Classic Job Interviewing Faux Pas

This may appear obvious, but interviewers’ questions are as important as your ability to get into their heads. Most believe that having a clever retort will suffice.

The instant you receive an invitation to interview, you have already passed the prescreening process. Someone determined you either met or surpassed the qualifications. The follow-up interviewing process is designed to determine best fit.

For any opening, many will apply. Whatever the amount, only a handful will be invited to exchange repartee. From that handful, the elimination process amounts to letting candidates disqualify themselves. Last person standing usually receives the offer.

Employers design questions as they relate to the position. The probing inquires will be preplanned, and designed to penetrate your otherwise flimsy façade. The questions will range from basic, behavioral and stress, to a mixture of trap and judgment-probes.

The important aspect is being able to anticipate those questions. Candidates failing in this are often caught looking sideways. At the opposite end are those who over rehearsed. Of the two, being over rehearsed is better than being caught off balance.

The third faux pas involves unrehearsed questions generated from candidate’s prior response. Interviewer asks, “Why are you looking for a new position at this time?”

Placating gestures such as, “I need a new challenge,” or “I’ve taken my current position as far as it can go,” often generate a backup question. The fast-thinking interviewer now asks, “How long will you be able to serve in this position without becoming bored or under challenged?”

The perceptive interviewer awaits a candid response. If the candidate scrambles to proffer a vague or evasive reply, the interviewer has what he or she needs to know.

Candid responses—even if negative—curry more favor than pandering this-is-what-I-think you want to hear. This latter approach, however, is the one candidates tend to use.

It has often been stated that the truth sets you free. In most job interviews, it still does. The technique amounts to knowing how to present that reality. It comes down to anticipating the question and then being able to deliver a thoughtful, sincere response—sans an excuse.

Too often, jobseekers attempt to project an image of something other than who they really are. They worry that being genuine and sincere will somehow make them appear weak or flawed. Well guess what—aside from those who are legends in their own minds, everyone is flawed.

For those concerned with navigating interviewing sessions—concern yourself with getting the interview. Then, be prepared to address questions designed to uncover the real you. Employers are more willing to hire a flawed candidate over phonies and those divorced from reality.

That’s advice you can take to the bank.

Copyrighted © 2014 by Robert James

The Generic Job Searcher

E

very time anyone enters the job market, the same question arises: What does the jobseeker want to do? Whenever that question is left ambiguously floating in the air, a troubled journey lies ahead.

The employment highway is crowded. A large percent of that traffic remains clueless when it comes to what they want to go. They resort to phrases like, “I want to be open to whatever becomes available,” or “I need to keep all my options on the table.”

From the employer’s perspective, these jobseekers represent lost souls wandering the highways hoping to find a destination. Employers see generic jobseekers as a drain on their valuable interviewing efforts.

From the generic jobseeker’s view, they envision things differently. They are looking for a steady paycheck and perhaps benefits. Anything that will fill the vacuum in their empty life will usually suffice.

The lack of career focus creates multiple problems for which there are no viable solutions—only short-gap maneuvers. Designing and creating a generic résumé becomes insurmountable, if not futile mission. Without a focus, the jobseeker sees everything as being relevant.

The issue is that the jobseeker is heavily relying on potential employers spending the time and effort to study the résumé and figure things out. Then perhaps, the employer will identify a suitable opening that will satisfy the jobseekers skillsets. Fat chance of that ever happening.

Anytime one relies on the kindness of employers to make a critical decision in the jobseeker’s best interest amounts to a fool’s quest. Résumé writers often confront this in preparing material for those who have lost their employment soul.

Jobseekers conducting searches for whatever comes down the pike often require expansive presentations. Suddenly, there is the need to cover all venues, skills and disciplines. Even non-relevant employment needs to be included in an effort to satisfy all far-reaching possibilities.

What otherwise might be addressed in a page or two now requires more. Statistically, 95 percent of employers will not turn to a third page. The exceptions involve in-house promotions, medical and academic positions involving search committees, and some senior-level government positions. Even then, the content needs to remain relevant and focused.

The thumb rule involving exceptions comes down to whom is being compensated for reading lengthy material. In most cases, it’s an unwelcomed additional chore. Whenever the recipient is not being compensated extra to scrutinize and analyze the material—relevancy, conciseness and focus matters.

Concise, well-focused résumés curry a 10-to-1 advantage over material attempting to be all things to all employers. Concise material sends a message the jobseeker knows what he or she wants to do. Likewise, generic résumés send an equally strong message—unfortunately, that message travels in the opposite direction. –Next!

Copyrighted © 2014 by Robert James

Postpone Nothing

The two jobseekers shared striking visual similarities: They popped out like a pair of jack-n-the-boxes. Had it not been for the one-week separation, the parallels might have escaped notice. Both were of the same age, gender, height and weight—even their eyes and hair color matched.

Both held postgraduate degrees, and almost identical GPAs. Each had worked a similar length with their respective employers and had delivered stellar job performances. Ironically, while their résumés contained dissimilar content and each pursued different careers, they shared identical job-search fears. Both choired the same mantra: It’s a tough job market out there.

Aside from the one-week separation in preparing their résumés, there was another dis­similarity. Each would pursue an altered job-search strategy that could dramatically affect their results.

Candidate A commenced the job-search by pressing the gas pedal with a damn the torpedoes—full-speed-ahead attitude. Candidate B slammed on the brake pedal with a let’s-not-be-hasty approach. Candidate A was on second and third interviews before Candidate B submitted the first résumé.

Spotting the degrees of separation visually loomed. Rather than rely solely upon what jobseekers say or tell me, I focus on what the individual does. This harkens to the age-old adage: Actions speak louder than words.

Nothing bespeaks job-hunting success like taking action. While my armchair observation falls short of a clinical study, the collective years of observing jobseeker behaviors come into play. I have observed marginal candidates outperform their competition by self-determination and putting plans into motion.

Job changes rarely occur overnight. Some do, but more often, the groundwork was laid well in advance. How one begins determines the results. It is better to endure setbacks, than to fail because of inaction.

Fear of rejection weighs heavy for many jobseekers. Likewise, there exist countless related apprehensions, such as fear of interviewing, fear of the unknown, fear of change, fear of being overqualified, and fear of failure to recap the common ones.

The best remedy for conquering burdensome fears is to confront them. If you fear being interrogated during interviews—master interviewing techniques. Naturally, that has to be part of one’s job-seeking strategy. It cannot be left to linger in the background hoping such fear will magically dissipate on its own.

In any job search, priorities need to be set. Aside from prepar­ing one’s résumé, references need to be contacted, companies need to be researched, responses to questions refined and rehearsed, wardrobes assembled, and grooming issues considered. Even eating habits need to be assessed in order to avoid mental fatigue and lethargic behavior.

None of these should be placed on the back burner. Hence, postpone nothing. The results of your efforts depend on what you do and the decisive actions you undertake.

Copyrighted © 2014 by Robert James

What You Think - You Do

As a licensed educator who specialized in abnormal behaviors, I can speak with a measure of credibility on this topic. What an individual thinks, he or she will eventually say. What the individual says to others inevitably manifests itself into reality.

You won’t wake up tomorrow morning and suddenly start acting differently than you did today (unless by chance you wake up as a U.S. Marine on Parris Island). Before any miraculous behavioral change transpires, you give it thought. Then you talk about it with whomever you trust.

After you have thought and talked about it, only then will your behaviors manifest themselves. When this process occurs spontaneously, perhaps erratically or impulsively, that is when you encounter trouble. (Society tends to institutionalize those who gravitate toward behavioral extremes.)

What does this have to do with John and Suzy Q Jobseeker? For starters, everything —especially one’s mindset and the self-image they choose to embrace.

Chances run high that everything you perform (or fail to) commences with giving the topic mental deliberation or worrisome thought. When your efforts go no further than this, you postpone taking decisive action. (The individual usually resorts to occupying time with makeshift and busy work.)

Thus, in a job search, when the potential jobseeker’s mindset concludes that it would be a waste of time, money and effort—no proactive job search occurs.

This mindset accounts for why large segments of older individuals avoid entering the job market. They literally talk themselves out of it beforehand. By the time they reach that decision, they have formulated rational arguments and plausible explanations.

A classic example of this occurs when individuals think they are too old to seek employment. The individuals will invariably refer to themselves as old. Eventually, they begin acting old. The process went from thinking they were old, to referring to themselves as old, and then turning that mindset into their new reality.

At the opposite end of this, we have to proactive jobseekers. Their mindset is positive. They talk optimistically, and inevitably exhibit can-do behaviors. For them, a job search amounts to being laser focused with a detailed strategy. Moreover, they invest their time and assets in what they like doing.

On the other hand, if you already think you are too old to enter the job market, you are—regardless of age. That said, imagine someone telling Warren Buffett he’s too old to be working. There is a good chance he would pick up a baseball bat and chase the individual out of his workspace.

Copyrighted © 2013 by Robert James