AP Photo - Adrian Dennis
Years ago, I had a large office in the Wall Street area with a personal secretary screening my phone calls, opening mail, taking dictation, and managing my calendar. Since then of course, the business world has changed. The next phase had executives sharing a pool of secretaries using floppy discs working on word processors. That was followed by an administrative assistant supporting at times an entire group.
Whereas years ago the hiring process and the hiring decision were the exclusive domain of the executive, nowadays—since so-called teamwork has become a major part of the work environment—hiring decisions are often shared and thus made by several team members. That process supports the concept that a group decision is better than an individual decision. As a result, the process has become convoluted, protracted, and not necessarily better—in my opinion.
Today’s job market is flooded with lots of very qualified candidates chasing very few openings. The way hiring happens has also changed. Technology has infiltrated the process, and today’s submission of one’s candidacy is purely mechanical. Nobody sees the candidate’s skills and qualifications unless the hiring manager’s keywords match those on the résumé, and only then is the original résumé reproduced for reading. Once that happens, several candidates get reviewed via a selection process.
To save time and money, a phone interview, or screen, is the next hurdle candidates face. It’s usually accomplished by someone junior in the human resources department who does not fully understand the hiring department’s particular needs. If an external recruiter is the intermediary between the candidate and the hiring company, then the recruiter’s financial motivation is playing a key role. That’s because recruiters work for the company paying their commissions.
Decision Making
Decision making is a complex process because several parties have a say and a stake in it. For example, sometimes the human resources department representative’s opinion carries significant weight, and other times the rep is merely a paper trail processor. Sometimes a candidate is interviewed by several people in addition to the final decision maker. Those others, too, have a say—because hiring managers want to show their support of their teams by demonstrating their collegiality—but to what extent those other opinions matter is probably variable. And what happens when a hiring manager favors a particular candidate but several others who’d be future peers of the candidate show resistance? In addition, in most cases hiring managers know the thinking and mentality of the person they report into, so what happens if their own opinion is opposed regarding the type of person who should be hired?
A recent large survey was conducted among human resources professionals and hiring managers. The survey clearly found that by far, the number one factor in the hiring decision is the fit factor—meaning, the determination about whether a candidate will fit into the culture of the company. Fully 100 percent of the respondents said so! But what is this culture that’s referred to? Who defines it? Who interprets it?
Some companies use exclusively behavior-based or situation-based interview questions. The tenet here is that past performance is a good indicator or predictor of similar such performance. I wonder if those companies can decisively demonstrate that by practicing this theory, they become able to hire and retain a higher-caliber labor force.
Ultimately, of course, it is people who make the final decision about which candidate to offer the job to. The interview process is certainly not a science but an art. Can that art be learned in order to improve one’s chances of being hired? Well, I’m sure you know the answer to the old riddle that asks, Do you know how to get to Carnegie Hall?
Getty photo
I am a practicing career coach and have noticed that in most cases, I guide my clients through 10 certain deeply held beliefs of mine that have evolved over my years of practice. I decided to call the concepts the Landing Expert Principles—naming them after my Web site, www.landingexpert.com
- Job seekers should have their résumés written by a recommended, professional résumé writer known to produce excellent résumés. In today’s economy, just plain “very good” résumés don’t make the cut.
- Based on the theories of Albert Mehrabian, professor emeritus of psychology at UCLA, an interviewer judges a candidate 55% on visual appearance, 38% on voice, and 7% on words.
- The interview is a competition. The winner is the one who outshines other candidates, who knows the rules of the game, and who knows how to deploy all the tools.
- The hiring decision is made during the interview, based on the impression the candidate leaves behind, which in turn is based primarily on the interviewer’s gut feelings. Unfortunately, such decision making is certainly not pure science.
- The interviewer knows the candidate is there to sell himself, but the interviewer is not ready to buy everything the candidate wants to sell—except when two conditions occur:
- The candidate recites facts and gives evidence about career background and ability to do the job.
- The candidate uses adjectives or other kinds of self-descriptions in sentences that are in the third person—that is, the otherwise self-descriptions were said by others.
- Interviewing is like dancing: it cannot be learned from a book but only from practice. The more one practices, the better one becomes at it.
- Interviews are counter-intuitive: they’re not about the candidate; they’re about the candidate’s skills and experience as they relate to ability to solve the interviewer’s problems.
- The interviewer is listening, but his hearing is selective: that is, when the candidate talks about himself, the interviewer barely hears it; when the candidate talks about how he can solve the company’s problems, the interviewer becomes more interested and attentive and is thinking, “Louder, louder!”
- Before you answer each question during an interview, ask yourself in turn the question “So what?” which will force you to recount significant and meaningful examples pertinent to the questions.
- To convey the most credibility as a candidate, provide facts via success stories from your professional past. Often use the expression for example and then (1) briefly describe a job situation needing resolution, (2) list the specific actions you took to resolve the situation, and (3) end by pointing out the resulting benefits to your team or employer.
Getty photo
As a career coach, I talk mostly with two kinds of people: employed or in transition to another job. Sadly, people in both groups have one thing in common: most of them are unhappy. For those in transition, the unhappiness is self-explanatory, but why such a high level of unhappiness for those who are lucky to have an employer?
Several recent articles cover this subject. People who still work spend longer hours at it, and they face higher levels of stress. There’s no question that employee satisfaction is at an all-time low and that it has an impact on people’s health as well as relationships with family and friends.
A 2010 study found that in the United States, 55% of employees were not satisfied with their jobs! This is the highest level of dissatisfaction ever recorded, and the trend toward such dissatisfaction has strengthened steadily in the past 25 years. That means that unhappiness in the workplace is not directly related to the current economic downturn.
Unhappiness at work is not isolated. Unfortunately, it affects not only the unhappy people themselves but also those surrounding them. A recent Swedish study found a direct link between one’s relationship with one’s manager and the impact that that relationship has on one’s health: men who had toxic supervisors increased their risk of heart attack by 50%. A different study revealed that people of average height who felt unhappy at work added as much as five pounds to their weight.
A different, long-term study dealing with the impact of unhappiness at work confirmed that there is a strong correlation between one’s job satisfaction and one’s life satisfaction. Clearly, our thoughts, our emotions, and our performance on the job affect our behaviors away from the job and thus are affecting our loved ones.
What a job seeker can learn from all this is that it is of utmost importance to find out about a company’s culture, about the work conditions there, and as much as possible about the person one will report to before accepting the job. The sad—but practical—part is that even if one gets a great job at a great company with a great boss, in today’s economy things change so fast, and many of those changes are totally out of the control of the employee. So, what does one need so that work life harmonizes relationships and doesn’t destroy them? Luck—lots of it.
So, what is career coaching? Many people nowadays use the term career coaching, but they’re not sure they understand its meaning or whether they’re using it in the right context. Any kind of coaching consists of the practice of supporting an individual or a group that has the objective of reaching a predetermined goal or goals. Coaching is a very broad term encompassing a variety of types such as business, career, conflict, executive, personal life, religion, and sports coaching.
Career coaching revolves around job-related issues. Many people use the expressions career coaching, career counseling, and career consulting interchangeably but without really understanding the differences between those terms. In fact, among the three terms there is a fair amount of overlap.
A career coach asks lots of questions to diagnose issues that need attention, focuses primarily on the client’s agenda, and works with the client on the skills needed to achieve the objectives. The process is brief and commonly accomplished via short sessions and sometimes even via phone or Skype.
A career counselor provides answers and information. It is logic that drives this process, which uses standardized assessment tools. Counselors typically meet with clients face-to-face at regular, predetermined time intervals.
A career consultant resolves problems by meeting frequently with clients at the consultant’s workplace, and the engagement is project based.
Even within career coaching there are subspecialties. Some coaches specialize in helping clients learn how to apply job search tools; others cover aspects of clients’ marketing of themselves; and still others teach social media presence and the use of LinkedIn, Twitter, and the like. I myself am a career coach specializing in preparing clients for interviews. About 70% of my work consists of performing mock interviews with clients, but a goodly portion also helps clients with myriad other career-coaching issues.
For some job seekers, the cost of career coaching can be a significant barrier. Career coaching is of course a service—one that is purchased the way similar professional services are. For instance, most people see a doctor when they’re sick; or they hire a lawyer when they need legal counseling; or they have their tax filing prepared by an accounting professional if they don’t know how to do it.
Career coaching is a profession similar to the professions of plumbers, electricians, accountants, and so on. All of those professionals invest in their careers in order to support themselves, and so, they rightfully expect to be compensated financially by clients or customers.
In my opinion, the cost of career coaching should be made explicit at the outset; and the most expedient way to announce it is via the coach’s Web site. The cost should be made transparent because clients have the right to know up front what they’ll end up paying for such a service. I’d be very suspicious if the cost is not spelled out. What is there to hide? What other surprises can a client expect? Frankly, job seekers should not engage career coaches without checking out whether such coaches have been recommended by others. And I’d question the quality of a coach’s services if no testimonials or LinkedIn recommendations are available.
In researching career-coaching costs, I’ve found it interesting that sessions vary in length from 45 minutes to 50 minutes to 60 minutes and that charges vary, too—from, say, $75 to more than $200 per session. My advice is that a prospective client look not at cost per session but at total cost and then compare that with how the client would profit from the service.
Above all, what would the likely outcome be if such a service is not used? By working with a career coach, clients speed up the job search process, work with a pro, get unbiased feedback, stay on track, and, by the end, will have learned how to negotiate a better compensation package that would cover the cost of the career coaching—often severalfold!
Getty photo
Ten minutes after I meet with a coaching client for the first time, the client is facing my video camera for 60 to 90 seconds. Then we watch the video together. Differently from in real life and because we have modern technology, I can separate the impression—and the client’s image—from the spoken words. I simply turn the speakers off so I don’t get influenced by the video’s verbal content and context. This is a powerful experience, one that provides rich information. In most cases a client can use that information for improving job interview skills and then can apply the newly learned skills during a job interview. Most people are awestruck by their video experience. In less than two minutes, people can see for themselves how they’re perceived by others—something they couldn’t have known before.
Albert Mehrabian, currently UCLA professor emeritus of psychology, published his findings on inconsistent communication of feelings and attitudes and on the relative importance of verbal messages and nonverbal messages. He devised what’s known as the 55%-38%-7% rule. Professor Mehrabian’s basic tenet is that when we communicate with other people, we’re being judged to the extent of 55% by our nonverbal behavior such as body language and facial expression, 38% by our tone of voice, and only the remaining 7% by the actual words we speak and their context. Moreover, if the words we use are incongruent with our body language and tonality, then the other person tends to believe more in what he sees and hears and less in the meaning of the words.
When we interview, our body language says a lot about us and about our emotional state; and poor body language often sends the message that we’re stressed or fearful. But even before the interview interaction begins, the interviewer looks at your face, your hair, your clothes, and the image you’re projecting. Thus, he forms an opinion about you before you’ve even had a chance to formally meet.
The interviewer observes your body language and interprets it quickly, knowing at once whether you’re scared, passive, under- qualified, or something else. If you say the wrong thing, the interviewer can forgive that, but if your body language says something different from what you actually say—for example, you say you’re a person who works well in stressful situations, but your body language betrays the fact that you’re indeed stressed; or, for another example, you say you’re confident, but your body language again betrays the fact that you’re not—well, those are things an interviewer knows you can’t change.
Following are a few body language mistakes to avoid during a job interview.
- Crossing your arms, which suggests you’re either overconfident or uncomfortable
- Lack of eye contact, especially while the interviewer is talking
- Not smiling, which makes you appear nervous or unfriendly
- Hiding your hands, because the interviewer will want to interpret how open and honest you are by looking at your hands
The only way to improve correspondence between the words you say and what your body language says is to prepare for the interview and practice, practice, and practice some more. It’s best to practice interviewing with someone who can point out to you your areas of deficiency and can guide you in making improvements.
