Are You Getting The Job Interview But Not The Job?

Maybe your interview skills are not up to snuff.

One of the biggest mistakes I see job candidates make is that they explore their "true selves" a bit too much during the job interview.

Be forewarned: Job interviews are NOT an opportunity for you to spill your guts. You are not at your shrink!

Rather, at an interview, or in any business interaction, you are ACTING. And the part you are playing is that of an eager, accomplished, confident, skilled professional.

Are YOU adept at portraying yourself in the best light? Let's discuss!

Feel free to write in and tell us what you feel might be going wrong at YOUR job interviews. Post a comment on this blog and we'll fire back with some helpful advice.


Click on the "# comments" link just below this line to post your career questions and opinions. Thanks!

Mid-Life Career Changes: Is There Any Hope?

I want to apologize for not commenting on this blog more frequently. Given my personal workload, it is very difficult to fit in blogging. However, we are back in the saddle and intend to post often from now on.

A reader comments as follows:

"I've been trying unsuccessfully to land a Marketing Internship. I'm a 37 year-old trying to transition from a career in Information Technology to a career in Marketing. My degree is a Bachelor's in Business Administration with a concentration in Management Information Systems from a well-respected Cal State University, but it's certainly not Harvard, Wharton, or Stanford. I've sent a few cover letters and resumes for Marketing Internships, but I've not gotten any bites.

Perhaps I'm operating under some incorrect assumptions, but I assumed most job screeners would prefer someone with proven experience who is still hungry enough to work for free over those who may not have held any real job or graduated yet.

I have some decent transferable general experience to highlight, and it's probably more than the average Marketing student, but something must be wrong. Either a mid-level career changer is raising red flags, my resume is weak aesthetically, job screeners are only interested in Marketing majors (current or degreed), most Marketing students already have Marketing-specific experience to highlight, or something else is the issue.

Could you provide any guidance to mid-career people like me trying to break into the field of Marketing who have good skills but not a Marketing Degree? Is Graduate school a necessity for us?"

Making a transition such as the one you describe is perhaps one of the hardest things you'll ever do in your career. If a transition is what you really want, do not give up, but understand the road is going to be a bumpy one. To my mind, your particular case would be easier were you to pursue an MBA or other degree that signifies a change in direction. And to expect an employer to give up a highly prized marketing internship to you - versus a younger Marketing major - is probably unrealistic.

Here are some things I would suggest:

1. Go back to school if possible, even if you have to do it at night.

2. If you are going to try for Marketing internships, don't just mail or email resumes -- try to get on the phone and call these people directly. In my experience, I find that writing or applying online does not produce half the result of personal contact.

3. Go to job fairs to meet and greet with employers. Visit college campuses and crash guest speaker forums.

4. If you are a techy (did I spell that right), you should know that technical companies have marketing departments, too. Try transitioning to a Marketing department in a company where your own skills are held to be valuable -- maybe even the company you work for now!

5. Do you look and dress like a Marketing person? Take a good look at your image before you even go to an interview and decide, maybe with the help of a friend, whether you look the part.

6. Your resume may have to be looked at by a professional - I could not begin to guess whether it is the problem or not. Our firm and others provide resume consulting services for a modest fee. You may want to invest a little money in your resume.

Good luck! And don't give up.

Brevity and the Job Interview

Prior to being in the management recruiting game, I ran a video production company for over a dozen years. We made all kinds of high-end corporate videos for big companies. Our work was generally very successful. We had accumulated a pile of commendation letters from our clients over the years, and I must say that I owed much of our success to a set of rules I followed about how to create content.

I can't mention all the rules right now, but one rule that stands out, now that I think about it, is this: When you interview someone on camera, make sure their sound bites are short and sweet. Don't let anyone ramble on - instead, have them deliver a clear idea quickly and succinctly. Very importantly, don't rely totally on cutting their comments in the edit room - instead, aim for a short, powerful "gem" while you are shooting. If it means doing a few takes, so be it. If it means taking more of an important executive's time, too bad!

As a video producer, my main goal was to maximize audience attention. When I became a management recruiter, I realized that the goal is exactly the same at a job interview! Indeed, in my first few months as a recruiter, I noticed that too many people ramble on for way too long when they answer an interview question. And this is one of the biggest mistakes they can possibly make. Why?

Off the top of my head, there are two main reasons why speaking too long can kill your chances of landing a job. Here is the first.

Blowing Your Time Budget

As you probably know, most job interviews are of a finite length - 30 to 45 minutes. Say you go to a job interview, and you sit down and the interviewer fires his or her first question at you. Usually, they start off with something like, "So, tell me about yourself." Without thinking, you vault into your life story, starting with your early childhood. And a full 15 minutes, and twenty yawns, later, you conclude your little speech.

Well, congratulations! You've just blabbed for a full quarter-hour and you blew a third of your interview time on one little question that should have taken two minutes tops to answer.

So now, you only have 30 minutes left, if that, and the interviewer has 12 other questions he wanted you to answer. Seems your face time has just become a precious commodity. But - if you had knocked off the question in, say, two minutes, you would have had 43 minutes left! And that would have been plenty of time for the interviewer to discover what he or she needed to know about you.

So properly budgeting your answer time is the first very important reason for being brief. Here is the second.

The Snooze Factor

Have you ever gone on a blind date or met a new acquaintance for a drink or lunch or something, and the person starts talking at you and doesn't stop? What was your reaction? I will bet that after just two minutes, your mind started to wander. You began thinking about how hungry you were. You fidgeted - your eyes glazed over - you started looking at your watch - you may have even given a good yawn!

In essence, your level of interest progressively petered out, and after three to four minutes, you just wanted to get up and leave. So, how do you think your interviewer starts to feel after five or six minutes of your own "fascinating" story?

Keeping Things Moving

I am sure you have heard people say that people watch too much television. And you might wonder, why would human beings, who, after all, have such a very short attention span, get into the bad habit of staring at a TV screen for hours and hours every day of their lives?

The answer, of course, is that television keeps people watching by "changing the scene" every two to three minutes - or even two to three seconds! When things move along, humans tend to stay more interested - even fascinated!

Likewise, you can build and sustain interest at a job interview by doing the very same thing as television does. No, you do not have to bring a television set along with you to the interview. Rather, when you answer an interview question, quicken the pace and get to the point almost right away. The less time you waste with parenthetical remarks, or details that no one cares about, the more people will actually pay attention to you. Your goal, after all, is for the interviewer to become progressively more interested in you as a person, and short pithy answers are a superior building block to help accomplish this.

There is a lot more to say on this subject, but in keeping with my own rule about being brief, I will end this segment right now.

Good luck!

More About "Respecting The Headhunter"

I received this anonymous comment regarding my last installment on respecting the recruiter. It reads as follows:

I am guilty of treating some recruiters abruptly - I'll admit it. But that's usually because they have made me feel like just another name on their list - they didn't bother to gain any knowledge of my experience or what I have to offer before they picked up the phone to call me. Some barely looked at my resume. It turns me off completely.

However, Mr. Yurman, I have talked to you on the phone and I was pleasantly surprised. You were personable, you related your own experiences to draw out mine, and you kept me on the phone longer than any recruiter ever has. I was obviously impressed because I've visited your site and now I'm blogging!

Your comments about getting too comfortable with the recruiter have me pondering something. Did you consider it a faux pas on my part (or anyone else's) when I candidly discussed the pros and cons of work, etc.? Seems to me that your relaxed, buddy-type demeanor is very deliberate - to coax information out of job seekers. And it's effective. So why wouldn't you expect us to be relaxed and at ease with you? Wouldn't you consider that a form of respect?

I appreciate your comment, and would like to clarify...

When I referred to "recruiters" I was not necessarily referring to myself. That is, not all recruiters are like me. Some are very distant, and are just looking at words on a resume, or not even that. Some will only speak with candidates who have exactly the right credentials for a particular job assignment. Others are very "professional," and are really judging you from your very first word to them, treating each interaction just like an actual job interview. It all depends on who you meet.

The basic fact is that a management recruiter's first priority is to represent the client (the hiring company) and to establish reasons to either consider - or not to consider - any given candidate. My advice is, if you do want to be considered, do not reveal anything to a "headhunter" that you would not reveal to the actual employer until you are absolutely comfortable with that person.

But I know it's not easy. Job seekers are in a difficult spot. They want and need someone to talk to. They are scared or frustrated or broke or all of the above. It is very tempting to unload all of that on the recruiter, but it is a bad idea because recruiters are not representing you, they are representing the client.

If you have, in fact, been able to establish a more "human" relationship with a recruiter over a period of a few days or weeks, I see nothing wrong with getting more familiar with that person - but it is unwise to completely open up to anyone from the very first contact.

To answer your question, I personally do not try to coax information out of anyone by taking a more familiar tone. I simply like to help people, and I am a more informal, friendly person by nature. I also believe that what goes around, comes around. If I can help you by sparing a few minutes of my day to advise you, perhaps you will help me or want to do business with me someday. For the most part, though, I just want to help. That is why I write this blog!

So in a nutshell, until you can really, really trust a headhunter, keep a lid on it. Why take the chance of blowing your opportunity?

Thanks!

How Technical People Can Sell Themselves Better

This past week, my firm was assigned a few technical IT jobs - a Web Applications Manager, an AS 400 Manager, and some others.

As you probably know already, my firm specializes mostly in less technical areas like Marketing and Communications, and we are used to seeing candidates sell themselves with a bit of, well, flair. So my eyes really had to adjust to the lights, as it were, when I gazed upon some of the resumes we received for these highly technical jobs.

What we found, basically, was that the majority of the resumes were like reading some sort of computer code. One resume started something like this:

- Five plus years experience in software engineering.
- Well-experienced in application development using J2EE, Servlets, JSP, Struts, Oracle, SQL Server.
- Operating Systems: Windows NT/2000/98, Unix, MVS
- Tools: WSAD, Eclipse, Dream Weaver, COOL:Gen 5.0
- Visual SourceSafe, Test Director 8.0
- Web Development: J2EE, HTML4.0, JSP 1.2, JavaScript1.3, Java Beans, XML
- Framework: Struts 1.2, Hibernate 2.1

Some of the resumes went on for pages and pages, spouting this kind of stuff.

Now if you are a marketing person, you are probably laughing right now because there is no way you would ever present a resume like this - "Where is the sales pitch? Where are the accomplishments? Where is the flair? You techno-geeks are too much!"

I guess I need to remind the marketing people that many technical people are contractors. And contractors play by a different set of rules. Employers seeking technical contractors usually judge people by the particular set of skills they possess. So consequently, the resumes of freelance contractors need not display much flair, just the skills. "If you've got the skills, you're hired."

But the game is a bit different if you are seeking a permanent job. Permanent employers are looking for more than just a set of capabilities - they want someone who is likable and professional - someone they would not mind having around for awhile.

If you are a "techno-geek" and you are seeking a permanent position, I strongly advise that you add some "humanity" and "business savvy" to your resume. Use your resume to promote your management capabilities, your creativity, your professionalism, your communications ability, as well as specific examples, not only of your skills, but of your accomplishments - anything that enhances your overall image as a "person."

Now I fully understand that for some technical people, writing about your non-technical attributes can be a challenge. After all, technical people tend to think in technical terms, right? So if you are incapable of adding the human touch to your resume, might I suggest hiring someone or asking a friend you trust to do it for you.

But whichever way you are able to accomplish it, adding some humanity to your resume is something you must do if you are to get the job you really want.

In effect, resumes are not just a list of capabilities, they are a reflection of who you are - as a business person and as a human being. So avoid the lists and put things in context for the person reading your resume. It could mean the difference between getting the job you really want - and not...

"Respect" And The Recruiter

I don't want to say this is true for everyone, but over the years, I have noticed a distinct difference between the level of courtesy and respect offered up by job candidates toward management recruiters like me, and the level of courtesy and respect afforded to individuals within the actual hiring organization.

Not many job seekers are willing to admit their innermost feelings on this subject, but from what I have been able to gather, there seem to be two basic reasons why management recruiters are afforded less than the respect and courtesy they should be receiving.

First, as a rule, we are much more approachable and less "formal" than someone in Human Resources. Candidates often regard me as a "friend" or a "buddy." I often catch job candidates saying things to me that they would never say to a hiring manager. Or, they might speak to me in a tone that is completely inappropriate. When I point out to them that they just committed a faux pas, they usually come back with, "oh, I would never say that to the actual hiring manager - I was just letting you know how I feel."

The second reason, I believe, why management recruiters are treated in a less than courteous manner is because, quite frankly, candidates look down upon them. They view them as flesh peddlers who do not add any value.

Sometimes, recruiters bring this upon themselves - not everyone in our field is the most thoughtful or "classy" person. But like any other trade group, management recruiters come in a variety of flavors, and I can safely say, there are some exceptionally intelligent, thoughtful, savvy individuals who chose to enter recruiting as their profession.

But that is neither here nor there - my advice to any job candidate is to approach management recruiters as if they were the hiring manager in the flesh. You are not helping yourself one iota by getting too familiar. After all, management recruiters were hired by their clients to test and evaluate candidates from the very first "hello." So why start off on the wrong foot?

There's a lot more to be said on this topic of "Respect" and the Management Recruiter. I'll be writing more on this topic, but would love to hear your opinions.

Thanks!

Are You A Great Storyteller?

Let's pretend for a moment that you are interviewing someone for a job, and you ask the candidate if he considers himself to be a good manager. The candidate answers, "Yes, I do," but offers no proof or elaboration. He just goes on an on about how great a manager he thinks he is. He almost convinces you.

Later that day, you see a second candidate. You ask her the same question you asked the first candidate - "Do you consider yourself to be a good manager?"

The candidate also answers, "Yes, I do." But then she launches into a compelling story about how she was able to lead a cross-functional team and drive that team to a successful outcome. It is an excellent story, and every time you ask her a question, she backs it up with evidence.

Later that day, you consider the two candidates. Which one would you want to hire --the one who just answered, "Yes, I'm a good manager." Or, the one who consistently told convincing stories to back up her claims?

The answer is obvious, isn't it? People who can present "proof" of their "claim" in a job interview are more likely to get the job because they are able to bring the claim to life and generally sound more legitimate.

Do YOU know how to tell a great story about yourself and your career? Before you even send out your first resume, prepare an arsenal of convincing stories about your accomplishments. I personally view this as the first and most important step in preparing for an interview.

Are you having trouble telling stories about yourself? Write in, and we'll help.