Comeuppance

By Neil Patrick

A cautionary tale for interviewers - we reap what we sow, especially if we treat people badly.

This post will give you a smile if you have been rejected following a job interview. It shows how an interview can expose the interviewer's shortcomings just as much as the candidate's.

I was recently told this story by a candidate for an internal promotion at the firm she worked for. It was a panel interview with the the head of department, prospective line manager and an HR person.

The line manager was cocky. Her approach was to pile overbearing pressure onto the candidates. Her tone was brusque, interrupting frequently and generally trying to unsettle the applicants. Every candidate said it was the most traumatising interview they had ever had. One left in tears.

Part of this interviewer’s ‘technique’ was to probe every answer ad nauseum.

At one point, the interview went like this:

Line manager: “If you were appointed into this role, what would you do to reduce the gossip and rumouring amongst your team?”

Candidate: “I’d make it a team meeting agenda item and make it plain to my team that this is unacceptable because it creates all sorts of damaging consequences for the firm and potentially their own career progression”.

Line manager: "How do you know that would work? And why have you not done this already?"

Candidate: "Well I did have a discussion with my team about it, and they understood and it has noticeably lessened the problem."

Line manager: "So why have you not spread this to the rest of the company?"

Candidate: "Well that is above my pay grade."

Line manager: "But if this has been successful with your team why would you not want to share this with your peers?"

Candidate: "I think it should be endorsed by you first."

Line manager: "But this is the first time I have heard about this. Why didn’t you tell me about it?"

Candidate: "I did. I sent you an email."

Line Manager: "I never saw it."

Candidate: "When you didn’t reply, I sent it again. Twice."

Line Manager (visibly irritated): "Well send it to me again and I will look at it."

She didn’t get the promotion allegedly because another candidate who was judged to deserve the promotion more than she was offered the role.

But her feedback said she had performed well at interview and that she would be given the next available managers job when it became available.

A good interviewer doesn’t bully or pile on pressure. They probe without menace. They need every candidate to perform to the best of their ability, not the worst.

This isn’t the last time this sort of interview will happen, but maybe, just maybe, this person will wind their neck in a bit from now on...

Being early – a secret way to access the hidden jobs market

By Neil Patrick

Fortune favours the punctual. Here’s why.

I post a lot of information here about techniques for getting hired in this hyper-difficult jobs market.

And they all involve some amount of effort. But here’s one which doesn’t. It just requires an adjustment of your schedule.

I was talking yesterday with a friend who’s a job search coach and he told me an interesting story.

He had a client who had applied for a job and got asked to attend an interview. She actually arrived almost an hour early and after signing in at the desk began her wait.

At this point, most people will sit down quietly in a corner waiting to be called to their interview. They’ll browse the magazines and newsletters, or read their resume and the job description over again.

This lady didn’t though. It was a busy open plan office and people were coming and going through the reception area constantly. Instead of quietly sitting down, she chatted with a few people. She told them she was there for an interview. And a little about what her background was.

Because she had prepared properly and knew a good deal about the business, she could talk about some of the things she knew the company was doing. She had also perfected her elevator pitch and used this as an opportunity to practise it. One person even asked her for her contact details.

She actually discovered a few more things about the firm that were useful snippets of information for her interview.

She had the interview. And a few days later she was called back to be informed she’d not been chosen.

She wasn’t in the least bit disappointed though. Because before she got this call, one of the people she’d talked to in the reception area had called her already to ask if she’d be interested in taking on a role they needed filling.

The job hadn’t been advertised. It was more senior and better paid than the one she’d interviewed for and she didn’t have to compete with any other candidates. Needless to say, she took the job.

Now this story isn’t statistically proven. It an anecdote. No more no less.

And will it happen to everyone who arrives early for an interview? Of course not.

But neither does it cost you anything. There’s no downside and a lot of possible upsides.

But what I like most about this story is that it shows how thinking outside of the box can make a big difference to outcomes. If this lady had just done the normal thing and quietly sat down waiting for her interview, speaking to no-one, she’d not have been hired. But she didn’t. She didn’t even plan this as a strategy; she just thought she’d make the best possible use of her time while waiting.

It just goes to show – fortune favours the brave…and the early!

Why the wrong people get hired and how to turn this to your advantage

By Neil Patrick

There are a lot of very average people that get hired simply because they fit a template. 

It’s not because these people are special. It’s because archaic approaches to selection have proved to be astonishingly persistent in many organisations. If you don't believe me, I think you'll change your mind, when you read some of the examples below, at least some of which I am sure you'll have personal experience of.

When these flawed approaches are combined with some bizarre thinking, it’s unlikely the best person for the job will be selected.

You cannot change this fact, but if you know what the process flaws are, you can use this knowledge to your advantage.

I’ve been talking to several recruiters recently about their businesses and how they and their clients go about the process of selection. And it’s clear the best person for a job is often not the one that ends up getting hired.

How can it be, when this is such an important decision and so much time, money and effort is invested in it, that so many poor decisions are made?

Well my conversations revealed that the supposed science of selection is frequently distorted and corrupted by a whole range of instinctive, almost primitive beliefs and practices.

1. Managers define the person rather than the job

Most job descriptions are written so that the desired person’s personal characteristics are much more specifically defined than the characteristics of the job requirements. These personal requirements presuppose what the person hired ought to have in terms of background, skills and experiences. Such profiles not are not job descriptions, they’re ‘person descriptions’.

Since clear definitions of work success have repeatedly been shown to be the main driver of personal performance, it seems obvious that managers should carefully define the work that needs to be done before defining the person they think can do the work.

Specific, key performance objectives should be the main part of a true job description. Not vague and generic characteristics like, “good communication skills”, “self-motivated”, or “results-orientated”

2. Getting the job requires a whole different skillset to doing the job

In an election, when deciding who to vote for, we often judge and choose based on our perception of the candidate’s presentation skills, not their ability to do the job.

Managers do the same with job candidates. They overvalue first impressions, likeability, and communication skills. They instinctively exclude those who are “different” in some way, temporarily nervous, or those who are not slick and polished interviewees.

 
3. People with personal connections are treated differently

People who are connected to the interviewer in some way are evaluated more fairly than a complete stranger. Strangers are assumed unqualified from the outset.

Ordinary candidates are assessed on the depth of their skills, level of direct experience, personality and first impression. These have been proven by research to be useless as predictors of future performance and fit.

The connected person has an automatic advantage – it’s assumed that they will fit with the team and culture of the organisation. Those who are unknown are not given this approval. They have to prove it and that can be difficult.

4. Managers ask irrelevant questions and assess people on meaningless facts

Brain teasers were proved to be of no value in selection processes long ago, but they remain a persistent feature of numerous interview and selection processes.

I heard of one CEO who predicted team skills based on whether or not the candidate picked up the coffee cups before leaving the interview room. I worked with a senior manager who co-related strong organizational and planning skills with a tidy desk, and would regularly carry out desk ‘inspections’, in the belief this would help him know who was performing and who wasn’t.

More recently, I heard about a manager who assumed that any person that could not keep to the appointed interview time for any reason at all lacked a strong work ethic.

5. The decision process is based on candidate features not benefits

Filling jobs with those who tick the largest number of boxes is a poor but common substitute for hiring the best person possible. The latter involves a dialogue aimed at acquiring an in-depth understanding of a person’s capabilities, aspirations and fit. There’s more give-and-take in the negotiation process. Both sides balance their long and short-term needs.

So, I have no doubt that the hiring processes in many, many cases are flawed and that the best candidates are often not the ones that get hired.

What can you do about this? Yes it’s unfair and counter-productive for everyone involved. But you have to face facts and ignore the things you cannot change, and focus instead on the things you can.

1. Pay close attention to the job description, however flawed it may be.

If the JD has been thrown together without due care and attention to detail, play them at their own game. Make sure that you include every clichéd key word from the JD in your resume AND then verify that you have that qualification, by means of providing an example of how you have delivered that result, or shown that capability in your previous job(s).

2. Recognise that the job interview will place undue importance on how well you present yourself, probably much more than how well you can do the job.

Approach the interview not so much as an exercise in showing what you know, more as an opportunity to seduce the interviewers. This is why you should pay close attention to every detail of your dress and personal presentation.

Understand that if you show an interest in the organisation and the job by asking appropriate questions, you’ll actually make the interviewers like you more and they will thus rate you more highly.

3. Adjust your target jobs to prioritise those where you may have a connection to the person hiring

This is where long-term investment in building a good personal network can really pay off. The bigger your network, the more chances you will have of finding vacancies where someone you know personally can come into play…whether it’s by giving you a confidential inside track, or in the best situations, actually putting you forward for consideration.

4. Don’t lose self-confidence following a rejection where you were the best candidate but still didn’t get hired.

I know this is easy to say and hard to do. But if you spotted any of the above process weaknesses I described above in your selection process, you can take heart from the knowledge that: 

• It was poor process by the hiring firm not your unsuitability that meant you didn’t get hired. 
• If the firm can’t get this key process right, maybe, it wasn’t such a great firm to join after all. 

For all the talk in HR circles about process quality and selection science, the sad fact is that the process flaws I describe above will probably never be banished completely. But at least if you know what they are, you have a chance to counter them.

How to transform your interview and defeat your competition

By Neil Patrick

If you think you know how to prepare for a job interview, think again. A recent survey of employers by job site Careerbuilder.com found that 39% of jobseekers failed because they didn’t properly research the company they were being interviewed by.

Whilst it might seem an obvious point that research is a key part of proper interview preparation, there’s a powerful secret extra benefit to doing this which I’ll reveal in a moment.

As Monster.co.uk points out, "Nothing is as disappointing as when a candidate oozes enthusiasm and then doesn't even know the most basic facts and figures about a company."

What’s more, in this digital age where so much information is freely available online, companies expect you to do this. There really is no excuse not to anymore.

What you need to know

Naturally, your aim is to appear knowledgeable about the company, its market position, plans for the future and the particular role you're applying for. With smaller employers especially, you should also reassure yourself that the company is financially sound.

It's also valuable to know about the culture within the company and a little about the person who’s interviewing you. You might just discover that you have connections, background or interests in common.

At the very least, their career history will give you valuable insights into how they are likely to think and what their particular focus at interview might be.

The company website

The first and most basic information source is the organisation’s own website. Any reasonably-sized firm is likely to have a blog or media centre. You'll find out what the company is doing right now, its products and services and how it markets them.

The website will probably also contain biographies of senior staff - possibly including your interviewer - and a list of important clients. If you extend your research to these clients, you can also pick up some very useful information that will enable you to talk knowledgeably at your interview.

Social media

Most companies now have a Facebook or Twitter account, and this can provide you with a good insight into the company culture. It's also very useful to look up the person that's interviewing you on LinkedIn. Do you have any contacts in common? If some of these are good personal connections of your own, it may well be worth having a private chat with them to get their insights.

Other websites

Job sites including Glassdoor and Inside Buzz, contain profiles of thousands of companies. Some have reviews written by current or former employees, which can tell you a lot about what working there is like.

When applying to small companies, provided you have some basic financial knowledge it is worth creating a Deudil account to check out the financial well-being of the company. That way, you won’t be blinded by any smokescreens by interviewers to cover up the real story. Make no mistake, companies in difficulty often keep on recruiting right up to the point of collapse…

Google is your friend…

The company’s website will only tell you what the company wants you to hear - and this may not give you the full story. Create a Google alert using the name of the organisation and/or business unit. This will give you daily updates of any news items about the company.

You can find out how your target company is doing by using Google searches such as "(company name) + research + share price". With luck, you'll find research reports about how your target company is performing, and some independent expert opinion on its prospects.

You'll need a context in which to put all you've learned about your potential new employer. So check out their competitors' websites too.

Get smart with social media tools

A valuable tool to help you establish the success level of the company on social media is Kred. I was recently talking to a client about their online marketing strategy. I showed them how their competitors were scoring higher than them on Kred and why. They had no idea this was the case. And this news made them really sit up and take notice of the plans I was proposing for them. Had I been applying for a job, this sort of insight would have been really valuable too.

How to use the information

After all this, you'll have a heap of information about your prospective employer. But you need to utilise it tactfully. Posts to the company's social media sites, may well include some customer complaints; unless the site's swamped with them, this doesn't automatically mean you should reject the company as a prospective employer.

Once you get into the interview, it may be tempting to try and showcase all your homework by dragging as many facts as you can into the conversation. Whilst this will make you look keen, it's much better to hold back a little and simply use what you've learned as and when it comes up. Your aim is to look as if you knew it all already. Where you've uncovered negative information about the company, a lawsuit, a fall in profits or any other negative information - it's best to avoid mentioning it altogether.

So, prepare, prepare, prepare!

I promised I’d let you in on a secret at the start of this post. And here it is.

A couple of years ago I was interviewed for an executive board position on a major UK plc.

Before the interview I wrote down every question I thought I might be asked, from the deceptively simple ‘tell me about yourself’, to the testily specific ‘what’s your take on the regulatory frameworks in the market’. And everything in between. I scripted the best answers I could come up with, polished them and learned them so I could more or less recite them word perfectly.

But I didn't just prepare answers, I prepared almost as many questions. I wanted the interview to be as much of a discussion as I could make it. And for that, I needed good questions. This would not only take the pressure off me a little, it would show if I chose the right questions, that I had really done my homework.

To find the right questions I really went to work on my research. I mean really went to work. I got hold of every news report and company statement I could find. I tracked the share price history. I used LinkedIn and other social media to discover the name and background of every senior person in the business. I researched their competitors. And their competitors’ strategies. I made notes on all the market sector reports and analysis I could find.

All in all, I think I spent about five full days of work preparing. But at the end, I was so prepared and ready, that I knew I would put on my best possible performance. When the day came and I sat in the reception area, waiting to go into the interview, I was calm, focussed and actually looking forward to the interview and having the discussion.

As it turned out, the interview was just between the CEO and myself. And it was the simplest interview I’ve ever had. It was more like a friendly chat than an interview.

And this was because my research meant that instead of me passively responding to a string of questions, I was able to not only answer every one, but also bring up relevant topics I had discovered through my research. And since most CEOs love talking about their companies, we ended up having an interesting and engaging discussion.

At a stroke, I had proved that I was super knowledgeable about the business and therefore interested and qualified. But critically, the interview turned into a two way discussion…and I’m certain that it facilitated a more meaningful dialogue as a result. I was no longer a passive participant - I was actively steering the conversation too.

Of course this couldn't have happened if I was being interviewed by several people or a panel. But the key point remains - proper preparation will make you more relaxed, more confident, and more knowledgeable. Do it thoroughly and the extent of your preparation will be clear, proving that you really want the job...in a positive way.

So don’t just think that research is about showing that you know a little about the company…do it right and you can change the whole interview process for the better and empower yourself too.

Show you mean business and let your competitors have the stress instead!