. In short, the guy was completely ill-equipped to be a vp of PR, but he thought he was entitled to "specific performance." The attorney who asked me to sit in on the interview prior to taking the case asked the client what he thought of his performance on the videos the advisor had sent home with him for review. The guy launched into a diatribe of how unfair the questions were, even though he had been provided with a list of what the questions would be so he could prepare. The lawyer said to me privately after the interview that the best he could hope for would be the advisor would be so embarrassed for taking money from such a fool that he would return a least part of it. I told the lawyer that if he got ANY money, I'd buy him dinner. I further told the lawyer that if he ended up getting sued by his would-be client for not doing better, I'd buy him another dinner. That was four years ago, no dinners paid yet.Sometimes, not always, you can find good, but much less expensive (even free), career coaches at places like 40+, SCORE, YMCA, unemployment bureau, your own college, your church. Use my guidelines above to determine whether you are getting value-added service or not, regardless of how much you pay.

Recruiters help "polish" a good resume to target the needs of their client, they do NOT even bother with a bad resume. In a sense, they've already decided to groom the candidate and they just want to close the deal with their client. They will not groom a poor candidate, because their livelihood depends on repeat business from satisfied clients and good referrals to other clients. Remember, the client is the HIRER, not the HIREE.

The kind of information I put out hit or miss in a venue like the Cove really only hints at what to explore in your own situation. Without knowing your personal abilities and experience and seeing your demeanor in a one-on-one situation, I won't know if you need coaching on how to handle yourself in the "small talk" which endears you to an interviewer or whether you come off as too aggressive or too wishy-washy. Without reading your cover letter and your resume and looking at the background you have on the company and the position, I can NOT make a value judgment about your cover letter and resume in relation to that specific case. The point is: you need a good, experienced, but dispassionate friend who can review the letter and resume for EVERYTHING, including grammar, spelling, tone, content, typography, etc. For some of us, we may have to assemble a "team" to provide all that review. I have repeatedly said, "finding a new job is a job all by itself." All the tools folks use in making their jobs successful are also needed in making the job of job hunting successful. If you need a team to help you, assemble one to the best ability of your field of contacts and pocketbook. In my opinion, if you have a $100,000/yr job and want to move to a $200,000/yr one, you may have to "buy" a career coach who has the skills to help you make that step. If you are currently unemployed and facing eviction, you obviously need to target less expensive career help, but then you probably aren't aiming at the limited number of $200,000/yr jobs, but more likely a position in the REAL WORLD and the expertise of career coaches at the Y or church or unemployment offices may help you get past your current snags.

BLIND ADS: sorry, still trying to "tighten" and "poka yoke" the advice. I haven't forgotten, just trying to prioritize.

Finally, let's tackle the blind ad.

Define your terms!
Blind: Blind ads describe job openings but don't indicate the employer's name or address. The addresses listed are usually post office boxes. There are legitimate reasons why employers may post blind ads: They may want to fill a position not yet announced within the company or to reduce the number of responses to the advertisement. But sometimes these ads are used by employment or sales agencies to create a pool of names. Approach blind ads with caution.

There are also a lot of illegitimate reasons - the illegitimate ones are often more illuminating that the legitimate ones.

Up front: It is my opinion that some (not all) blind box ads can identify the employer organization with a little research and tenacity on the candidate's part. If so, and you think you'd like to work for that organization, ignore the blind ad submission and target your cover letter and resume to the hiring entity you identify with your research. Why send in a resume to be one among many in the slush pile at the blind ad address?

If careful reading of the ad indicates it is an employment agency, run, don't walk for an exit! Why? Agencies exist for one purpose - to process candidates for employers. The most successful agencies are the ones which process the most candidates (like throwing spaghetti against the wall to see if any sticks.) The best agencies want their names known because it helps them get more clients and more candidates when they have name recognition. There is something seriously wrong when an agency pays for blind ads.
What could be wrong?
The job doesn't really exist - they are performing espionage to see if anyone is unhappy in a current job so they can go in to the hiring people at that sucker's employer and offer up candidates for HIS job.
They are doing research to learn about prevailing wages for a job function.
they don't have an exclusive and don't want other agencies "poaching" their job listings
They may not be an "agency" but rather a "career counseling" outfit that will hustle the sucker to say "you could be a great candidate for the job, but you need some polishing . . ."So what are some clues that the employer is the real issuer of the ad and he has a "legitimate" reason for hiding identity?

First, and foremost, the only "legitimate reason" to hide identity may be because the company is going to fire someone, but they want to have a candidate in the wings to fill in once they escort the other guy off the premises.

Other reasons companies give are not really valid:
Don't want to tip off competitors - give me a break! If the company is that important and powerful a competitor, anyone who cares will already know from other sources what's going on, they don't need to read want ads.
Don't want to disrupt our business with phone calls, etc. - equally silly! They bite off their nose because research shows the most highly qualified candidates categorically refuse to answer blind ads. Do you really want to work for a company that shoots for mediocre candidates on the theory your resume will stand out?The pure reason any company runs a blind ad regardless of what lie they use is that they don't want to be bothered with the trouble and expense of saying "no" to unsuccessful candidates. Think of it! - they don't have enough respect for candidates who answer their ad to invest 23 cents in a postcard or 1 cent in an email that says, "Sorry!" after they've had the candidate invest a lot more in mailing a hard copy of cover letter and resume to a blind box. Certainly that doesn't inspire MY confidence in that being the kind of employer I want to work for.

So after all that, you are desperate and want to explore the idea of answering a blind ad.

First, read the ad carefully. Here's one from Chicago Tribune:
Location: US-IL-Chicago
Base Pay: N/A
Employee Type: Full-Time Employee
Industry: Automotive - Motor Vehicles - Parts
Manufacturing
Manages Others: Yes
Job Type: Management
Manufacturing
QA - Quality Control
Req'd Education: None
Req'd Experience: More than 5 Years
Req'd Travel: Negligible
Relocation Covered: No
MACHINE SHOP
Quality Manager
Machine shop in Elgin area is seeking an individual for the role of Quality Manager. Knowledge of SPC, DOE, TS16949 is required. Must have 5 years experience in precision machining of automotive parts and be familiar with 8D, FMEA, PPAP and Six Sigma. Individual must demonstrate strong analytical, process improvement, and written and verbal communication skills.
Fax resumes to 847-214-8428 or email [Click here for email]
(mailto:JZ5836G94WGYQ6KX8G_cbcb_ct~ctrct1002^JR@apply.careerbuilder.com?subject=Careerbuilder: Ref.38582)
Web CB38582
Source - Chicago Tribune

REQUIREMENTS
Please refer to the Job Description to view the requirements for this job
Keywords: Skilled Labor- machine, CNC, EMD ISO, SurfCAM, Metal, QA, QC, quality control, quality assurance, ISO 9000, ISO 9001, QS9000, SPC statistical process, stats, statistics, AS9000, AS9100 TQM total quality management, six sigma
This one gives two clues to narrow the list of potential targets.
(Note I have NOT followed through on this research)
First, a fax number is given. A smart researcher can ferret through some industrial directories listing machine shops doing automotive work in the Elgin area and see if the fax number matches any listings.

Personally, I have a hunch this is an employment agent, not the company directly - all the more reason to ferret out and send your application directly to a decision maker at the company. (My clue to "agent" versus direct employer is the vague use of a 3rd party designation: "machine shop" and deliberate omission of a name for "attention to" - not even "Bob" or "Sally" No bright employer would want job applications coming in on the same machine that accepts requests for quotes. An absolute dead giveaway of the "agent" status is the listing in this internet version of the Tribune ad of all the "buzz words" keywords in blue, especially the inclusion of the AS9100 (aerospace, not automotive) reference

Second, you can send a blind fax to the number - some fax machines are set to show who they belong to as well as the phone number when they complete the "handshake" between faxes.

You can ask friends and acquaintances in various trades (machine tools, cutting fluids, calibration houses, steel and nonferrous sales, etc.) if they know which shop it might be.

Even if you can't identify the exact shop, you can narrow it down to a small list and make some phone calls to find out if all the shops on your list have current QMs.

Once you have narrowed the list, you can do research to find out owners, CEOs, etc. who would make or be in on such an employment decision and send them a letter offering your candidacy and never mention the blind ad.

I can guarantee you if this is an agent ad, he does not have exclusive right to fill the position, else he would not be so secretive. He is worried some other agent will slip in behind his back and fill the position.

Are you beginning to see the concept about blind ads? They don't have much value for job candidates under the best of circumstances. Even if you manage to find out who the fax machine belongs to the odds are it is a double blind belonging to a non-exclusive agent who wasn't persuasive enough to get an exclusive contract with the employer. Is that really the best lead-in to a company? (Somebody the company doesn't trust enough to give an exclusive contract?)

Just for laughs, notice there is no reference to any ASQ certification or Six Sigma Black Belt.

Let's hear your comments!

Added in edit: It has been pointed out that you can "google" the fax number to see if it bounces up with a lot of hits - a major clue it might be an employment agency when you follow the hits. Occasionally, you may strike gold and discover it belongs to a real company, and, once identified, you can sidestep the "slush pile" of blind responses and target your pitch without referring to the blind ad!

Has this thread run its course?

If so, c'est la vie - time to move on to something else.

Looks like it pretty much has had its day. :agree1:

This is a very good article for ASQ members to read in the November issue of Quality Progress. (available via internet to members) http://www.asq.org/pub/qualityprogress/past/1104/qp1104career.pdf

How To Handle References by Russ Westcott
Russ's brief bio:
RUSSELL T. WESTCOTT is president of the Offerjost-Westcott Group (OWG), a division of R.T. Westcott & Associates, Old Saybrook, CT. OWG specializes in providing worklife planning, guidance and coaching. He co-edited The Certified Quality Manager Handbook, second edition, the Certified Quality Manager Section Refresher Training Course, The Quality Improvement Handbook and Stepping Up to ISO 9004:2000. Westcott is an ASQ Fellow, certified quality auditor and certified quality manager. He serves on the Thames Valley Section’s executive board as newsletter editor and job leads chair.Russ gives very practical advice on the "care and feeding" of references - when to give them, when not. If you are NOT an ASQ member, but think you need the refresher on management of your references in the job hunt process, send me a PM and I'll send you a "summary" of what Russ has to say. There is NO "50 words or less" blurb from QP: the most interesting thing from my point of view is that Russ acknowledges the odds are the "reference checker" is probably not the person who makes the hiring decision.

Wes do you work for Bernard Haldane Associates ?????

Wes do you work for Bernard Haldane Associates ?????Short answer - no!

Since Haldane (http://www.bernardhaldane.com/) has been around since long before I first owned a substantial portion of the largest employment agency/professional recruiter in Chicago (then - out of business now, after I got my money back out) and is still around after, I am certainly aware of who they are and what they do.

There is absolutely nothing in the Haldane repertoire which you cannot get for free or almost free from the internet, state unemployment, YMCA, churches, friends, etc. Google the internet and you can find dozens, if not hundreds of complaints against Haldane. My read: most of the "victims" were like victims of successful confidence games anywhere: they expected "something too good to be true."

This thread alone contains more useful information than Bernie and Jack and any number of the Haldane leaders I've met or heard about over the years normally give to a client for thousands of dollars in up-front fees.

Here's a blurb from Haldane:

Your successful transition is our goal. Here is how we help:

We evaluate your experience to determine what you offer to the job market.
We define the career path that is best for you given the many variables at play in today’s job market.
We define your experience in various ways that will help you market your strengths effectively. This includes CV’s or resumes and collateral materials used as a component of your job search.
We provide the one-on-one coaching necessary to support your interviewing and negotiating for job offers.
We provide web based research tools to empower your search efforts.
We establish a long-term relationship that continues after a successful career change to help with your future career planning.
In my opinion, if you are that insecure or unaware of your personal positive and negative attributes that you need to hire a Haldane associate to figure it out for you, you certainly aren't the kind of candidate I would look for in a $100,000 annual position.

What on earth in what I have written so far could give you any idea that I would agree to be part of a Haldane operation?http://elsmar.com/Forums/images/smilies/confused.gif

What on earth in what I have written so far could give you any idea that I would agree to be part of a Haldane operation?http://elsmar.com/Forums/images/smilies/confused.gif [/QUOTE]


The term "gatekeeper". I have had some experiance with them and thats one of the catch phrases they use. Sorry I did not mean to offend you.

What on earth in what I have written so far could give you any idea that I would agree to be part of a Haldane operation?http://elsmar.com/Forums/images/smilies/confused.gif

The term "gatekeeper". I have had some experiance with them and thats one of the catch phrases they use. Sorry I did not mean to offend you.Bernie didn't create the term "gatekeeper." That you might think he did is regrettable.

FWIW: my OED says first recorded use of the term was in 1572. I recall reading Disraeli (British PM before US Civil War), who used the term several times. The usage certainly predates Bernie Haldane.

(Incidentally, Bernie was a gracious, intelligent guy. I think much of the apparent ill will toward the organization has accrued since his time. His original thesis was innovative for its time. He contrasted with employment agencies in the post WWII era because he set his operation up to work for (with) the candidate versus for the employer. For a long period of time, employment agencies used to require candidates to sign contracts to pay fees if the candidate got a job through an agency referral, but the agency didn't bother to tell the client he was collecting from the employer, too. Bernie was at least straight up in that he only took a flat fee from the candidate. The value of the service versus the fee is what causes most of the contention today.)

thanks for the clarification

What on earth in what I have written so far could give you any idea that I would agree to be part of a Haldane operation?

Wes,

It must have been something since Haldane came to my mind also when I was reading this thread. Although you have given some good advice on how to prepare a resume and do job interviews, it does nothing to tell someone where the available jobs are. To get past the gatekeeper, you first have to find the gate.

An executive recruiter is getting paid to find someone to fill a position and has a Rolodex (or its modern equivalent) of contacts as possible candidates. I doubt if executives are searching for job advice here.

You have given the negatives of blind ads. Internet job search sites get thousands of resumes so they are not a good resource. Networking is great but finding a job that way is a random event since the job has to be available and you have to have the qualifications. Being methodical may be the right way to find a job but it does not help to make the house payment as it rapidly approaches due time. Having a perfect resume and good interview techniques does not help when you cannot find somewhere to apply for a job.

Bill Pflanz

Right, Bill. You make some good points.

The curse of a Forum venue, even one as liberal as the Cove in allowing post length, is that it is difficult to explore the full spectrum of the "job hunt" in one thread.

I recognized that early on and have tried to restrict THIS thread to the subset of getting to the guy who can hire you ONCE you have identified a target company through any other means.

I have given referral to Dick Bolles on at least one occasion in this thread
Yes! Dick Bolles (the author of What Color Is Your Parachute) updates this handy book every year. He also has a website where much of the material from the book is presented: http://www.jobhuntersbible.com/ If you are looking for a job or looking to hire someone, you should at least browse his website.

I met him once about 20 years ago. A very straight-shooting guy!
His site is sometimes difficult to navigate, but he does address some of the concerns you put forth.

If after looking through his site (or any others), you have questions or need interpretation of something, feel free to ask me. If I don't have an answer, I can probably help you find one.

I started this thread when I was in one of my "mentoring modes" after going through a spate of folks bemoaning the fact they couldn't seem to get noticed when answering job ads.

It is not my intention to challenge Dick Bolles for "job mentor of the year." He and several others do an excellent job. I know a lot about the process, having been in it as agent, employer, and employee. I like to think I bring an analytical approach to the process (akin to problem solving in the Quality field.) If nothing else, I hope readers of this thread will think about solving hunt in the same way they think about solving a problem in the Quality field - methodically, with a constant eye on budget and return on investment.

In regard to your statementI doubt if executives are searching for job advice here.
. . .
Being methodical may be the right way to find a job but it does not help to make the house payment as it rapidly approaches due time. Having a perfect resume and good interview techniques does not help when you cannot find somewhere to apply for a job.-Bill PflanzI DO BELIEVE there is a consistent and methodical way to find (or create) a job opening. Dick Bolles certainly spends a lot of time covering it in his book and web site. I'm sorry to say it means making tough choices and compromises in one's entire life. It means getting from friends, free resources, and sometimes even PAID consultants, an oftentimes brutally honest assessment of the job hunter's skills, talents, and shortcomings. In over 40 years of business, the most common cause I see for job dissatisfaction (including lack of a job) is an unrealistic understanding of one's current skill and, most importantly, potential for compatible employment.

Year after year, I see folks tied to "drudge" jobs who could easily be doing more exciting and fulfilling work. They remain because they simply don't realize their own potential. They fear criticism, so they don't open themselves up to an honest appraisal of their abilities. They fear the "unknown" of change, so they don't even position themselves to qualify for a different job.

Deming said, "Remove fear!" It applies to all of us.

[QUOTE=Wes Bucey]Right, Bill. You make some good points.

So now he understands...

We've pretty much exhausted the ins and outs of gatekeepers. Any suggestions for a new thread connected with job hunting from either side of the desk? I know there are a lot of employers (and even professional recruiters) out there who think they know how to get the best candidate, but they make some basic errors. What would you say to a thread on how to be a smart candidate hunter?

:topic: Have you noticed how few recruiters come here where they could have a free targeted market to list jobs and recruit candidates? Why do you suppose they are so few and far between?

We've pretty much exhausted the ins and outs of gatekeepers. Any suggestions for a new thread connected with job hunting from either side of the desk? I know there are a lot of employers (and even professional recruiters) out there who think they know how to get the best candidate, but they make some basic errors. What would you say to a thread on how to be a smart candidate hunter?

:topic: Have you noticed how few recruiters come here where they could have a free targeted market to list jobs and recruit candidates? Why do you suppose they are so few and far between?
I don't supopse they know about this forum, and possibly wouldn't feel they have time to plumb here for people. They could learn a lot about their clients by reading these posts.

Too bad to lose this opportunity, too, because it would be very helpful for all the stakeholders in this process. This of course includes myself, since I have very often felt I would be happy to find another position in Quality. My current teaching gig is really not what I can stay in as a new career. I'm just not the right stuff to be teaching special ed adolescents forever.

Then again, I wonder if I have said too much here? Perhaps my outspoken submissions would make me unattractive as a candidate. I wonder about that.

The idea that prospective recruiters and employers would FEAR an outspoken candidate is really a sad commentary of employment procedures, isn't it?

Given the probability that many employers and recruiters are afraid, I see the makings of the equivalent of a perpetual motion machine - we figure out a way to harness a generator to Deming's grave and let him generate power as he spins in his grave.

Yep, Jennifer - your wonderment is part of the whole issue of employers and recruiters using the wrong criteria to select candidates that will benefit the organization.
Wrong criteria = wrong candidate.
Simple equation. Why is it so difficult for employers and recruiters to see?

Any other ideas for a fresh thread in this Forum?

The idea that prospective recruiters and employers would FEAR an outspoken candidate is really a sad commentary of employment procedures, isn't it?

Given the probability that many employers and recruiters are afraid, I see the makings of the equivalent of a perpetual motion machine - we figure out a way to harness a generator to Deming's grave and let him generate power as he spins in his grave.

Yep, Jennifer - your wonderment is part of the whole issue of employers and recruiters using the wrong criteria to select candidates that will benefit the organization.
Wrong criteria = wrong candidate.
Simple equation. Why is it so difficult for employers and recruiters to see?

Any other ideas for a fresh thread in this Forum?

The Deming generator thought, poor man, made me laugh out loud although I have actually heard that one before. :lmao: We could solve the world's energy troubles.

I needed that, thank you! I have had plenty of chances to feel like a defect--though I decided there is simply a good deal of competition for what I applied for, and likely it's a life journey matter after all. Such thinking is cold comfort, though.

I can't think of any specific questions that would help me now. I just don't see much promise in the employment market out here at present, so I've basically pulled back from the process and concentrated on my current customers, the kids. I'm always thinking about the future, though, and looking for the crack through which I can run like water.

Sometimes, I have an opportunity to spend an evening away from folks who live in the world of Quality. Frequently, we (the folks from the real world and I) run into a Quality glitch such as overbooking at a popular restaurant or poor sound system at a theater or even poor food and service when we stop for an early breakfast after a late night.

My companions know me as kind of perfectionist, not to mention downright "persnickety." They are amazed when I don't fly off the handle at the hapless employee who happens to be present when the glitch occurs.

I always (usually even patiently) explain to my friends that the fault is not the employee's but rests squarely on the shoulders of management who were supposed to supply the employee with the proper tools and training to meet our requirements. I tell them my (our) choice is to determine just how inconvenienced I (we) am (are) compared to the time and effort it will take me (us) to ferret out someone who can actually provide a remedy or compensation for the situation.

So I take the occasion to lead my companions through a problem solving scenario. I swear to you it as eye-opening for them as the red bead experiment is for managers who had lived by the reward and punishment system for employees, never understanding about the variation inherent in the process.

So, how does this seeming digression relate to the job hunt?
Sometimes, when you are the candidate, you have to craft your cover letter and "lead" your interview to provide that "awakening" for the person with the power to hire. In fact, this guy may have only a vague idea of what he really seeks when he asks, "What's in it for me?" I don't know that prospective employer, but I know that you have a better chance of getting and keeping his attention if you can help him understand how "glory" will rain down on him, personally, for having been the guy who hired you. This means you will find enough in your research about him and the company to include phrases such as:
"I'd love to work with you and your team so we can really make a giant contribution to the bottom line of the organization and all earn big bonuses."
or
"I can help you show an immediate savings which will be double my salary. I'm pretty sure we can do even better the following year. It's going to be exciting working with you to generate these savings."

The important thing is start your research where most folks stop.
Most folks stop when they identify an opening. Then they go "brain dead" and send the same resume and cover letter they sent to 100 other companies.

It's not enough to just know the name of the guy you need to interview with, you need to know something about him, his organization, his customers, and his competitors, so you can craft an application and interview (when you get one) which will go right to the pressure points with your offer to solve problems they may not have recognized they had until you articulate them.

The important thing is start your research where most folks stop.
Most folks stop when they identify an opening. Then they go "brain dead" and send the same resume and cover letter they sent to 100 other companies.

It's not enough to just know the name of the guy you need to interview with, you need to know something about him, his organization, his customers, and his competitors, so you can craft an application and interview (when you get one) which will go right to the pressure points with your offer to solve problems they may not have recognized they had until you articulate them.Perfectly true. Any such information helps, and the cover letter should always be adapted to fit the application in question. Employers can smell a standard letter from miles away, and they want to see people wishing to work for them, not just getting any job....

/Claes

So, how does this seeming digression relate to the job hunt?
Sometimes, when you are the candidate, you have to craft your cover letter and "lead" your interview to provide that "awakening" for the person with the power to hire. In fact, this guy may have only a vague idea of what he really seeks when he asks, "What's in it for me?" I don't know that prospective employer, but I know that you have a better chance of getting and keeping his attention if you can help him understand how "glory" will rain down on him, personally, for having been the guy who hired you. This means you will find enough in your research about him and the company to include phrases such as:
"I'd love to work with you and your team so we can really make a giant contribution to the bottom line of the organization and all earn big bonuses."
or
"I can help you show an immediate savings which will be double my salary. I'm pretty sure we can do even better the following year. It's going to be exciting working with you to generate these savings.".

Very seldom do you find a prospective employer who is visionary enough to have even a vague idea of what they want. Has anyone ever had the hiring manager say their main criteria for the job was improving the bottom line or earning big bonuses for them? Most of the time they are up to their ears in problems, desperately need a body to get the work done and, oh by the way, want you as cheaply as possible. When your best person just left to take a better job, your first priority becomes finding a replacement so you can keep things going. Hopefully you can find someone as good as the last but you won't find that out in a 1-2 hour interview.

It's not enough to just know the name of the guy you need to interview with, you need to know something about him, his organization, his customers, and his competitors, so you can craft an application and interview (when you get one) which will go right to the pressure points with your offer to solve problems they may not have recognized they had until you articulate them.

That is a big challenge to do what you have described. You can do some research in advance but there is a limit especially in getting to know the hiring manager. You basically have the same problem as the hiring manager. You have 1-2 hours to figure out what their problems are and what you could provide as a solution. Considering our training in root cause analysis that does not sound like something that will happen. The best that you can do is show the skills you have and find out if they have a use for them. If they have no idea what you are talking about then it is time to move on.

Bill Pflanz

It's not enough to just know the name of the guy you need to interview with, you need to know something about him, his organization, his customers, and his competitors, so you can craft an application and interview (when you get one) which will go right to the pressure points with your offer to solve problems they may not have recognized they had until you articulate them.

This brings some of the concepts covered in the book "Work with Passion - How to do what you love for a living" by Nancy Anderson. She stresses the need to research organizations and the people in the oraganization that may be the one involved with hiring you. She explains in her book that approaching these people as an information gathering and not as a employment interview is the key to getting in the door and past the gatekeeper. This is truly a book worth a look at.

Mooser

This brings some of the concepts covered in the book "Work with Passion - How to do what you love for a living" by Nancy Anderson. She stresses the need to research organizations and the people in the oraganization that may be the one involved with hiring you. She explains in her book that approaching these people as an information gathering and not as a employment interview is the key to getting in the door and past the gatekeeper. This is truly a book worth a look at.

Mooser

Great advice from you and Ms. Anderson. Now tell us specifically how we do that. Ms. Anderson makes her living selling books on how to get hired because that makes her more money than using the information herself. Don't want to be a cynic but she is not saying anything that I cannot get for free from this board or in the Sunday paper employment articles.

If I have access to a company phone book or know someone at the company then I agree I could call someone but all that would do is help me find out if they had or expect to have a job opening or are willing to create one for you. It may work but it sounds like a random way to find a job. See my previous posting about why that may not be a good strategy.

If we survey Covers I bet we find out that almost everyone found a job by applying for an open position. I guess they could get in the door as a consultant or contractor but even that happens because the employer is looking to fill a need.

Bill Pflanz

Great advice from you and Ms. Anderson. Now tell us specifically how we do that. Ms. Anderson makes her living selling books on how to get hired because that makes her more money than using the information herself. Don't want to be a cynic but she is not saying anything that I cannot get for free from this board or in the Sunday paper employment articles.

If I have access to a company phone book or know someone at the company then I agree I could call someone but all that would do is help me find out if they had or expect to have a job opening or are willing to create one for you. It may work but it sounds like a random way to find a job. See my previous posting about why that may not be a good strategy.

If we survey Covers I bet we find out that almost everyone found a job by applying for an open position. I guess they could get in the door as a consultant or contractor but even that happens because the employer is looking to fill a need.

Bill Pflanz

Hey, This gal has run her own Employment Consulting in CA and has been doing this for 20-30 yrs. She advises using the techniques used by reporters and many other people who need this information... Yes use the phone directory but also the internet, friends, Chamber of Comerce and any other sources that you can to get the information.
What I really found helpful: Is the job you are seeking the right job for you?. I think the whole book is " a golden nugget".

Mooser

mooser is apparently getting the idea I want to convey:
In today's world, it is NOT ENOUGH to do things the way that the majority of people have always done - you must be proactive and make your own opportunities, not just wait around for one to come along.

I was aware of Nancy Anderson's book, but I have not read it because the reviews I saw seemed to indicate it echoed information I already knew.

I do not mean to imply here that you have no hope of getting a satisfactory job using the old "tried and true" methods. I do mean to state positively and in no uncertain terms that you will increase your odds of getting a satisfactory job in shorter time if you incorporate some or all of the tips contained in this thread and in books like Bolles' What Color Is Your Parachute?

Life has changed drastically in the 40+ years I've been in business. Transnational outsourcing of jobs may be the single most important factor in the job hunt today. You are not just competing against John Doe or Jane Roe for a job, you are competing against slick, well-financed organizations and even whole countries who want to capture not only YOUR prospective job, but every job in that division or company. These folks are not fools - they are smart, aggressive, and absolutely relentless.

You have to set yourself apart from the flock of sheep being led to slaughter by being imaginative and aggressive in your hunt. Think of it in the same mode as a hunter in Paleolithic times - if you are not successful in the hunt, you and your family don't eat.

Instead of looking at reasons why my suggestions and those of Bolles, Anderson, et al won't work, think of how they might work in your situation. It's OK to be realistic, but pessimism is self-defeating.

P.S. If you use any of the tips from this thread and they help you get a job, I'd sure appreciate hearing about it (either in the thread or by PM)

Be forewarned this is :soap:

The impression that is still being given in this thread is that you are unemployed because you are stupid, passive, not trying and unimaginative. I am enough of an optimist that I don't believe that there are international organizations and countries out there that are leaving the United States in the dust.

What has changed in the last 40 years is that Japan, Germany, Russia and others have recovered from wars and for the last 25 years have been competing on a more equal foot with the U.S. rather than it dominating the world economy. Deming and Juran went to Japan to teach and help and it worked. That makes it more difficult but not hopeless. Honda just announced that they were adding jobs at their Marysville Ohio plant using American workers. Is that a problem for GM? Probably but the net loss to the American worker may be zero.

I agree the odds are that you will find a job if you use some or all of the suggestions from Bolles et al are giving since they have come up with so many ideas that even if you never read their books you probably stumbled across one of their techniques that worked for you. I don't see the U.S. workers lying down and dying but changing with the times. Unless the concept of normal distributions is no longer valid, the rest of world does not have a higher share of smart, imaginative, relentless people than in the U.S.

Bill Pflanz

Any other ideas for a fresh thread in this Forum?

I'd like to know if anyone moonlights. By moonlighting, I'm referring to working at another job which may be totally different from your "day" job or quality job. Does anyone work as a waiter on weekends, provide consultant services, or coach youth sports, etc?

What it really boils down to is how do you find a job you enjoy which will also supplement your income? If no one else is interested in this idea, fine. But most of the people I know work somewhere else in addition to their 'steady' work and not always because of financial needs. I think it could be explored but maybe in a different thread?

Just an idea.:2cents:

I intend to make an unemotional statement about Walmart here. There is a high probability it make strike some sensibilities as inflammatory and others as "so what else is new."

Walmart is a huge economic engine which buys goods and services in a global market. Walmart has two primary avenues to continue growth and dominance in every market it enters:

It buys primarily on "lowest price" decisions
It hires primarily only folks to fill low skill, low wage jobs, regardless of the innate skill of the worker.
To support these two avenues, it forces suppliers (through forcing an economic decision) to outsource manufacture of most goods in low wage countries. The Walmart statement to suppliers is simple:

"We can only buy from you if you meet this price point.
You cannot possibly meet this price point in a relatively high wage country like Canada, Germany, Great Britain, France, USA.
Therefore, you will probably have to establish manufacturing in a low-wage country to continue to be our supplier."
http://elsmar.com/Forums/images/smilies/offtopic-d2.gif Factoid: some activists are claiming 80% of Walmart non-food items are manufactured in low wage countries. There is supposedly a well-researched report coming out this month which will support or deny that claim.

The other half of the Walmart success equation is that it must become the dominant retail outlet in each market it enters. It does this by simply underpricing competition with "loss leaders" until it drives them out of business. Soon after, the loss leaders go back to the primary purpose of drawing customers in the door where they are subtly attracted to the higher profit items.

Walmart spends a lot of money and effort on public relations to soften its image as a behemoth organism that swallows everything in its path. The fact remains most of the money spent in a Walmart store leaves the community, never to return.I'm trying not to cast Walmart in an evil light, only to point out that outsourcing is real. It is growing. It is organized and funded by brains and money. American brains are included in the brains that drive the outsourcing engine. This outsourcing engine is documented. It is not a figment of my fevered imagination. I am not some Jeremiah or Chicken Little, I'm a pragmatic businessman who is trying to give folks a realistic path to follow.

I'm aware there is a nascent movement afoot in both China and India to spin off Quality Associations of their own. ASQ has tried to counter this with a joint venture with the Chinese. How long might it be before China or India or Malaysia or the like decide they can do just as well or better on their own than with an alliance or partnership with ASQ?

If we try to pretend that somehow "good old Yankee knowhow" will pull us through, we are just hastening our own demise, unless we are proactively part of the Yankee (or German or Scandanavian or French, or etc.) knowhow and create pockets of opportunity for ourselves and our companies.

Bottom line: just because this advice may be repeated in dozens of venues doesn't make it any less good advice. I see lots of messages that smoking is bad for one's health, but I still see teenage girls standing across the street from the high school, smoking. Just because some members of the target market refuse to take advice to quit or never start smoking, does that invalidate the advice about not smoking? Why should that fact that some choose to ignore or belittle the job advice in this thread and those books invalidate the advice for others?

I'd like to know if anyone moonlights. By moonlighting, I'm referring to working at another job which may be totally different from your "day" job or quality job. Does anyone work as a waiter on weekends, provide consultant services, or coach youth sports, etc?

What it really boils down to is how do you find a job you enjoy which will also supplement your income? If no one else is interested in this idea, fine. But most of the people I know work somewhere else in addition to their 'steady' work and not always because of financial needs. I think it could be explored but maybe in a different thread?

Just an idea.:2cents:Let me suggest that you do start such a thread, little__cee, and that you couple it with a poll.

I think I'd be interested in knowing first what percentage moonlight for money and what percentage "volunteer" at something equivalent to moonlighting or at a task which would normally earn a wage. Thus, hobbies or being a volunteer as a ASQ Section officer wouldn't count, but cooking or serving meals in a homeless shelter would. Same thing for tutoring folks in a skill or trade.

Then, obviously, we'd like comments beyond the metrics.

An acquaintance of mine, Jim Ziegler, publishes a peripatetic newsletter targeted at skilled professionals who work "on contract" for various organizations. Suffice to say, if you are a contract worker or contemplating becoming one, you should browse his present and past newsletters plus some other of his publications to orient yourself within the business.

CAUTION: Jim sells a service. I am neither endorsing nor criticizing the service. Make up your own mind about that. I thought this article from his latest newsletter was worth a look and had some relevance to our general topic of enhancing your prospects for getting hired.

Thus said, here's the link to
FEATURED TOPIC: Your Strongest Single Credential Is Your Reputation

http://www.pacepros.com/CENewsletter_html/cenewsletter_04number03.html#featuredtopic

This is just a reminder that this thread is a companion to
"Resume and cover letter - how good is yours?"
http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=10169

If you are serious about job hunting or serious about being more efficient from the employer's standpoint, you should read both of these threads.

I intend to make an unemotional statement about Walmart here. There is a high probability it make strike some sensibilities as inflammatory and others as "so what else is new."

I'm trying not to cast Walmart in an evil light, only to point out that outsourcing is real. It is growing. It is organized and funded by brains and money. American brains are included in the brains that drive the outsourcing engine. This outsourcing engine is documented. It is not a figment of my fevered imagination. I am not some Jeremiah or Chicken Little, I'm a pragmatic businessman who is trying to give folks a realistic path to follow.



Apparently Walmart's strategy of pricing is not working well this year. Or is it the beginning of a backlash against their business practices? The attached article describes their low sales this weekend and even includes some concerns about their competitors.

http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/041130/retail_walmart_1.html

Bill Pflanz

Wes,

It must have been something since Haldane came to my mind also when I was reading this thread. Although you have given some good advice on how to prepare a resume and do job interviews, it does nothing to tell someone where the available jobs are. To get past the gatekeeper, you first have to find the gate.

An executive recruiter is getting paid to find someone to fill a position and has a Rolodex (or its modern equivalent) of contacts as possible candidates. I doubt if executives are searching for job advice here.

You have given the negatives of blind ads. Internet job search sites get thousands of resumes so they are not a good resource. Networking is great but finding a job that way is a random event since the job has to be available and you have to have the qualifications. Being methodical may be the right way to find a job but it does not help to make the house payment as it rapidly approaches due time. Having a perfect resume and good interview techniques does not help when you cannot find somewhere to apply for a job.

Bill PflanzI kind of glossed over this post when Bill first made it, but it has weighed on me more and more since then.

My original intent in starting this thread was the narrow focus of getting past the gatekeeper to the folks who actually do the hiring.

It has since expanded, in this thread and in the companion thread
"Resume and cover letter - how good is yours?"
http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=10169

Soon, as a response to public and private urging, I'll start another thread (no title yet) about how to be an efficient and effective employer and recruiter, to cover the job hunt from both sides of the desk, employer and job candidate.

Everything Bill writes has a certain validity. I just look at them from a different point of view. Let's look at Bill's points one by one and consider how we can turn them to our advantage:

You have given the negatives of blind ads.
I certainly have. I think blind ads are just plain dumb from both employer and job candidate point of view. If you are motivated, however, you can mine blind ads for cues to where real jobs are and use the information to zero in on real, live organizations you can research and create a targeted campaign to get your credentials and interest on the radar of someone with the power and incentive to hire you.

Internet job search sites get thousands of resumes so they are not a good resource.
They are not a good resource if you just throw your resume into the sea of other resumes (much like the image I have written of oysters spreading sperm and eggs into the ocean.) Just as blind ads can be a source of information, so, too, can the ads you find on the internet. The whole point of this thread is to go BEYOND throwing your resume blindly into an ocean of other resumes to feed gatekeepers. Be smart. Be efficient. Make every resume count because you have done everything to get it into the hands of someone with the power to HIRE. Gatekeepers only have the power to say NO. The best you can hope from a gatekeeper is for him to pass it on to someone who CAN say yes. Why not try to avoid adding another [weak] link in the chain between you and the decision maker?

Networking is great but finding a job that way is a random event since the job has to be available and you have to have the qualifications.
Networking has a lot more good points than bad points. The primary feature of networking is that you want to plant a lasting impression in a person's memory so that when he comes across something remotely applicable to you, your name and credentials (especially your credibility in how you conducted yourself with that person) will leap to his mind and he will be motivated to either pass on your name or pass the opportunity back to you for action. Each time you interact in a network situation, you have a chance to get feedback (if you really look for it) about how credible you appear to be. If the networking sometimes goes into blind alleys or you get negative feedback, you can re-examine your credentials or your presentation to ensure they are presenting the most positive image of you possible.

There is a special technique to networking. You have to create the impression that the person who recommends you is doing a favor for the person to whom you are recommended; that by recommending YOU, he will be gaining prestige and respect for having helped that person solve a problem. The last thing you want to do is appear like you are begging for a job and that the favor is for YOU.

Being methodical may be the right way to find a job but it does not help to make the house payment as it rapidly approaches due time.
Yep. This is a tough reality. It is difficult to be scintillating and charming on paper and in person during an interview when your stomach is rumbling because you are hungry and you worry if you can afford enough gas in your car to get back and forth to an interview. Sometimes you have to make compromises or expend extra energy to take care of yourself and family during a transition. It may mean taking a job as a night clerk in a gas station or convenience store so you can continue your job search and interviews during the day.

I live in what's laughingly called an "upscale" neighborhood, but one of my neighbors lost an executive job and turned to driving a limousine nights and weekends to stretch his savings while he searched for a new position.

He learned so much about this "make do" job, he changed his plans and now owns a fleet of four limousines and is negotiating to merge with another limo company. He is not embarrassed about what he does and most of us in the neighborhood find it convenient to hire one of his limos to go to and from the airport as we pursue our "upscale" careers. Sometimes, when life hands you lemons, you find some sugar and make lemonade.

Having a perfect resume and good interview techniques does not help when you cannot find somewhere to apply for a job.
This is really the whole point of this thread and its companion threads - getting a realistic picture of your skills and experience and matching them to existing openings or creating openings where previously only PROBLEMS existed - problems you have a solution for.

Summary:
Take a tip from the door-to-door salesman's handbook:
"the toughest door to get open on any given day is your own front door in the morning when you set off to work."

Simply stated, this means you have to get past your own depression and discouragement and start each day as if it were the BEGINNING, not the END of your life. If you can't handle it alone, don't be afraid or embarrassed to seek help. All we suggest is that you be smart and judicious in WHO you ask for help. Start with your family and friends. Consider religious leaders and schools and government agencies. If you have sufficient funds, consider health care professionals (psychologists, psychiatrists) or well-recommended professional coaches (committed athletes have coaches, why shouldn't you?)

The bottom line:
Working through the job hunt is analogous to a "root cause" search. Sometimes, we go down blind alleys and have to reverse, but we keep in mind that the solution, as well as the search, itself, must have realistic budgets in dollars and time. If you find yourself spending a lot of time and money and still not finding what you were seeking, it's time to consider whether you are in one of those blind alleys and it's time to go in another direction. Sometimes the solution costs more than the end product is worth. (Sometimes, the perfect job is a continent away and you have to uproot your family to pursue it - and when you balance the needs of your family against the merits of the job, sometimes you decide the tradeoff isn't worth it and you compromise with a different job. At least you make a conscious decision after weighing all the facts.)

Sometimes, even I get discouraged. I know this thread is being viewed, but is it being viewed by real people whom it can help or just search engine spiders? Dozens of questions leap to my mind every day. Here are just some of them:

When you read through this thread, does the advice make sense to you? Is it something you can use yourself or pass on to someone else who may need it?

If it doesn't make sense to you, why don't you comment? As dogmatic as I can be, I'm always willing to consider a new point of view. In the end, one of us may end converting the other to his point of view.

If you are an executive in a position to hire, have you gained any insight from this thread which may make your own recruiting efforts more efficient and effective? What would you like to know? I wrack my brain and my memory to create scenarios and solutions, but most of it is old history to me. What real problems are you facing today as an employer or employee? Are you discouraged by lack of response to your resume applications or your recruiting ads? Have you "settled" for a position where you are overqualified or hired someone less than qualified because the job search was too debilitating? Do you work in a "fear" atmosphere?

Are you suspicious of MY motives?

If you are currently employed, but seeking to change - Why? Is it money? Work atmosphere or conditions? Are you over qualified? Underemployed? Stymied for future growth? Too long a commute?

If you are the employer and seeking to replace someone who currently works for you - Why? Did you know or suspect that when you hired him? Knowing what you know now, what would or should you have done differently in the recruiting process?

If you are the employer and have a vacancy, what are you doing to fill that vacancy? Are you satisfied it is the most efficient and effective way to recruit someone? Is there anything about your method that excludes some qualified people from being exposed to the opportunity? Are you only advertising in trade magazines with controlled circulation? local newpapers? using blind ads? put it in the hands of "professional" recruiter? did you spend a lot of time crafting the job description? Is the job description realistic with the money you have available to pay? Do you "hide" anything from the candidates in the recruiting ads or during a job interview which you think might discourage someone from accepting employment? Are you aware of current laws about legitimate questions you can ask candidates? Do you follow those laws or do you still ask questions of females like, "Are you planning to have a family?" (My own daughter got that one a couple of years ago.)

Bottom line:
Just like the tabloid says, "inquiring minds want to know!"

Yes, the advice makes sense.

And no, I don't think your motives are questionable.

I do think there are relatively few hiring personnel out there (or, to be more succinct, out here) with the sophistication that makes the tips altogether valid.

However, unquestionably a person should learn all they can about an organization, and not just to get hired. A job seeker should be trying for the best professional fit possible.

The market is changing. There are millions fewer jobs in manufacturing than when I entered my field. Those that remain are changing what they do.

I play in an adult community band, where I chanced to inquire of an engineer about potential opportunities in his organization. He said, "We build quality into our product." As though that explained everything: we don't have defects, so we don't need you.

It actually did explain quite a lot: that this influential professional is viewing Quality as a product-based system, not a whole-business-based system. The fact that he doesn't know what I do is indicative. With beliefs such as his in place, there is little point in my pursuing that particular alley further. And I am finding these kinds of beliefs extremely common now.

I do not know how things are in the rest of the country, but from my vantage point the environment has changed to the point where one needs to stop identifying as a quality professional and instead be a project manager, test engineer, or to similarly metamorphisize. This is fine, so long as one has the will to change and accept starting at or near the bottom again.

Yes, the advice makes sense.

And no, I don't think your motives are questionable.

I do think there are relatively few hiring personnel out there (or, to be more succinct, out here) with the sophistication that makes the tips altogether valid.

However, unquestionably a person should learn all they can about an organization, and not just to get hired. A job seeker should be trying for the best professional fit possible.

The market is changing. There are millions fewer jobs in manufacturing than when I entered my field. Those that remain are changing what they do.

I play in an adult community band, where I chanced to inquire of an engineer about potential opportunities in his organization. He said, "We build quality into our product." As though that explained everything: we don't have defects, so we don't need you.

It actually did explain quite a lot: that this influential professional is viewing Quality as a product-based system, not a whole-business-based system. The fact that he doesn't know what I do is indicative. With beliefs such as his in place, there is little point in my pursuing that particular alley further. And I am finding these kinds of beliefs extremely common now.

I do not know how things are in the rest of the country, but from my vantage point the environment has changed to the point where one needs to stop identifying as a quality professional and instead be a project manager, test engineer, or to similarly metamorphisize. This is fine, so long as one has the will to change and accept starting at or near the bottom again.Actually, I thought I had covered this, but I'm glad you raised the topic so we can go into it a little more thoroughly.

Job TITLES are immaterial to everyone EXCEPT the gatekeeper who has a narrow list of buzzwords to work with. Job FUNCTIONS are important. Just because we are in a Quality Forum (the Cove), don't be seduced into thinking that every person who visits here has the word "quality" somewhere in his job title.

When you research jobs and when you assess your own experiences, education, and aptitudes, focus on the "business oriented" processes involved. A quality technician can describe the processes he performs without EVER using the word "quality." He doesn't HAVE to start over again "at the bottom."

Here's a job description for one:
"Inspects materials and products, for conformance to specifications, using fixed or preset measuring instruments. Ensures materials and products are in accordance with established tolerance levels for dimensions and functional performance and are not irregular or damaged. Requires an associate's degree with at least 5 years of experience in the field. Familiar with a variety of the field's concepts, practices, and procedures. Relies on experience and judgment to plan and accomplish goals. Performs a variety of complicated tasks. Directs and leads the work of others. A certain degree of creativity and latitude is required. Typically reports to a supervisor/manager. "

Would you agree it covers basic quality technician chores without ever using the word "quality?"

Perhaps we might add stuff like "read and interpret blueprints and engineering drawings." The point is, you automatically limit your choices if you paint yourself into a corner of only looking at jobs that have the word "quality" in the title.

If you were a candidate who would fit the job description above, you'd want to alter your resume to emphasize the matching functions you performed at your last job, but would "conveniently" omit your job title of "Quality technician" and say something like "Job function: manufacturing inspector" and go on to include all the functions which match those listed in the description for the job opening, regardless of what job title is at the head of the listing.

Going further, a Quality Manager or Quality Engineer (ASQ definitions) might list himself as "job function: business process strategist" or "job function: manufacturing process engineer."

We aren't weaseling here. We are merely being pragmatic in realizing that less than 200,000 people IN THE WORLD are card-carrying members of ASQ [as of March 14, 2008 - fewer than 100,000 ASQ members!] and probably only 5 times that many or 1 million out of 6 billion ON THE PLANET could tell you what ASQ stands for without a "cheat sheet." If you don't believe me, try a brief survey of folks at your supermarket, your church, the plumber's union hall, or any other place where people outside the rarified world of Quality geeks may be found and simply ask, "Do you know what ASQ stands for?" On the other hand, you shouldn't have too much trouble finding folks who can tell you what an "inspector" does (even if they talk about "police inspectors.")
(Heck. I bet a substantial number of card carrying ASQ members have no idea who Deming, Juran, Shewhart, or Crosby are!)

The bottom line:
In order to be understood, you have to speak a language the listener understands. Shouting in English won't make a person who speaks only Mandarin understand any better, If you can't learn the language, sometimes you have to speak with signs and gestures to reach a common understanding until gradually one or both of you learn some of the other's language.

We must learn to "continually improve" our understanding of the changing world around us and learn to adapt to survive and even excel in the business of making a living.

I note the two job related threads I've begun have kind of tapered off as we enter the end of the year holiday season. I understand that. Currently employed folks are keeping their heads low to ensure collecting the year-end bonus, if any is forthcoming.

Unemployed folks are finding the pickings mighty lean this time of year because only absolutely desperate bosses want to spend holiday time dealing with resumes and interviews. Ad lineage for ads typically drops this time of year and picks up again after the new year, often headlined with some meaningless pap like, "start the New Year with a new job."

I don't want to single anyone out for abuse or humiliation, but I want to comment that I have looked at over 50 resumes of individuals since Thanksgiving and haven't seen one that had the kind of OOMPH that made me say, "Wow! That's pretty good stuff. I'd at least like to talk to this person on the phone to see if talk matches text."

Whatever else you, dear reader, as a job hunter, are thinking, the one thing you have to believe is that I want you to succeed. I have prowled the executive suite long enough to know what my fellow "suits" think and do when it comes to job recruitment and hiring. I further agree there is a large contingent of clueless bosses out there who are expecting to see mediocre resumes and they get them because of the way they recruit. I also know that those same clueless guys CAN be jarred out of their somnolescence by a great resume and WILL move it to the top of the list.

90% of the resumes will be dull laundry lists of jobs and employers. 9% will be absolute drivel written by mental defectives. Only 1% will tie candidate's achievements, experiences, talents, and education to needs of the target employer.

Despite what some may think, I am NOT setting myself up to be a clearinghouse to review resumes and suggest improvements. That's a task best done by someone who really knows you and can assess the written resume against the real you.

Writing FICTION in your resume MAY get you a phone or in-person interview, but you have to be able to maintain the image during the interview. By fiction, I mean if a candidate writes he managed a department of 10 people, but can't give a credible example of what he did to "manage" other than show up every day, everything else in the resume will be completely discounted. In other words, the interviewer will consider the ENTIRE resume to be fiction.

Similarly, if you write you saved your company $1,000,000 USD, you had better include what it was that YOU specifically did to accomplish that and THEN tie it to how you can do something similar for the NEXT organization you work for.

I once had occasion to be an outside consultant at a Board meeting of a company interviewing new advertising agencies. We saw folks who could have been only junior copywriters at the time [of the campaigns they mentioned] claiming credit for having been a "key creative person" on Coke and Pepsi advertising campaigns of ten years earlier. When one group making such outlandinsh claims left the room, one Board Member expressed a thought many of us harbored, "If he was that freaking good ten years ago, why hasn't he done anything similarly great since? WE don't need any freaking one-trick ponies working our account!"

With that, another chimed in, "When Bill asked him how he saw our account, his only answer was 'we'll do some focus groups.' What a freaking phony!"

At that point, I chimed in with, "If you thought that, gentlemen, why did you let him waste another 20 minutes of our time? Why didn't you speak up and stop him right then?

They looked kind of sheepish and a third fellow spoke for the group, "Our sort don't do that!"

I nearly choked on my coffee. I stood up and said, "Wow! I hope you have the cojonnes to tell me to my face if you think I'm not cutting the mustard."

We all laughed nervously and they hastened to assure me I was still "good." After that, I suggested they agree on a private signal and their spokesman would cut the interview short if it seemed to be a dead end. We managed to schedule and finish 3 interviews in one afternoon the following week by being more conscious of concentrating on the organization's needs and how the agencies perceived them and planned to satisfy them. We were much more clear in the instructions we gave the agencies when setting the appointments and EVERYONE seemed happier.

This kind of experience is directly comparable to the job interview. Both the employer and candidate should zero in on what they expect to achieve in the interview. Any time the interview lags, one or the other should bring it back into a meaningful track OR TERMINATE IT.

Here's a super tip:
If you are considering looking for a new job next year, take the slow period at most workplaces this holiday season to start researching the kind of job and the kind of organization you want to work for. Definitely visit Dick Bolles' website http://www.jobhuntersbible.com/ and read what he has to say about resumes, cover letters, job research, etc.

95% of all who read and post here in the Cove are capable of writing a cover letter and resume that will interest a job recruiter enough for the recruiter to ask for at least a phone interview. Remember to always answer the interviewer's primary concern: "What's in it for me and my organization?" in your resume and cover letter to give him the extra incentive to call.

5% will have difficulty writing that cover letter and resume without help. If you recognize you are in that segment, go to someone you trust and who knows your work to help you. There is no disgrace to asking for help in this aspect of the job hunt. Just be wary of con artists and crooks who will take your money to write you a resume and end up with a piece of fiction that will be discarded by recruiters.

The reasons people fall into the 5% bracket are myriad. They range from a cultural bias against "bragging" to language barriers to one condition I first learned about back in the 70's, but have since learned afflicts many people.

This person was highly educated and read both novels and technical texts with equal zeal. He was widely admired for his wit and charm in social situations. He had just one problem - a psychological inability to put words on paper with pen or typewriter (this was long before personal computers!)

He could spell like a champ (even better than I) and give word definitions almost verbatim from a dictionary. He was forced to sign checks and documents and each signature took nearly two minutes to form the first letter of his first name and then a long straight line with a little squiggle at the end for the balance. He would break out in a sweat and his whole body would tremble.

He, of course, had friends, family, and employees who would pick up the writing slack and very few of his customers and clients suspected. Many were flattered that he took the effort to call and talk to them in person versus sending a memo. He carried recorders everywhere and would dictate into them for staff to write or type up reports, proposals, etc.

Remember - find a friend who knows you and your work to help you craft the cover letter and resume.

Here's an aspect of the process of getting past the gatekeeper I just read on an outplacement website. If you are in the job hunt, you owe it to yourself to read the entire eight-page document. This quote comes from
http://www.challengergray.com/guidebook.pdf

(page 5)
Be Aggressive and Unconventional. Some job seekers are afraid to employ more aggressive or unconventional techniques to obtain interviews. However, these are often the methods that stand out in an interviewer’s mind and can lead to the appointment.

E-Mail Your Way Into An Interview. Check the company web site or call the main switchboard to find the e-mail address of the person managing the area in which you want to work. Send a brief but persuasive e-mail on why he or she should meet you face-to-face. Do not send a resume. Rather, explain in the message what you have to offer and why you are qualified for a position with the company.
Waiting It Out. Arrive at the company you would like to work for as the office is opening. Ask to see the person you want to work for without an appointment, after confirming that he or she will be in. Tell the secretary that you are willing to wait until the manager has a few free minutes. Even if it takes all day, it will be worth it if that is where you want to work and the manager reasons, “If you waited this long, I will give you ten minutes."
The Dawn Patrol. In today’s competitive global economy, executives often arrive at work early and stay late. Call the company switchboard operator for the night number of the person you want to meet . Try to reach the executive early, before a secretary is there to screen your call. You may find a receptive executive willing to meet with you early the next day or after office hours.
The Pen Is Mightier.... Write a "personal and confidential" letter to the person you want to work for, praising his/her secretary for the outstanding job he or she was doing screening calls so the executive could concentrate on work. Close the letter with a request for a job interview. Do not be surprised if the next time you call, you find a friendlier tone to the secretary's voice and the news that you have an appointment the next day.
Score One For Alexander G. Bell. Use your cell phone -- a tool that every job seeker should have -- to call from outside the building where your prime prospect is located. Call the person you want to see and explain that you are downstairs and would really appreciate a few minutes of his or her time. Often times, executives are willing to take a few minutes after hours to meet. In one example, this approach won the candidate a “few minutes,” which then turned into a long conversation and, very unexpectedly, an offer of a job!
As always, I wish all of you job seekers Good Luck! I hope you have a great New Year!

One of the best ways to get around the gatekeeper is to get to the hiring people BEFORE they put up gates and gatekeepers.

As the New Year begins, many companies are rolling out new plans and new incentives. Luckily for the smart job hunter, advertising for new people to staff those plans and incentives is usually LAST on the list of "things to do." This means they haven't set up the mechanisms to screen job applicants for those jobs (which in many cases are not yet defined.)

Getting in on the "ground floor" is usually advantageous when investing money. So, too, is getting in on the ground floor when investing time and energy in looking for a new job. If the job isn't yet defined, YOU have the opportunity to influence that definition in YOUR favor.

Nobody knows YOU better than YOU know yourself. Follow the tips in this thread and its companion thread http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=10169 and get that new job!

Good job. A really nice, thought-provoking thread.

On one subject. I decided a long time ago, there are really only THREE questions I want answered in an interview.

1) Can I do the job? Let's face it, I might think I am all-powerful and all-knowing, but there are some jobs that I'm just not qualified for -- and even if they are "nice" enough or desparate enough to hire me anyway, i will fail eventually due to lack of knowledge/talent/skill.. etc.

2) Do I want to do the job? Hey, just because I'm qualified to do the job, it might be a job I really don't want. Could be due to a variety of factors, but still -- CAN I do the job, and do I WANT to do the job are very important points to consider.

3) Do I like my boss? Wow, what if I'm qualified, and want to do the job -- but this person interviewing me seems like a total prick (or whatever negative connotation seems appropriate). Sooner or later, most of us have figured out that WHO we work with, and work for -- probably weighs out more when it is all said and done.

Yes! Excellent points. It is important to your well-being to have job satisfaction.

You can't be satisfied if you constantly worry:

"Is this the day they figure out I don't know what I'm doing?"
"Do I really want to spend my days commuting 2 hours each way because the housing near the job doesn't have good schools or services for my family?"
"Is today the day I lose my cool and slug the boss because he's a horse's patootie?"

I'm copying over two (now three) posts from another thread because I believe they have pertinence here.



To go incredibly off topic here.... but I agree maybe a poll would be interesting.

What did you receive a degree in?

For me, I graduated with a Bachelor of Science in Criminal Justice. At the time I thought I wanted to be a Federal Law Enforcement Officer (ATF, FBI, DEA) then after completing several interviews, physical quals, tests, etc. I was told I currently do not meet the hiring criteria (not the standards) that is currently available for Federal Law Enforcement (think EEOC)

Ok that is fine and I started down the manufacturing trail. I started as a line lead on the floor. Now after several years, several successes and several failures I am in senior management with a manufacturing company.

Another intersting rub, I have been discreetly looking for a more challenging opportunity. I was contacted by one company. The job description should have been titled, "My Job Description" as it fit me to a T. We went through 7 (yes 7 phone interviews) with various GMs and VPs. Things were going well, it was a "perfect" position for me, I fit their philosophical culture to the nines. Then some lowly little HR Specialist was conducting her standard background check and "discovered" I did not have a Mechanical or Electrical Engineering Degree. She called and said it was one of the requirements. I never said I did, it is clearly stated in my resume I have a BS in Criminal Justice. We never got into degrees in the interviews with the GMs and the VPs, I had experience over a piece of paper with a pretty seal on it and fancy calligraphy. That stopped me cold in the process. (think Mack truck hitting a brick wall) I could not get past this "gatekeeper" as Wes calls them. I tried emailing and calling the GMs and VPs I had bonded with to no avail, as all calls are routed through the switchboard. I had no emails to respond to, I tried several tactics outlined in here from Wes to no success.

I finally received an email from one of the VPs that I interviewed with and he said, "I am sorry you chose not to accept the position we offered, I thought we could have "taken over the world" together." Good luck and stay in touch. I hope our paths cross again, I enjoyed talking with you."

Talk about an internal communication problem. It is pretty sad when senior management gets bested by a HR Specialist.

Just some thoughts.......Sorry for the off topic http://elsmar.com/Forums/images/smilies/offtopic-d2.gif
__________________
Though we have heard of stupid haste in war, cleverness has never been seen associated with long delays.
-Sun Tzu, the Art of War


I sympathize with you for the shabby treatment you received. I regret you did not take the opportunity to set the emailer "straight" about the gatekeeper.

More often than not, the "gatekeepers" have a narrow understanding of the "rules" they are to follow. In my opinion, this is still salvageable if you want to make the effort. PM me for details if you still have interest.

For future encounters for everyone, let me state there are usually "front porch" clauses like the ME degree in the job description, which are initially put in as "screening" devices to limit the number of candidates a company has to "wade through."

If a candidate manages to get through the initial screening because of a "glitch" in the system, it behooves the candidate to trot the front porch clause out and ask that it be formally waived in his case. The vast majority of cases will turn out in the candidate's favor IF the one you ask is high enough on the totem pole to do it. Company size is no indicator of which way the decision will go (we have an interesting item elsewhere in the Cove about "monkeys and the way it's always been done" which illustrates the mechanism for not granting the waiver.)

There are numerous instances on record where the candidate plays the "don't ask, don't tell" card when hirers assume facts not in evidence. Sadly, some of these turn out to be PR nightmares with charges of lying and fraud. Rest assured, the higher the profile of the position, the more likely someone will ferret out the truth, either through innocent job performance like the clerk in IEGeek's example, or from "deeper motives." So, better to "immunize" them against the fact by disclosing while rapport with hirer is high. If they blow you off at that point, you at least have a good idea of the rigidity you narrowly escaped.

(I'm going to copy these two posts over to the "Gatekeeper" thread. IMO, they belong both here and there.)
__________________
"Few minds wear out; more rust out"
Inscribed over the entrance of Louis Pasteur School, Chicago
Christian Nestell Bovee (1820-1904) in Thoughts, Feelings and Fancies, 1857


When I did respond to the VP, he was shocked, however they had filled the position with another candidate. I made no misrepresentations about my background, it literally never came up and as I never saw the job description, I was in no position to bring it up. I have come up with a qualifier that I now send to recruiters and HR personnel that request my resume. It is not pretty and quite frankly some get offended, however, I aske these questions:

1. Have you actually read my resume, or was it scanned for keywords?
2. Why do you think I fit the description of what you are looking for?
3. What is the salary range? (this is becoming more and more important) or I ask if the company is paying the person or the position.
4. What is the company's timeframe for filling the position? ( I am not interested in stockpiling their resume bank)
5. Who exactly is the final decision maker?

AS I said most recruiters get incredibly offended and downright crappy about being put in the hotseat, but most HR folks are happy to answer. In any job interview, I feel that I am interviewing them as much (if not more) than they are interviewing me. Plus this helps me get an idea about the organization and the philosophical values of the company.

Just some thoughts.....
__________________
Though we have heard of stupid haste in war, cleverness has never been seen associated with long delays.
-Sun Tzu

This is a long thread, and thus no one is likely to agree with every point in every post, but I think all of us can agree that Wes has done a nice job with this thread and, with help from other posters, has provided a thread that many folks who are in a bind will likely find useful. For that, :agree1: Wes.

Something that also might be helpful is reading a HR forum and seeing how the HR folks think and what problems they have.

Something that also might be helpful is reading a HR forum and seeing how the HR folks think and what problems they have.

My favorite is www.ahipubs.com

Note I added a follow-up post from IEGeek in Post #70.

In my opinion (only mine - there is a lot of controversy), any HR guy who hangs on to resumes after the initial recruiting cycle is just wasting time and energy, not to mention space for storage. Resumes are dynamic documents, continually changing as the candidate gains more experience and knowledge. If nothing else, it is an arrogant assumption the candidate will still be available at some point down the road and willing to come to a company that rejected him previously.

How about IEGeek's response to his recent "adventure" by creating "a qualifier that I now send to recruiters and HR personnel that request my resume" - got any comments?

Thanks for moving the thread over, Wes. I must have missed it in the other. Fascinating story to add to other anecdotal stories. At some point they should add up to evidence of a broken system.

Although HR is taking the bad rap here, there is some responsibility on the managers part to be in charge of hiring. Maybe HR lied to the hiring manager about IEGeek turning down the offer but the manager could as easily of picked up the phone and asked for more information. If he was interested enough to write his letter than a phone call would have worked too and he would have learned something about why he lost out on a good candidate.

I don't know if my scenario is correct but it could be an alternative to the one involving HR. Are we just making HR a scapegoat for the lack of ownership by the hiring manager?

Bill Pflanz

I don't put blame on HR. All of HR (any organization) is merely bureaucratic support to the organization. If a leader is weak and allows a bureaucracy to usurp the normal order of things, then the "blame" falls on the leader (only because the buck has to stop somewhere.) But a weak leader isn't necessarily evil, despite the evil repercussions from his lack of action and leadership.

The candidate who gets caught in the switches (railroad talk) can't blame himself for not being prepared to inoculate interviewers, clerks, and managers against making irrational decisions. It is easy to get caught up in the euphoria of a string of successful interviews and ^SS_U_ME everything is rosy. It's hard to counsel a candidate to have a healthy paranoia when he's struggling to make a good impression to land a job.

My only counsel is to plan for an interview like preparing a FMEA - try to outline what could go wrong and how "fatal" that might be to one's candidacy. Then have countermeasures firmly in mind to prevent the derailment before it occurs or to ameliorate it if it does occur. It is all about assessing as many risks as possible before beginning the process.

...peripatetic...
LOL - I had to look that one up!

How about IEGeek's response to his recent "adventure" by creating "a qualifier that I now send to recruiters and HR personnel that request my resume" - got any comments?
I have a similar list - in order of my hierarchy of needs. It's a lot longer though. The only difference is that I don't send it with my resume and I don't share a copy with my interviewer - the interviewer may not even realize that I'm actually asking questions from a list.

It occurs to me that:
Just so everyone is on the same page - a searchable copy of the Occupational Outlook Handbook can be found here:
http://www.bls.gov/oco/ (http://www.bls.gov/oco/)

"Many companies do not use 'quality' in job titles. Steve Prevette does not have 'quality' in his job title. Therefore, it makes sense to consider looking at lots of optional titles when looking to perform or get a job performing a 'quality' function."

When you look through the job titles, you won't see many with "quality" in the title, but digging deeper will disclose many which have the "functions" which Quality folk, especially ASQ member Quality folk, have come to think of as "quality" jobs.

Hence the tip for today is to really research a target company to see the kind of titles and jargon they use for the work you do. Tailor your approach to those companies to fit in with the prevailing jargon and view. The less "stretching" a hiring officer has to do to interpret your cover letter and resume in terms of what his organization needs, the more likely he is to consider your candidacy for the opening he has.

This is just a "bump" to bring this back to the top of the 24-hour cycle. Jobs are still hard to come by. Don't hamper your search by not being fully aware of your search options.

I just got a new job using the methods from a book I read and I shared about earlier in this thread, "Work with Passion" by Nancy Anderson. I got a 20% raise in salary and benefits. I really know what I am getting into because I did the research asked the questions I needed to know to fulfill my expectations of a job I will enjoy doing. :D
Wes, I think you have done a good job making everyone who reads this forum much more aware of the kinds of things that need to be done in this new job market. Hey, this whole process took me about 6 months but I have learned a lot about myself. I made goals for myself 6 weeks ago and have already met 4 of my 8 goals (two of them were part of this new job). :agree1: Hey, you don't have to hate what you do for a living and only do it because of $$$$$.

Mooser

Congratulations, Mooser! I hope your experience will inspire others.


Appropos of Mooser's commentHey, this whole process took me about 6 months but I have learned a lot about myself. I made goals for myself 6 weeks ago and have already met 4 of my 8 goals (two of them were part of this new job). I have an acquaintance who is a "motivational coach."

Without stealing any of his thunder (because he does "hold hands" of his clients), I can tell you that his advice and that of most other motivational coaches is

Take your daily/weekly/monthly/yearly/lifetime "to do" list and split it into two lists: "important" and "urgent"
Focus on the "important" list and accomplish the first 3 within the time period you set for yourself.
Only when you have three important things accomplished, should you even begin to address the "urgent" ones.
The tough part, of course, is knowing yourself well enough to decide what is "important" and what is merely "urgent." Some folks never learn in their lifetime what is truly "important."

Many of you have read my screed about the guy who carried a bucket of sand and a bucket of water everywhere he went. He would always ask, "Do you have a fire? I'm ready to put it out." The guy was a consummate "firefighter" ready to be a hero at the drop of a match, but he never accomplished anything. He could never add anything to his possessions because he could only carry the water and sand. He always sought out the "urgent" but never learned what was really "important."

I had been told a slightly different variation of important/urgent that I like a little better.

Activities are rated by how important and how urgent they are. Things that have a large impact are important. Things that must be done soon are urgent. For example
* you wake up to find your house on fire: important and urgent
* deciding whom to vote for in the next Presidential election: important but not urgent.
* catching your favorite soap opera this afternoon: urgent but not important.
* playing Solitaire on your computer: neither important nor urgent.

If you like charts, you can plot the activities on a grid with importance on the horizontal axis and urgency on the vertical axis. Then do the activities that are in the upper right corner.

As Wes says, it is easy to focus on the urgent, rather than the important. Focusing on the urgent means you are always putting out fires. You may look busy and important, but you don't accomplish as much in the long run as the person who prevented the fires before they ever started. (Unfortunately, often the boss sees and rewards the fellow who always seems to have something urgent to do:().

;) So here is the system. Rank each activity between 1-10 on 1) importance, 2) urgency, and 3) how likely the boss is to notice. Multiply the three numbers together (like an RPN rating in FMEA) and do the tasks in that order.:lol:

Tim F

playing Solitaire on your computer: neither important nor urgent.
Speak for yourself :D

What is this "solitaire" of which you speak?:confused:

What is this "solitaire" of which you speak?:confused: You're kidding, right?
http://www.b3ta.com/interview/solitaire/

What is this "solitaire" of which you speak?:confused:
NOW we know how Wes gets so much done!

Gotcha!:lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

ROTFLMAOASTC!:rolleyes:

Something that also might be helpful is reading a HR forum and seeing how the HR folks think and what problems they have.

Here's one:
http://www.workforce.com/phpBB/viewforum.php?forum=56&start=0

Here's one:
http://www.workforce.com/phpBB/viewforum.php?forum=56&start=0
Thanks for an interesting resource. I briefly browsed some of the discussion forums and immediately came across one that clearly demonstrates what a short-sighted a$$ some employers and their agents can be. Thankfully, at least one respondent tried to put the original poster straight.
Take a look at this thread for an instructive lesson:
Most applicants overqualified
http://www.workforce.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?topic=29955&forum=56&21

Thanks for an interesting resource. I briefly browsed some of the discussion forums and immediately came across one that clearly demonstrates what a short-sighted a$$ some employers and their agents can be. Thankfully, at least one respondent tried to put the original poster straight.
Take a look at this thread for an instructive lesson:
Most applicants overqualified
http://www.workforce.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?topic=29955&forum=56&21
I try to stay away from forums like that because I can't read the threads for very long before I feel a :blowup: coming on.

I try to stay away from forums like that because I can't read the hreads for very long before I feel a http://elsmar.com/Forums/images/smilies/blowup.gif coming on. Isn't there some sort of famous quote by some famous person
(Sun Tzu's advice, in The Art of War, to know your enemy)
which applies here?

Isn't there some sort of famous quote by some famous person
(Sun Tzu's advice, in The Art of War, to know your enemy)
which applies here?
Straining my memory, but I think it was something like, "If you know yourself and know your enemy, you can fight 100 battles without disaster occuring," but what happens when you exceed the 100-battle limit:D ?

Straining my memory, but I think it was something like, "If you know yourself and know your enemy, you can fight 100 battles without disaster occuring," but what happens when you exceed the 100-battle limit:D ?
If you are still battling the same enemy after 100 battles, even Sun Tzu's advice won't help! Is there another quote about brick walls?

Isn't there some sort of famous quote by some famous person
(Sun Tzu's advice, in The Art of War, to know your enemy)
which applies here?

Perhaps this is a human resources "strategy" practiced by organizations that have failed to "appoint deputies for key managerial personnel"?? See thread...

http://www.workforce.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?topic=24994&forum=56&8

:blowup:

Perhaps this is a human resources "strategy" practiced by organizations that have failed to "appoint deputies for key managerial personnel"?? See thread...

http://www.workforce.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?topic=24994&forum=56&8

:blowup:I think the most disturbing factor in the threads I've looked through is the absolute callousness with which many of these HR writers view the job applicants. When I was in the business, this was "whispered stuff" - definitely not for public consumption. We may have privately had the same low regard for applicants, we just didn't blurt it out for the whole world to read. Talk about blogs that can land you in hot water! I think some sharp labor lawyers could have a field day identifying hiring bias by tracking down some of these writers and hoping they work for a corporation with deep pockets.

Maybe even worse, I see some of this same callousness in some of our Cove writers who still leap to blame individual workers for management's process failures!

If you are still battling the same enemy after 100 battles, even Sun Tzu's advice won't help! Is there another quote about brick walls?
Lucretius: The drops of rain make a hole in the stone, not by violence, but by oft falling.

This recent experience would seem to be appropriate for this thread, though different from the most recent posts, and it's probably time to give it another "bump". :) I'm in the job market - or more appropriately the career market. I'm working with recruiters, as well as pursuing independent solutions. Called one recruiter up today to discuss status, as I'd been out most of last week with an interview I secured and volunteering for a local ASQ section ISO 9001:2000 preparation audit. I shamelessly used the interview to bump them a bit, and also let them know in passing what company I had it with. (No big deal - I'd seen the stack of resumes on the vp's desk, and the top one (not mine) was from this recruiter's company.) In passing the recruiter indicated the company had been having some difficulties recently - nothing clear or definitive, and I hadn't found any such note in my search, other than they were late with shipments, which is why the particular position was open.

This PM my commonsense kicked in, after remembering that they had submitted a candidate for the position as well. My supposition is that by potentially creating doubts in my mind the chances for their candidate might be increased. When I analyze the situation I'm not surprised, but just had not included recruiters as potential gatekeepers in addition to a company's HR department. Something else to mull/consider.

This recent experience would seem to be appropriate for this thread, though different from the most recent posts, and it's probably time to give it another "bump". :) I'm in the job market - or more appropriately the career market. I'm working with recruiters, as well as pursuing independent solutions. Called one recruiter up today to discuss status, as I'd been out most of last week with an interview I secured and volunteering for a local ASQ section ISO 9001:2000 preparation audit. I shamelessly used the interview to bump them a bit, and also let them know in passing what company I had it with. (No big deal - I'd seen the stack of resumes on the vp's desk, and the top one (not mine) was from this recruiter's company.) In passing the recruiter indicated the company had been having some difficulties recently - nothing clear or definitive, and I hadn't found any such note in my search, other than they were late with shipments, which is why the particular position was open.

This PM my commonsense kicked in, after remembering that they had submitted a candidate for the position as well. My supposition is that by potentially creating doubts in my mind the chances for their candidate might be increased. When I analyze the situation I'm not surprised, but just had not included recruiters as potential gatekeepers in addition to a company's HR department. Something else to mull/consider.
Absolutely! Thanks for the insightful contribution to our knowledge pool, Kevin! Pretty soon, like it or not, we will all have to be part of Deming's System of Profound Knowledge.

It's been a long time since we had any additions to this thread, but even so, we've had another 2,000 views since the previous post.

This thread and its companion (Resume and cover letter - How good are yours? (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=10169)) contain really useful information. Over 11,000 views in two years means at least the thread titles are provocative!

I'd like to know if the information helped any of you in your job hunt. If so, tell us about it so we can all learn how to be better and more efficient in our search.

If this info was NOT helpful, let's hear why not. Perhaps we can learn from your experience.

It's been a long time since we had any additions to this thread, but even so, we've had another 2,000 views since the previous post.

This thread and its companion (Resume and cover letter - How good are yours? (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=10169)) contain really useful information. Over 11,000 views in two years means at least the thread titles are provocative!

I'd like to know if the information helped any of you in your job hunt. If so, tell us about it so we can all learn how to be better and more efficient in our search.

If this info was NOT helpful, let's hear why not. Perhaps we can learn from your experience.Monday "bump!" Comments?

Another "bump" to remind us that even in our current economic recession, there are still jobs to be found if folks really buckle down and pay attention to the tips in this thread when deploying their job search! I have gone through and deleted some links which have gone dead. If you come across any dead links please click the "report post" button and tell us so we may remove them or update them

I was lucky that my previous employer paid for a specialist to help me get ready and prepared for new employment. I learnt that it is really important to design an eye catching, brief yet informative resume and then make sure that your letter of application links what the company is looking for with what you can offer. The resume is like the product leaflet - it has to be really eye catching, so I spent a lot of effort preparing something suitable. This is what gets you past the 'gatekeeper'. Being honest is another useful bit of advice - the times I have caught people out during interview when I've asked them to explain something on their resume.

Spread your net far and wide - local/national press, trade journals, local library, list companies you want to work for, register with web recruitment agencies, do daily searches of these. Then, I'm afraid, it is down to the current job market - if there are not many jobs of your type out there at any one time, then your job hunting won't take very long.

Apparently my cv is still out there, several years on, and I still get approaches and cold calls asking if I'm interested, which is very good to hear, but don't tell my boss.

I have to agree with Wes and curryassassin about job hunting. There are good jobs out there if you have done your homework and layed the groundwork. Curryassassin's comments about spreading the network are even more critical in today's age and can be used to a person's advantage.

I have a couple of good friends who are recruiters that I chat with several times throughout the year. They helped to place me in the past, I've kept the relationship up (Christmas cards, birthday cards, etc.) and used them both as a sounding board for various things. I usually inquire about the state of the recruiting industry, what skills are being viewed as critical or desired, etc.

Depending on what you want to do, you need to plan accordingly. Don't just look at your next opportunity, but look to the next position after that. It helps to identify some of the skills, knowledge and experience you'll need to pick up along the way. Look for opportunities to speak at one of the dinner meetings that are so common for many of the professional organizations. Get your name and yourself out there, and when you have the opportunity to present in front of a group people, make that time count. That hour can leave a much greater impression than any resume you can print out.

If your diligent, serious and have layed that foundation; I think everyone has an opportunity to go farther in their career. I am currently finishing up my fifth week in a new position. Within in the past 12 months, I went from being in a manager's role at one company, to a director role at smaller family held company (won't do that again), to a VP role at much larger manufacturer. But I like to think that I've done a lot of homework, have spent the time and effort in networking and building up the progression.

Wayne

I've bumped this thread because I find myself referring folks to read it quite a bit as I receive phone calls and emails from folks who are strangling in their job hunts and have turned to me in desperation for a path to get through a tangle of conflicting advice.

There are actually four threads in this series which folks have found useful
Thinking about a New Job for New Year? (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=19619)
http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=19619
Resume and cover letter - How good are yours? (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=10169)
http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=10169
The Job Hunt - Care and feeding of references (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=19094)
http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=19094
Tips to get past the "gatekeeper" when job hunting (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=9325)
http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=9325

Why not read through them and judge for yourself?

The following post is typical of the kind of advice you will find in each thread and the threads are pretty consistent among themselves, with little or no conflicting advice (any conflicts ARE explained.)

Be sure to add any questions or comments you may have to the appropriate thread.
I kind of glossed over this post (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showpost.php?p=92558&postcount=39) when Bill first made it, but it has weighed on me more and more since then.

My original intent in starting this thread was the narrow focus of getting past the gatekeeper to the folks who actually do the hiring.

It has since expanded, in this thread and in the companion thread
"Resume and cover letter - how good is yours?"
http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=10169

Soon, as a response to public and private urging, I'll start another thread (no title yet) about how to be an efficient and effective employer and recruiter, to cover the job hunt from both sides of the desk, employer and job candidate.

Everything Bill writes has a certain validity. I just look at them from a different point of view. Let's look at Bill's points one by one and consider how we can turn them to our advantage:

You have given the negatives of blind ads.
I certainly have. I think blind ads are just plain dumb from both employer and job candidate point of view. If you are motivated, however, you can mine blind ads for cues to where real jobs are and use the information to zero in on real, live organizations you can research and create a targeted campaign to get your credentials and interest on the radar of someone with the power and incentive to hire you.

Internet job search sites get thousands of resumes so they are not a good resource.
They are not a good resource if you just throw your resume into the sea of other resumes (much like the image I have written of oysters spreading sperm and eggs into the ocean.) Just as blind ads can be a source of information, so, too, can the ads you find on the internet. The whole point of this thread is to go BEYOND throwing your resume blindly into an ocean of other resumes to feed gatekeepers. Be smart. Be efficient. Make every resume count because you have done everything to get it into the hands of someone with the power to HIRE. Gatekeepers only have the power to say NO. The best you can hope from a gatekeeper is for him to pass it on to someone who CAN say yes. Why not try to avoid adding another [weak] link in the chain between you and the decision maker?

Networking is great but finding a job that way is a random event since the job has to be available and you have to have the qualifications.
Networking has a lot more good points than bad points. The primary feature of networking is that you want to plant a lasting impression in a person's memory so that when he comes across something remotely applicable to you, your name and credentials (especially your credibility in how you conducted yourself with that person) will leap to his mind and he will be motivated to either pass on your name or pass the opportunity back to you for action. Each time you interact in a network situation, you have a chance to get feedback (if you really look for it) about how credible you appear to be. If the networking sometimes goes into blind alleys or you get negative feedback, you can re-examine your credentials or your presentation to ensure they are presenting the most positive image of you possible.

There is a special technique to networking. You have to create the impression that the person who recommends you is doing a favor for the person to whom you are recommended; that by recommending YOU, he will be gaining prestige and respect for having helped that person solve a problem. The last thing you want to do is appear like you are begging for a job and that the favor is for YOU.

Being methodical may be the right way to find a job but it does not help to make the house payment as it rapidly approaches due time.
Yep. This is a tough reality. It is difficult to be scintillating and charming on paper and in person during an interview when your stomach is rumbling because you are hungry and you worry if you can afford enough gas in your car to get back and forth to an interview. Sometimes you have to make compromises or expend extra energy to take care of yourself and family during a transition. It may mean taking a job as a night clerk in a gas station or convenience store so you can continue your job search and interviews during the day.

I live in what's laughingly called an "upscale" neighborhood, but one of my neighbors lost an executive job and turned to driving a limousine nights and weekends to stretch his savings while he searched for a new position.

He learned so much about this "make do" job, he changed his plans and now owns a fleet of four limousines and is negotiating to merge with another limo company. He is not embarrassed about what he does and most of us in the neighborhood find it convenient to hire one of his limos to go to and from the airport as we pursue our "upscale" careers. Sometimes, when life hands you lemons, you find some sugar and make lemonade.

Having a perfect resume and good interview techniques does not help when you cannot find somewhere to apply for a job.
This is really the whole point of this thread and its companion threads - getting a realistic picture of your skills and experience and matching them to existing openings or creating openings where previously only PROBLEMS existed - problems you have a solution for.

Summary:
Take a tip from the door-to-door salesman's handbook:
"the toughest door to get open on any given day is your own front door in the morning when you set off to work."

Simply stated, this means you have to get past your own depression and discouragement and start each day as if it were the BEGINNING, not the END of your life. If you can't handle it alone, don't be afraid or embarrassed to seek help. All we suggest is that you be smart and judicious in WHO you ask for help. Start with your family and friends. Consider religious leaders and schools and government agencies. If you have sufficient funds, consider health care professionals (psychologists, psychiatrists) or well-recommended professional coaches (committed athletes have coaches, why shouldn't you?)

The bottom line:
Working through the job hunt is analogous to a "root cause" search. Sometimes, we go down blind alleys and have to reverse, but we keep in mind that the solution, as well as the search, itself, must have realistic budgets in dollars and time. If you find yourself spending a lot of time and money and still not finding what you were seeking, it's time to consider whether you are in one of those blind alleys and it's time to go in another direction. Sometimes the solution costs more than the end product is worth. (Sometimes, the perfect job is a continent away and you have to uproot your family to pursue it - and when you balance the needs of your family against the merits of the job, sometimes you decide the tradeoff isn't worth it and you compromise with a different job. At least you make a conscious decision after weighing all the facts.)

Another thread bump!

As I was leafing through two days worth of newspapers this evening, I came across a photo of some pitiable soul standing outside the entrance to the David Letterman Show.

He was middle-aged, wearing a sign that indicated he was out of work from a job as a middle-level manager and looking for a similar job.

What struck me, though, was not his appearance (he looked like a whipped pup), but the text on his sign. The entire sign wasn't legible in the photo, but here's what I could read:
Almost Homeless

Looking for Employment

Very Experienced Operations
And
Administration Manager

Desperately seeking full time
employment
With insurance benefits
For self and family
Disabled wife on 15 medications

Request a copy of my resume

Any kind of help would be greatly
appreciated

[the capitalization and layout (centered) are as accurate as I could make out from the photo. He also had some very tiny type in red ink written on a slant across the corners of his sandwich board which were blurred in the photo. One of them may have been referring to a web page.]

Let me suggest the tips in our four job threads (see the box below) would get this guy a full-time job suited to his skills and experience much faster and more surely than this blatant plea for charity from a desperate man. Nowhere in his sandwich board does the guy mention what value he can bring to a new employer. I suppose he thought "exposure" would solve his problems. Since it was the holiday season, maybe some kind-hearted tourists in the Letterman line gave him a few bucks, but I bet you dollars to doughnuts not one offered him the type of job he was seeking.There are actually four threads in this series which folks have found useful
Thinking about a New Job for New Year? (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=19619)
http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=19619
Resume and cover letter - How good are yours? (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=10169)
http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=10169
The Job Hunt - Care and feeding of references (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=19094)
http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=19094
Tips to get past the "gatekeeper" when job hunting (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=9325)
http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=9325

Why not read through them and judge for yourself?