THIS is How Job Rejections Should Be Handled!

Admit it, it's the best use of those all-too-common finds in the mailbox during the job search:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RP4abiHdQpc

Friday Funnies

Sometimes a few puns are all it takes to bring a much-needed smile to the job seeker's face.  Enjoy!

***


"I've got a picture of the Supreme Court, but it really doesn't do them justice."

- George Carlin

"Advertising is the art of making whole lies out of half truths."

- Edgar Shoaff

"An optimist is one who knows exactly how bad a place the world can be; a pessimist is one who finds out anew every morning."

- Peter Ustinov

"Idealism increases in direct proportion to one's distance from the problem."

- John Galsworthy

"Idealism is fine, but as it approaches reality the costs really do become prohibitive."

- William F. Buckley

When Companies Don't Know What They Want...

Everybody remembers the teenage breakup.  The long staring into one another's eyes, the endless tears, the never-ending pseudo-drama that inevitably ended with the same five words:

"It's not you, it's me."

And while we all probably contemplated various acts of revenge - breaking into the offending ex's house while s/he was away and dialing automated long-distance calls in order to run up enormous phone bills was a common fantasy among many of my friends - most of us inevitably just settled for the typical 16- or 17-year old idea of vengeance and TP'd the offending ex's house.

If only there were some modern equivalent for the job interview.

This week's story comes from a friend of mine who has seen the same position advertised by the same company not once, not twice, but three separate times.  What's changed, you ask?  Only the title.  Some of the following text has been changed to preserve anonymity, but the basics are regrettably all too accurate:

Director of Marketing
[Type] of firm seeks marketing director for media outreach and development...

My friend applied for the position and received a notice that the position had been canceled.  "Well," she said.  "Another case of a company talking before doing its thinking."  

But it didn't end there.  A couple of months later, she saw this position advertised by the same firm:

Marketing Manager
[Type] of firm seeks marketing manager or outreach and business development...

My friend applied for the job through the agency running the position and was surprised to be told, "Sorry, you already applied for this position a couple of months ago."

"But that position was canceled, I was told," my friend replied.


"No, it's the same job," she was told.  "The company couldn't find anyone qualified as a director, so they bumped it down." Well, my friend thought, so much for that.


But it doesn't end there.  Two weeks after this conversation, my friend was contacted by the agent and asked if she would be interested in the following position with the same firm:

Marketing Manager for Business Development
[Type] of firm seeks marketing manager for business development and outreach projects...

"So, let me get this straight," my friend told me.  "You have a company that advertises a position at one level, can't find anyone willing to take it the given salary, but rather than raise the salary a few thousand dollars to the competitive level necessary to attract qualified candidates, they bump the job down instead.  When that doesn't work, they bump it down EVEN MORE, thus wasting more time, effort - and yes, money - going through all these pointless efforts just to 'save' a few thousand dollars? 

Or, to put it more directly, how much is the company really "saving" if it is wasting so much staff time and effort running in circles like this one?

"It reminds me of Alice in Wonderland," my friend concluded.  "Where the cheshire cat says, 'You must be mad, or else you wouldn't have come here!"

How to Turn Off a Candidate, Part VI - The Disinvitation!

Almost everyone who has ever watched more than a few episodes of "Seinfeld" sooner or later starts drawing the inevitable comparisons between the show's quirkier settings and life's equally unusual events.

But sometimes the parallels are really uncanny.

In the famous "backwards episode," (aka, "the one where they go to India"), Elaine receives what she regards as a "disinvitation" to a friend's wedding.  The reasoning behind the "disinvite" stems from the fact that she receives the invitation only a few days before the actual event itself (which is in India).  Feeling deliberately snubbed, she decides to attend the wedding as a means of avenging the apparent slight.  "You mean you're going to go all the way to India just to attend a wedding out of spite?" Jerry asks.  "Yep," Elaine says.

What brought this to mind was the experience a woman I know had recently where she received what can probably only be described as a "disinterview."  Put more simply, the company asked her to "keep Tuesday morning open" for a possible interview but never actually got around to confirming either the interview or the planned time for it until after 9:00 p.m. the night before:

----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Exxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: "[Name]" <[Name]@yahoo.com>
Sent: Mon, January 31, 2011 9:06:09 PM
Subject: Tomorrow

Hi.  I meant to give you a call today, but the day got the better of me…apologies.

As mentioned on Friday, mid-morning tomorrow works to meet with some of the team.  I have you starting at 10am and meeting with me, [PERSON] (who is a Marketing Manager on the [XTZ] team) and [SOMEONE] (whom you spoke with).

Please let me know if that works for you.

Thanks.

Exxxxxxxxxxxxxx


I've written before about some of the ways companies try to shift the blame to candidates for mixups regarding meetings and planned events or how they can be known to cancel interviews on the spot after someone has driven across town, but even by forgiving standards, this is another low.  You have to wonder if,  like Elaine's "disinvitation," the company is deliberately trying to dissuade the candidate from interviewing.

Suppose a candidate tried this approach and tried leaving a voice mail on someone's office machine at 9:07 the night before. "Mr. Johnson?  Suzie Q. here.  I apologize for the late notice, but I appreciate your keeping "mid morning" open for me tomorrow.  As luck would have it, I can see you at 9:00 a.m...." Chances are the candidate would not only be denied an opportunity for interviewing with Mr. Johnson, she probably wouldn't even be admitted to the building.

But leaving that aside, this candidate was apparently expected to block out her entire morning - remember she needs to allow for time to and from the location - for an interview that might or might not come through.  And on top of that she somehow was expected to be online after 9:00 p.m. to get the message that the interview would be going forward.  She would then have to make arrangements to get out of whatever professional obligations she already had scheduled for the next day (part time job, volunteering, personal commitments like child care, etc.) and get downtown for the interview.  And assuming she was able to do that, would there be an actual job waiting for her?

"No, there wouldn't," the woman told me after sharing her story. "They indicated the already had other candidates for the position, so this would simply have been another informational or pipeline interview.  In other words, even if I could have made it, you could hardly say it would have been worth it."

So what did she do?  Upon receiving the e-mail the next day - at 9:15 a.m. when she logged onto her personal e-mail from her office location - the woman sent a polite but steadfast reply advising the recruiter that the time did not work, that she had a part-time job she would need to arrange time away from (and which she indicated she had mentioned during initial conversations) but that she was still interested in possibly rescheduling for another time.  She followed up with a voice-mail that afternoon and another the next day.

She never received a reply. 

"I can't say I'm that upset," she confessed.  "Given the lack of notice that they gave and the lack of any follow-up or response, I'm not convinced it would have been a good use of my time to have tried to interview with them anyway."

How to Turn Off a Potential Candidate, Part V

Just when you think you've seen everything, something happens to make you realize that what defines the concept of "rock bottom" still has a long way to go.

Back in November, I began interviewing with a local company that has a regional headquarters in Richmond.  For obvious reasons, I can't disclose the name, but suffice it to say they are a Fortune 500 firm with what initially seemed to be a very respectable reputation.  A friend put my name in the hopper for a position, and I soon received a phone interview for a screening.  Shortly after, I had a second phone interview with the hiring manager, followed by an invitation to interview in-person down in Richmond.  (Note:  I live 90 miles north of the city.)  In keeping with our usual format, here are some take-aways the company & others like it might want to note:

If you want to turn off your candidates, drag the interview process out over a number of months.  This has been mentioned before, and while it's certainly understandable that companies want to move cautiously when hiring, taking months as opposed to weeks can convey a negative impression to candidates as to how management operates and how efficiently the organization conducts its business. 

If you invite a candidate down for an in-person interview, make no attempt to reimburse him or her for any related expenses that they incur.  So what if they have to drive nearly 200 miles round trip for the interview and wind up paying for all the gas, tolls, and meals out of their own pocket?  They won't look unfavorably upon you for making them pay these expenses on their own if they really want a job.  In fact -

If the candidate stays with relatives to avoid incurring any overnight accommodation expenses and save you money, consider that a side benefit that does not require any expression of appreciation on your part.  Sure, some folks abuse their expense accounts the way most rock stars do their livers and personal assistants, but that's no reason to thank them for trying to save you money. 

Don't acknowledge any follow-up messages or thank-you notes.  Look, we understand that for legal purposes - as well as just the normal hesitancy that accompanies the interview and decision-making process - you need to keep responses and replies to a minimum.  But if someone travels a good distance to interview in person with you and takes the time to send a polite follow up, a decent acknowledgment or thank-you on your part is hardly going to require that much effort.  You can probably even have a template created for forwarding if you're really worried about saying anything that might cause legal concern.  Of course, if you really want to take things up a notch -

Don't reply to any follow-up messages of any kind.  Sure, the candidate may reach out to you after a week or two to express continued interest, but rather than reply or answer the queries, it's probably best just to ignore them altogether.  That'll show 'em how great you are!

But best of all, if someone does all of these things and provides samples, portfolio pieces, project summaries, and outlines of the ways s/he is looking forward to contributing -

Don't show them the professional courtesy and respect you would expect for a finalist, treat them like an anonymous applicant instead!  There is no need to bother with a personal e-mail or phone call thanking them for their efforts and interest; just let them know your decision by making sure they receive the same automated rejection you would normally forward to anyone sending a resume in response to a position listing in the local paper!


----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Human Resources
To: Jxxxxxxxxn
Sent: Sun, January 30, 2011 8:36:41 PM
Subject: Status of Application

Dear John

Thank you for your interest in the position of [XYZ].  After careful review of your resume we have decided to proceed with other candidates.

Please continue to visit the [our career] website to review additional opportunities for which you are qualified.  We wish you every personal and professional success with your future job search. Thank you for your interest in [XYZ].

Sincerely,

[XYZ] Staffing

 Replies to this message are undeliverable.  Please do not reply.




I've said before that in an era of online media and social networking, companies need to be very careful with how they treat candidates.  While nobody likes to learn that s/he did not get a particular job, candidates who are let down in a professional manner that shows respect and appreciation for their interest are far more likely to reapply for other opportunities with the company, particularly those that might be an even better fit for their skills and expertise.  That's the difference between treating someone professionally vs. giving them a reason to go online to an Internet chat room, bulletin board, or job networking site and post critical reviews of the company and how it treats its applicants and candidates. 

And while in a down market when so many people are desperately looking for work these kinds of shoddy practices might be overlooked or dismissed, over the long-term such practices have the potential to do tremendous damage to a company's image and its ability to attract and recruit key talent.  In short, damaging your brand identity today can undermine your competitive standing tomorrow.

But then, if that's not a concern of yours as a hiring manager, there's certainly no need to worry about that now is there?