The Return of the Purple Squirrel

Earlier this year I wrote about the mythical purple squirrel that one fellow job seeker told me about.  The term represents the mythical perfect-fit companies always seek but can never find.  Rather than compromise on expected perfection, they keep searching and hoping they'll find that jack-of-all-possible-trades who can:

• Solve every single problem and need
• Get along perfectly with ever single conflicting personality in the office
• Bring decades of experience to the position without somehow being over 40 years of age, and yet is still
• Willing to work for the lowest salary grade possible.

Well, as they say in horror movie circles, "He's baaaack..." 

True enough, no less an authority than Juan Williams's favorite former employer NPR posted an excellent article on just how far companies are willing to hold out as they search for that ultimate candidate.  With rising health care costs, leaner budgets, and a continuing anxiety over the ongoing recession, firms are so reluctant to hire that it's not uncommon for them to decide even after finding suitable candidates with strong records that, "Well, for us the time is just not right at the moment.  Call us back in another 6 months."  (Which makes perfect sense, actually, since most job seekers have little else to do but circle back to the same companies that reject them every six months, right?) 

Anyway, you can read the full article here.  It's part of an ongoing series NPR is producing on how skills gaps (or perceived gaps) are in many instances keeping companies from hiring.  A particularly notable part of the series addresses the fact that many applicants apparently continue to "live in the past" when it comes to salaries.  The argument goes that if an applicant has transferable-but-not-identical skills, s/he should be willing to compromise on salary to take a position. 

This would be almost comical if it didn't ignore the more fundamental fact that employers often won't hire someone who used to make a higher salary in his or her previous job.  The reason?  Once the economy picks back up, they fear, the candidate will bolt for a higher-paying position elsewhere. 

This puts candidates in a perfect Catch-22:  If they disclose what they actually made at their last jobs, they may price themselves out of consideration.  On the other hand, if they lowball what they were actually making and the discrepancy is discovered as part of the standard due diligence normally done before a hiring decision is made, the candidate looks dishonest and won't receive an offer.  In short, you're damned if you do and damned if you don't. 

Bottom line?  Candidates may indeed have to get used to living in a different world as far as compensation is concerned, but they also shouldn't be penalized for once making something more at their previous positions, either.  Put another way, companies shouldn't expect to have it both ways, or they may find themselves unable to hire anyone at all.

What if Candidate Rejections Mirrored Company Ones?

(Editor's Note:  Anyone who's read more than a few of these postings knows one of my biggest pet peeves is the way companies interview candidates for positions that don't exist or post advertisements just to solicit resumes when they have no plans to do any actually hiring.  That led me to wonder, what if candidates could do the same thing to companies?  What would that be like?  Read on and find out.)

(Opening Scene:  A typical household.  The phone rings.  A very qualified applicant picks it up.)

Applicant:  Hello?

Hiring Manager: Hi.  Is Jack there?

Applicant: This is Jack.

Hiring Manager:  Jack!  It's Fred with Widget Makers, Inc.  I'm calling with some great news for you.  Our management team was really impressed with your credentials and enjoyed meeting you last week for that panel interview.  And after running things through the system, we've put together a compensation and benefits package that we think will be right in line with what you outlined.  Therefore, we'd like to go ahead and make you a formal offer at this time.

Applicant: Well, Fred, I appreciate your interest; but due to a realignment of my priorities and business needs, I'm afraid I will not be making any new employment decisions at this time.

Hiring Manager:  (Aghast)  WHAT?!?!

Applicant:  Yes, I really enjoyed talking with you and your managers last week, and your company's qualifications are certainly very impressive.  However, due to an unfortunate freeze in my decision making, I'm afraid I'm not able to accept any offers at this time.

Hiring Manager:  Wait, wait.  Hold on.  I'm confused.  Last week you said you were very interested in working for us.

Applicant:  Yes, but I'm afraid my needs have changed. 

Hiring Manager:  You're telling me that they've changed just since last week? 

Applicant:  I'm afraid so.  However, I will keep your offer on file for six months, and in the event my needs change, I'll be glad to contact you. 

Hiring Manager:  Jack, this is a one-time offer.  It won't be around in six more months.

Applicant: Well, when organizations tell me they'll keep my resume on file for six more months, that usually means they won't be calling me, either.  I just wanted to be up front with you. 

Hiring Manager:  (Frustrated)  I don't understand, Jack.  We spent a great deal of time putting this package together and scheduling these meetings with you; and last week everything seemed fine.  You're telling me that this was time that was wasted because you were never really interested in finding a job in the first place?

Applicant:  Again, I really enjoyed talking with you and your team.  As I said, your qualifications are quite impressive and commendable.  I'm afraid it's just not the right fit for me at this time.

Hiring Manager:  (Exasperated)  Jack, I'm really confused here.  What do you mean when you say it's not the right fit?  Last week everything seemed to be very positive.  Have you accepted another offer?

Applicant:  No, like any candidate, I need to keep my finger on the pulse of the hiring market to see what's out there.  So I regularly screen employers to measure their value propositions for employees to make sure what I'm offering is competitive in the marketplace.

Hiring Manager:  So, you're telling me that we were just market research for you and that you were never really seriously thinking about working for us at all?

Applicant:  I wouldn't look at it that way.  As I said, I enjoyed meeting with you and your team; it's just not the right match for me at this time.

Hiring Manager:  There's that phrase again about "match" and "fit."  Jack, I have to be honest with you.  This is really putting us in a bad position.  You're telling me we have to start our search all over again?

Applicant: Well, as a job seeker, I know I've been there many times myself.  You've got a good company.  I'm sure you'll find something.

Hiring Manager:  Jack, this search has taken us several months; and as you know, it's a difficult time out there to be hiring right now.  Is there any way we can get you to reconsider?  I mean, perhaps we could schedule another meeting or something -

Applicant:  I'm sorry.  I have business needs that I have to attend to, so I can't just meet with every employer who wants to make me an offer.  If I did that, I'd never be able to do the rest of the things I have to do.  (Side note:  This is an actual paraphrasing of something that was once told to this author by a recruiter - you can't make this kind of diplomatic finesse up.)

Hiring Manager:  Jack, don't you think this is just a little unprofessional?  I mean, you wasted a good deal of our time that could have been spent looking at candidates who were serious about working for us.

Applicant:  Excuse me, Fred, but didn't you tell me you folks had been in a hiring freeze for the past year? That didn't seem to stop you from leaving all those positions up on your Web site during that time.  How much time did you waste looking at all those resumes you received?

Hiring Manager:  We didn't waste any time.  We weren't looking at any resumes -

Applicant:  That's what I mean.  You advertised for jobs you weren't planning to fill and wasted a lot of other people's time that they could have spent more productively talking to companies that were actually hiring; but now that the shoe's on the other foot, you're upset because you think I wasted your time? 

Hiring Manager:  But it's not the same -

Applicant: No, it's not. But you know what it is, Fred?

Hiring Manager:  What?

Applicant:  It's just business.  Thank you for your call.  I wish you well in your future endeavors. 

(Curtain)

Undercover Boss? How About "Undercover Applicant" Instead?

Okay, I admit it.  I've never been a fan of reality TV.  I often think I'm the only person who has never watched a single episode of "Survivor," never got into "The Amazing Race," and never really got "hooked" on any of the shows.  But I know the shows are cheap to produce, and so long as there is good-guy / bad-guy conflict that people can root for or against, we're likely to get more and more of them. 

However, there IS one show I've been tempted to watch but have never actually bothered to, and that is "Undercover Boss."  The premise is that a CEO takes on the role of a lower-level staffer at his - and yes, it's still mostly "his" as opposed to "hers" these days - own firm to see what it's like in the trenches.  The boss takes on the role of a mail clerk, cleaner, or other menial task to view life from the bottom.  How would the boss do at your job?  Could he handle it?  And what would he learn? 

I have a counter-proposal for the networks:  Do another show where the CEO has to interview for that same job. 

You read that right.  Have the guy in the suit with the diamond cuff links actually interview for an administrative assistant position, data-entry clerk, documentation specialist, or similar menial job and see how he does.  Better still, have him do so at several firms like his own and see how many callbacks he gets (or doesn't.)  The scenarios practically write themselves:

• Forget that continuous-improvement thing.  Imagine a documentation specialist trying to "improve" the way things are done in filing system.  He'd be backhanded and out the door in a few days (assuming he even lasted that long) for "not doing things the way we do them around here." 
• Sorry, we need someone with better computer skills.  Sure, in the executive suite you probably have someone to operate your computer and print your calendar; but in the trenches, you gotta do it yourself and know how to do it flawlessly.  Don't know Excel 101 or how to do a mail-merge in Word?  See ya.
• You don't fit within our diversity program.  Let's face it, go into any room full of CEOs or stop by any golf club and it's going to be white-male central.  Now picture those same guys trying to interview for low-level jobs when HR has a set of diversity goals to maintain.  Admittedly, it may be hard on some levels to feel too much sympathy for these guys, but that's only until you realize countless other people out there run into this same wall every day.
• You're just not a team player.  Any executive with years of experience is not likely to fit too readily into a group of people whom he still sees as his subordinates.  Seeing how things are done - particularly if they are done incorrectly or contrary to any initiatives he tried to launch or thought he'd already pushed through - will make him angry and frustrated.  That leaves him a catch-22:  He either becomes part of the problem by adopting the systems and practices he opposed, OR he tries to change them and gets branded - you guessed it - as somebody who's a "troublemaker."  Sayonara.
• This guy can't even use a copier.  Let's face it, once we pass the age of 30, that bloody machine gets increasingly difficult to use.  When you were in your 20s, you knew all the buttons and features; but somewhere along the way, the complexity grew as your ability to handle it fell.  Consequently, it's all most people who aren't admin assistants can do to simply enter an accounting code and press start.  That sorting and stapling function?  Copying on both sides?  Changing paper sizes?  Good luck with that.

Think about it.  Every week having the opportunity to watch CEOs getting bounced from menial jobs that they're not able to handle?  That might be a reality show worth watching.

George Costanza as a Role Model? Think About It...

One of the most popular episodes of the TV show "Seinfeld" has perpetual loser George Costanza concluding that, because his life is in shambles, the only logical course of action is to begin doing the "complete opposite" of everything he normally does.  The episode includes a number of hilarious incidents where he challenges street punks to fight in a movie theatre, turns down an offer of sex on a first date, and openly criticizes George Steinbrenner to his face during an interview with New York Yankees.

Believe it or not, he may have been on to something.

No, I'm not advocating trashing your prospective boss in a job interview - nor am I suggesting a head-case like George would actually make a sound role model for life, let alone the job search - but a recent experience taught me that commonly-accepted wisdom may not necessarily be the best course for seeking a job in today's market.  I recently went on a job interview without doing much preparation of any kind.

It was one of the best exchanges I ever had.

Stick with me here.  Normally, I do what all the advice books and seminars tell us to do before a job interview. I check the Web site to learn all I can about the company, and I reach out to contacts to learn what their experiences with the firm have been.  I read press releases, business publications, and blogs to find out as much as I can about the good and bad of the place.  I look up my interviewers on Linked In to see what kinds of tidbits I can learn about their backgrounds, what things we may have in common or what interests we may share, etc. 

Guess what?  After a year of doing this, I'm still just as unemployed. Even worse, I can't begin to count the number of times this preparation turned out to be a colossal waste of time for interviews that were for jobs that either didn't exist or which were frozen. 

So, when I landed a job interview last week with a branch of the federal government, I decided George's approach might be worth emulating, albeit to a lesser extent.  Instead of my usual informational-overload of preparation and research, I decided I would simply look up the organization's Web site on the day of the interview, check the interviewer's name on Linked In, and just bring an extra copy of my resume and a few samples of my earlier work.  I would not do an exhaustive search about the organization's history and mission, I would not print out multiple copies of my portfolio to leave with the interviewer, and I would not memorize complex talking points to recite when I got the usual "tell me about..." behavioral questions.  I wouldn't do any additional checking or researching on anything related to the organization, and I would not reach out to a single person to learn about his or her experiences.   (If nothing else, I figured this would give me an interesting posting for this blog.)

Now admittedly, I didn't undertake this particular initiative without some trepidation.  One frequently-repeated scenario in my head had the following exchange taking place:

Interviewer:  "Tell me what you know about our organization."

Me:  "Just what I know on the Web site...ABC...XYZ..."

Interviewer (clearly put off):  "I see."

Me (clearing throat):  "Well, after the last five or six jobs I interviewed for all got canceled or filled from within, I've learned it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to do too much advance preparation until I know for sure that the company is serious about filling a position and looking to hire externally.  So why don't we put our cards on the table?  Tell me if this interview is for an actual position, and if so, why are you looking at outside candidates?"

Now, most interview guides and advice books will tell you this blunt approach would be suicidal.  But I doubt many seekers in today's job market who have been misled about positions - or worse, openly lied to about offers that never came or jobs that didn't even exist to begin with - would see it that way.  Most, I suspect, would love to have this sort of direct exchange but are understandably too frightened to have it.

After twelve months of frustration, however, I was looking forward to it.  Much like another "Seinfeld" episode where Elaine decides she only wants to attend a wedding in India to spite the bride - who, it turns out, only invites Elaine at the last moment because she does not expect her to actually attend - I decided that for just this once, I would go into an interview with almost no preparation and just see what happened.  If it went south?  Well, it wasn't as if all the hours of preparation, effort, and "doing the right thing" had paid that many dividends anyway. 

What happened? Well, for starters, it actually turned out to be one of the best interviews I've had in a long time.  Why?  Because like a lot of searchers, I lowered my expectations.  Once upon a time, you prepared for interviews and hoped they would lead to a job.  Not so much any more.  Nowadays, chances are the interview is for a position that may or may not be filled because the company offering it may - or may not, depending on whom you talk with  and when you talk with them - be in a hiring freeze.  I didn't walk in expecting a job; I went in expecting the usual song and dance about getting to know you and then deciding whether to keep in touch in the near future, etc.

And that's exactly what the interview was.

The interviewer - a very polite and likable guy - wanted to see what skills I had and talk about some "possible openings" in the future.  More to the point, since I had figured there would not be an actual position behind the interview, I was far more relaxed than I normally might have been.  During our conversation, I even suggested a couple of Web sites that I thought would be helpful in dealing with some work issues he was wrestling with.  By the time we were done, instead of feeling I had to go that extra mile somehow to show my interest in any job he had that might fit me, I simply thanked him for his time; and we exchanged business cards.  That was all.  I walked out relieved that I had not wasted countless hours preparing for the interview, and while it hadn't led to a job, I had at least managed to get out of the house on a sunny afternoon.  Best of all, I hopefully made a contact that would help me expand my network.  If nothing else, it was another step toward something down the line if things do go well.

And there, in fact, is the irony in all of this.  In today's job market, you may actually have to go into an interview not expecting a job but to simply build a connection instead.   All those instructions to meticulously research a company and learn as much as you can before going in may still be valid; but when actual unemployment hovers near 16-17 percent (9.6 percent officially as of this writing; but it's actually closer to 16-17 percent when people who have given up the search are counted) and companies are extremely reluctant to hire anybody, perhaps doing the opposite can actually pay more emotional dividends than conventional wisdom.

Or to put it another way, maybe like the proverbial stuck clock that's still right twice a day, George wasn't always off target with some of his ideas...

The Neverending Job Interview...

The following is a diary of an actual interview process with a Fortune 100 firm.  The firm's name has been withheld and some dates have been changed to preserve anonymity, but the experiences, conversations, and personal sentiments are real.


July 29, 2010 - I attend a job fair convention in [Virginia].  Upon entering the overcrowded room, I am quickly advised that the majority of the jobs to be filled require IT experience and government security clearances.  Since I have neither, I quickly ask the fellow at the information desk if I'm wasting time by being there.  He assures me I'm not and directs me to a sparsely attended area on the opposite part of the room for non-cleared positions.  As I trudge over, I'm reminded of the scene at the beginning of "Animal House" where Pinto and Flounder are directed to the rejects' couch when they first attempt to pledge at Omega Theta Pi.  It is not a pleasant sensation.  

I take a seat and wait my turn to talk to the two clearly underwhelmed people behind the table.  One is a fellow slightly older than myself, the second is his female counterpart who has just returned from her lunch break.  When my time comes, I launch into my elevator speech, telling him why I want to work for his firm and which of my qualifications would make for a sound match with any suitable positions he has. He tells me that this his first event like this one and that he doesn't really know what he's supposed to be doing.  Somehow, I manage to keep my facial expression from collapsing, but deep inside my body, a tiny sound of glass breaking is heard...


August 6, 2010 - Apparently, I made a stronger impression than I figured.  One of the company's recruiters - a different one from the one I talked with at the table, in fact - spoke to a woman who handles outreach efforts.  She is e-mailing me to see if I am interested in following up to discuss a possible position.  Having been out of work for more than year, I find her question comparable to asking a castaway if he'd be open to the possibility of a steak dinner.  I struggle to keep my fingers from shaking as I hastily key my reply and run the spell check several times before hitting send.  Absolutely, I tell her.  This sounds like a wonderful opportunity!  And I'm off to the races...


August 11, 2010 - The recruiter e-mails me back to say my first interview will be a preliminary phone conversation with a hiring manager on August 13 at 10:00 a.m.  I thank her again for the opportunity and immediately begin preparing for the interview by looking up the manager on Linked In to learn more about her.  I also start drafting a list of expected questions that I can practice answering. 


August 13, 2010 - I have my phone interview with the hiring manager.  She tells me she is impressed by my background and that they are looking for someone who is "parachutable" that can just drop into a position and hit the ground running.  I tell her everything she's outlined matches my background perfectly and that this sounds like a very strong match.  She tells me she will recommend moving forward with my interview process.  I hang up the phone and pump my fist.  Life is good once again.


August 16, 2010 - The recruiter e-mails me back to arrange a face-to-face interview with another manager for August 20, which is my birthday.  I smile.  I've successfully moved from being an anonymous neo-reject at a job fair ("Super!  Then you'll have lots to talk about!") to a phone-screen-cleared candidate who is now apparently worthy of a face-to-face meeting.  I am making progress.  I tell her this sounds great and politely inquire what type of position they're considering for me.  She tells me she has no idea but will check. As we hang up, it dawns on me that I will be heading into an interview in just a little over 72 hours with absolutely no idea of what I am expected to say or which parts of my background I should emphasize.  I decide to focus on some core strengths and use this as an opportunity to show that I am "flexible."


August 17, 2010 - I begin reaching out to friends and connections I have at the company.  One is a former coworker; three others are alumni connections.  They ask me what sort of job I am interviewing for.  I tell them I don't know because no one has told me.  They wish me luck. 


August 20, 2010 - I meet the manager for my interview.  She is working from home, so instead of going to the office, we meet at a local Starbucks.  I am easy to spot since I am the only fellow in the shop wearing a suit and tie.  She shows up in business casual attire.  I give her an updated copy of my resume, a one-page summary of my professional achievements, and a PowerPoint deliverable outlining my skills and how they match the company's needs.  She is impressed.  I hand her my business card.  She tells me she forgot to bring any cards of her own.  I briefly wonder how someone who can't remember to bring a business card to an interview is able to land a job while someone who prepares meticulously like myself is struggling to find work.  I remind myself that this is not a level playing field and that when she was a candidate, she likely had to be on her toes as well.  It is all part of the process, I say.   



August 27, 2010 - The recruiter e-mails me to say she has set up two phone interviews with some senior managers for August 30th.  I thank her and make some notes of the people I will be talking with so I can check with my contacts and look them up on Linked In.  I make a note to do some checking at my upcoming networking events as well to see if anyone has heard of them before or interviewed with this particular firm.  (Note:  No one did.)  I also let the recruiter know that I have some other interviews coming up but would be happy to sign on with her firm because it is my first choice (which in truth, it is).  She does not acknowledge this or say anything in her reply.  I wonder again if this constitutes progress or if I'm simply treading water.  I decide it is not something I want to dwell on. 


August 30, 2010 - The recruiter e-mails me that morning to say that my second manager cannot make our scheduled interview.  Can I reschedule for some time during the first week of September?  Eager to appear flexible and understanding, I tell her, "Certainly."  I then proceed with my interview with the other hiring manager. He tells me the company likes my background but is "not sure where to put me."  I tell him that based on our discussion and my research, his unit sounds as though it would be the strongest fit.  He says he'll recommend me for a face-to-face interview after I talk with the other manager.  In other words, I've  gone from a phone interview to a face-to-face interview, but now I'm going back to more phone interviews. I'm reminded of George Jetson at the end sequence of "The Jetsons" where he's helplessly spinning on the treadmill shouting, "Jane!  Help me stop this crazy thing!"   


September 2, 2010 - The recruiter e-mails me to say my interview with the next hiring manager is set for September 9th.  I reiterate my interest in moving ahead with her company.  She wishes me luck in my next interview.  I wonder what exactly it takes to land a job with this place since I seem to be doing nothing but shuttling between different managers who all seem impressed with me but not impressed enough to recommend me for hiring.  I consider telling her she's keeping an angel somewhere from getting its wings by dragging this process out but change my mind.  "Sounds great," I say smiling.  As I hang up the phone, I stab another pin into my voodoo doll...


September 9, 2010 - I have my phone interview with the final hiring manager.  He and I talk for 30 minutes.  He finds my background is not as technical as he needs and asks where I think I would fit best.  I reiterate what I said to the earlier manager I spoke with about his unit being the best fit.  He says he agrees and will recommend to the recruiter that I come in for yet another face-to-face interview.  As I hang up the phone, I conclude I am being "pinballed" but have no real choice in this situation since I need a job.  I also realize it has now been almost eight weeks since I started talking with this company and that to date I have yet to actually interview in a hiring office.  Perhaps my doubts about reincarnation should be questioned since it appears I must have committed some truly heinous crimes in a past life that I am obviously still paying for.


September 13, 2010 - I get a phone call from the senior recruiter and we talk for 15 minutes.  He tells me everyone liked talking with me and recommended me for hiring; but they still can't figure out where I would be the best fit.  I struggle to restrain myself from picking up one of my dog's rawhide chew toys to gnaw on it in frustration.  He asks me where I think my skills would be best put to work.  As pleasantly as I can force myself, I tell him.  He says great and then says the word every job seeker loves to hear:  "We'll start working on that offer."  My hands shake as I hang up the phone.  Could my search finally be ending after all this time?


September 14, 2010 - No word.


September 15, 2010 - No word.


September 16, 2010 - No word.


September 17, 2010 - No word.  I decide to bite the bullet and send an e-mail telling him and the other recruiter that I enjoyed the talk earlier in the week, that I want to "re-affirm my interest" in moving forward, hope they have a nice weekend, etc., etc.  No replies.


September 20, 2010 - I get an e-mail saying that there is a meeting that afternoon and that there should be some feedback for me afterward.  For some reason, this does not inspire a great deal of confidence.  Last week we were talking about putting an offer together, now I'm told to "expect feedback"??? Could Dante have missed this level of purgatory in his Inferno?  Or is Fate just mocking me here?


September 22, 2010 - I hear back from the recruiter.  The meeting scheduled for earlier this week has been postponed, so there is no news at this time.  He says he'll advise if/when he has anything to report.  Somehow, after five interviews, I was hoping for something more positive by now, but maybe that's just me...


September 23 - 29, 2010 - No word.  I'm learning this is what Corporate America defines as "being patient."  To me, it's more like "being ignored."


September 30, 2010 - I e-mail the manager again to check in.  If cyberspace were radio, the response I would receive would resemble static...


October 5, 2010 - Finally having reached the end of my rope, I call the manager and tell him I may have another offer later this week.  "Can you please let me know the status of that offer we spoke about back on September 13?" I ask him.  (It was only a month ago, I think to myself.)  He tells me he was out yesterday but will check and get back to me.  What's the best number to reach me?  I tell him.  I then follow up our phonecon with a brief e-mail thanking him for taking my call and telling him I'm looking forward to hearing from him.

October 12, 2010 - After over two months of shuttling back and forth between managers and following up, I call the recruiter and tell him I have another interview and need to know what to do if these folks decide to put some kind of offer on the table.  Not surprisingly, he responds that very day and tells me he will get back to me tomorrow. This appears to be what it takes to get responses to polite inquiries.

October 13, 2010 - The recruiter calls me back.  After doing some checking, he tells me, the managers all "thought very highly of you, but we just don't have any openings at this time."  In other words, the last several weeks have, in effect, been a complete waste of the employer's time and mine as well.  I grit my teeth and thank him nonetheless, adding, "I'm very sorry to hear this, but please keep me in mind in the event something should open up."  I hang up the phone and wonder why this seems to be such a common practice.  I decide it's not worth dwelling on and take the rest of the week off from searching.  Sometimes you need a break if you're going to maintain your sanity...


Epilogue:  According to several contacts I've spoken with, it's quite common for large consulting firms to string candidates along in this manner in case they land a significant contract and need to hire suddenly, although most confide that five interviews is a bit beyond the norm.  As for the offer that the recruiter did mention, this experience underscores the difficult truth:  Verbal offers are not worth the paper that they're not printed on.   

A Leveling of the Playing Field?

Traditionally, job interviews have never been anything close to a level playing field.  You need the job, but the hiring manager holds all the cards.  He or she can select you or any of the countless other candidates pounding on the office door.  You, on the other hand, have only your services to offer, so the weight is on your shoulders to prove yourself worthwhile. 

That may finally be changing.

The Internet has led to an explosion in available information that both job seekers and corporations are learning to exploit, but trends favor the former more than the latter.  Why?  Because job searchers' desperation makes them more likely than companies to use every available tool to learn about firms and positions.  Corporations, on the other hand, have to wait for applicants to come to them and then run the usual credit / background checks once selections are made.  Here's the problem:  The new tools will soon give applicants enough advance information to decide whether or not the interview should even take place.  

Glassdoor is one such example.  Unlike Hoovers or the Vault, which offer basic business insights (company profiles, competitors, financial performance, etc.) Glassdoor offers job seekers insight into the inner workings and experiences of actual employees at a given firm.  Workers post anonymous thoughts - both positive and negative - about what it's like to work at the company.  Salary ranges, interview experiences (including actual questions) are posted, as are additional tips and suggestions for interested applicants.  In short, the site is a gold mine of critical information an applicant should know before interviewing with the company - or even deciding whether the company is worth interviewing with in the first place.

This last point is where companies ignore the Internet at their own peril.  While it may be commonplace nowadays to interview candidates for positions that don't exist or for jobs that are ultimately canceled if they ever existed in the first place, in the long run such shoddy practices risk getting the company blacklisted on any number of different job-related Web sites.  In the not-too-distant future, multiple postings from mistreated applicants will make it increasingly difficult for companies to hire the talent that they need to succeed.  And while one can always dismiss a few negative postings as the inevitable disgruntled complaints from a few bad apples,  multiple criticisms on different sites will eventually be seen as a warning for prospective employees to either stay away or to ask very direct, challenging questions that will almost certainly catch unprepared interviewers by surprise.

In fact, according to a recent white paper by Simplyhired, the job market of the future will be marked by almost perfect information as both candidates and companies know more about one another long before meeting for an actual interview.  However, the changing dynamics will come to favor the candidate as the process evolves:

In the future, job seekers will be able to access a complete and accurate picture of all information related to a job opportunity. For example: a mechanical engineer in San Francisco will be able to view available jobs and top hiring companies not only in his field and location, but in other areas as well ... He will know that the salary range is $62,000 to $84,000, and that the top hiring companies for his field are Southwest Airlines, Raytheon and Ford. He will also be able to note that while transportation remains a top industry for his occupation, there are a growing number of mechanical engineering jobs in a different industry (aerospace), or a different location (Atlanta). Knowing this, he may approach job search in an entirely new way. By centralizing job listings with all the other information that job seekers must consider, future job search applications will be able to build a holistic picture of each potential job opportunity. Job seekers will be able to compare positions side-by-side and point-by-point, allowing them to make informed decisions for their individual situations.

True Example:  Several months ago I interviewed with one of the Big Four firms for a consulting position.  The manager asked for my salary requirements, and when I answered, she grimaced.  "I'm sorry," she said.  "But that's outside our range for this position."  I smiled and opened one of the folders I had brought and took out a printout that showed the different salary ranges her company reportedly paid for various positions.  Her eyes widened.  "Where did you get this?" she demanded.  I politely explained that as a good candidate, it was my job to research a company "as thoroughly as possible" before an interview.  "May I keep this?" she asked.  "I know what I'm going to be checking when I get back to my desk!" 

Now, admittedly, disproving the manager's assertion in this manner may have been counterproductive to my job search - I never did receive an offer from that particular firm after the interview - but knowing what the reported ranges were going into the interview did empower me in ways that would not have been possible before the Internet.  And while one should certainly always be suspicious of anything found online, being able to locate and cross-check such information on various sites gives the candidate a much better ability to challenge mistaken (or false) assertions about jobs and their reported pay scales. 

In short, the playing field may finally be starting to level in ways that finally begin to favor the candidate as opposed to the company.  Expect this to shake things up in the very near future.   

The Process Begins - Again

For me, this process started more than a year ago when I joined the estimated 18 million Americans out of work. My story was no different from anyone else’s – I showed up at work, was told to report to HR as part of a “reorganization,” and within twenty-five minutes I was out on the street with my desk in my hands wondering what exactly had just happened.

Over the next 14 months, I reached out, e-mailed, called, begged, and networked my way to no particular destination. I joined job search groups, revamped countless resumes, answered myriad advertisements, rehearsed multiple elevators speeches, and after several near misses and close calls, I finally managed to achieve…

…nothing.

Well, technically that’s not true. I gained a lot of friends, learned a great deal, and found out more about myself than I ever knew before, but to imply that all of these achievements and learning experiences in and of themselves should be some sort of reward means trying to ignore the pile of bills that come in each month with only a slowly dwindling savings account to cover them. Life doesn’t follow the predictable pattern of television sitcoms where everything is happily resolved at the end of a half hour with some lesson to be learned by everyone – no, it’s actually a much longer, frustrating, and tedious process. And it’s one that continues as I type these words.

So, why am I starting this blog? I mean, there are countless other Web postings about the job search process out there, so why add yet another voice to the cacophonous process that marks the modern job seekers’ dilemma? I can’t promise my experience will be any more “unique” than anyone else’s; but then, a shared experience hopefully offers some value if for nothing other than entertainment for the equally misfortunate. And if we can share a few stories and tips along the way, who knows what might happen?

Stay tuned – it should be an interesting ride!