"Every single moment of your life you must choose from a number of alternatives. What you choose determines where you will end up." - Shall Sinha
Now the final point on “Interview With Purpose”. Thus far we’ve covered these six questions:
_1. Can the company successfully compete in its market?
_2. What is the company “culture”?
_3. What are the expected outcomes? How is success measured for this position?
_4. Will I have access to the resources required to be successful in this role?
_5. Do my skills and experience truly qualify me for this position?
_6. Would I hire myself for this position?
The final question is probably the most important and tends to get the least amount of attention:
_7. What are my other options?
This is a real challenge for people who are highly motivated to take a new position, especially if they are really unhappy in their current job or unemployed. Everyone has their reasons for seeking a new job. If you are desperate (perhaps unemployed and running out of money) and have few options, you do what you have to do. I get that. I’m not addressing that situation.
What I’m talking about here is the person who may be unhappy and frustrated in their current job. They start looking around (or get a call from some headhunter) and suddenly they find themselves in the interview process for what would appear to be a much better position. And if they have done their homework and the answers to the first six "Interview With Purposes" questions are very positive, this may be exactly the right job. Sometimes the term “no brainer” really does apply.
But most often there are unanswered questions or concerns about any new job opportunity. The big mistake people make is when they focus too much on how the new opportunity compares to their current job. Career decisions deserve more than a “Ben Franklin” T-chart, pro’s vs. con’s analysis. Take a deep breath and step away from the “either or” decision. Most of the time it’s really an either or, or, or, or….decision. And candidly, I would urge people not to take a new job if ANY of the answers to the first six questions are NEGATIVE. All of the answers don’t have to be clearly and strongly positive, but if you have a negative one why would you take the job. What are your odds of success? It’s a worn out phrase, but don’t jump out of the frying pan and into the fire. There are other options. They are out there….you just have to be patient and keep looking. (And stay plugged into a good, trustworthy Headhunter.)
With that we wrap up the Interview With Purpose series. I urge you to go back and read each entry. I hear the consequences of poor career choices every day as I speak with candidates who took the wrong job and employers who hired the wrong person. Often I hear words to the effect that they knew it wasn’t a perfect match, but there were more positives than negatives, so it was worth the risks. There are always risks, even when the decision appears to be one of those “no brainers”. Change is uncomfortable and it’s easy to fall into the trap of “better the devil I know that the one I don’t know”. It’s ok to be nervous about changing jobs. But if there are no major negatives and no better options, take the plunge and go for it. However, unless you just need a paycheck, never take a job knowing that you are walking into a bad situation, you’re not a good fit for the position and you’ve not thoroughly considered other options. As crazy as it sounds, people do it every day.
Sunday, May 15, 2011
Saturday, May 7, 2011
Political Correctness- KIA
The last installment of the “Interview With Purpose” series will have to wait. It has been a great week for America. Bin Laden sleeps with the fishes. We sent a message to the rest of the world that we do not forget, we do not give up and that we will deliver justice no matter how long it takes or whatever it cost. Chalk one up for the good guys. Seal Team Six kicked ass. And, no matter how you lean politically, we have to give it up to President Obama for giving the order. Well done.
But, it is now clear that our Seal Team Six training failed in one very critical area: Political Correctness. “For God and Country; Geronimo, Geronimo, Geronimo…E-KIA”(meaning enemy killed in action.) Those were the words used by the leader of the Seal Team Six strike force as he reported the mission’s successful outcome to the President. How insensitive. Atheists are angered by the reference to God. Native Americans, Apaches in particular, are pissed off that Geronimo’s name will now be forever associated with this most wanted Al-Qaida terrorist. And probably someone, somewhere whose initials include the letter “E” is now on suicide watch.
The atheists are always upset about something, so I’m not surprised that they are having a hissy fit over this. But the Indians? (My bad… I meant to say Native Americans). It’s a free country so they have every right to be offended if they choose to be offended. I just don’t think they have a good reason. At this point it’s unclear to me whether Geronimo was the code name for Bin Laden, for the entire operation itself or just code for a successful outcome. I’ve heard that the operation was actually called “Jackpot” and that Bin Laden was Santa Claus. I don’t know and I really don’t care. Perhaps I would care if I was a Native American, or an Apache or my name was Geronimo (or Jerome…Geronimo is Spanish for Jerome…at this point let’s not leave anyone out).
My father served in the 101st Airborne back in WWII. Many of those paratroopers shouted Geronimo when they jumped out of the plane. Apparently it was a fitting tribute to Geronimo who once upon a time supposedly jumped from a high cliff to avoid capture, survived the fall and escaped. This became a scene in the 1939 film titled “Geronimo”. It stuck with those young men and teenagers who later became paratroopers. Some of the paratroopers even wore Mohawks and their faces were painted black (now I just offended another tribe plus an entire race). The Germans called them “Teufel”, Devils (now you can add Wiccans and Satan worshippers to the list of those offended by this rant). And those American “Devils” killed Germans by the bushel (hope I didn't cross a line there with Germans or farmers). These days the 101st would have a lot of explaining to do. And so would Victor Daniels, aka Chief Thundercloud, the Cherokee who played Geronimo in the movie. What was he thinking?
Next time Seal Team Six is trying to come up with code words, they have my permission to use Redneck, Texan, Headhunter, Bogey Golfer, Red Raider, Old Fart or just Click.
(Now I’m waiting for PETA to start bitching about the Seal Team Six attack dog with the titanium teeth implants. I love that dog.)
But, it is now clear that our Seal Team Six training failed in one very critical area: Political Correctness. “For God and Country; Geronimo, Geronimo, Geronimo…E-KIA”(meaning enemy killed in action.) Those were the words used by the leader of the Seal Team Six strike force as he reported the mission’s successful outcome to the President. How insensitive. Atheists are angered by the reference to God. Native Americans, Apaches in particular, are pissed off that Geronimo’s name will now be forever associated with this most wanted Al-Qaida terrorist. And probably someone, somewhere whose initials include the letter “E” is now on suicide watch.
The atheists are always upset about something, so I’m not surprised that they are having a hissy fit over this. But the Indians? (My bad… I meant to say Native Americans). It’s a free country so they have every right to be offended if they choose to be offended. I just don’t think they have a good reason. At this point it’s unclear to me whether Geronimo was the code name for Bin Laden, for the entire operation itself or just code for a successful outcome. I’ve heard that the operation was actually called “Jackpot” and that Bin Laden was Santa Claus. I don’t know and I really don’t care. Perhaps I would care if I was a Native American, or an Apache or my name was Geronimo (or Jerome…Geronimo is Spanish for Jerome…at this point let’s not leave anyone out).
My father served in the 101st Airborne back in WWII. Many of those paratroopers shouted Geronimo when they jumped out of the plane. Apparently it was a fitting tribute to Geronimo who once upon a time supposedly jumped from a high cliff to avoid capture, survived the fall and escaped. This became a scene in the 1939 film titled “Geronimo”. It stuck with those young men and teenagers who later became paratroopers. Some of the paratroopers even wore Mohawks and their faces were painted black (now I just offended another tribe plus an entire race). The Germans called them “Teufel”, Devils (now you can add Wiccans and Satan worshippers to the list of those offended by this rant). And those American “Devils” killed Germans by the bushel (hope I didn't cross a line there with Germans or farmers). These days the 101st would have a lot of explaining to do. And so would Victor Daniels, aka Chief Thundercloud, the Cherokee who played Geronimo in the movie. What was he thinking?
Next time Seal Team Six is trying to come up with code words, they have my permission to use Redneck, Texan, Headhunter, Bogey Golfer, Red Raider, Old Fart or just Click.
(Now I’m waiting for PETA to start bitching about the Seal Team Six attack dog with the titanium teeth implants. I love that dog.)
Saturday, April 30, 2011
Square Pegs and Round Holes (Part III)
Hope you had a wonderful Easter. Before we jump back into the subject of “Interview With Purpose”, I’d just like to remind you of my blog entry of January 22, 2011 titled “That Giant Sucking Sound”. Wish I’d been wrong about that one.
We’ve covered the first four items on the “Interview With Purpose” checklist:
1. Can the company successfully compete in its market?
2. What is the company “culture”?
3. What are the expected outcomes? How is success measured for this position?
4. Will I have access to the resources required to be successful in this role?
Now on to numbers 5 & 6:
5. Do my skills and experience truly qualify me for this position?
6. Would I hire myself for this position?
These are the most challenging questions one must face when interviewing for a position. Let’s face it, when you interview for a job that you really want, you are in full sales mode. You will tend to “stretch” to match your skills and experience to those required for the position. The primary reason candidates do this is because quite often IT WORKS. Depending on the positions you’ve held in the past, the companies you’ve worked for and what your references have to say about you, it’s not that tough to convince an employer that you are truly qualified for a certain position. And if the employer is anxious to fill the role and doesn’t really ask probing questions, you will likely get the job. And unfortunately, you will likely fail…very soon and very conspicuously.
Be honest with yourself. Do you really have what it takes to be successful in the position? Would you hire yourself for the position? I’m not saying that you have to be the best person for the position, but you better darn sure be well-qualified. However, when someone really wants the position, or perhaps desperately NEEDS the position; the focus is on getting the job, not determining if they can actually do the job.
This is a really tough subject. As a headhunter, I get paid to find people to fill positions with my client companies. As an experienced headhunter and an experienced industry professional, I tend to be overly critical in evaluating candidates, especially when the client has been very clear and specific in what they expect from the position. It’s also very frustrating when I see clients hiring people who are not truly qualified for the position. Increasingly, I’m taking the position that if a candidate is talented and motivated, a good fit for the company (not necessarily the position) and the company has a track record of hiring “off spec”; I should go ahead and submit the candidate. As a result I am more dependent than ever on candidates and clients being open, honest and transparent in the interview process; to interview with purpose. Frankly, I see other headhunters as well as internal recruiters taking the same approach in presenting candidates. So candidates beware. Just because you’re getting an interview, don’t assume that you are really qualified for the position. Take a look in the mirror. Check yourself, before you wreck yourself.
Next week, the final installment of this series.
We’ve covered the first four items on the “Interview With Purpose” checklist:
1. Can the company successfully compete in its market?
2. What is the company “culture”?
3. What are the expected outcomes? How is success measured for this position?
4. Will I have access to the resources required to be successful in this role?
Now on to numbers 5 & 6:
5. Do my skills and experience truly qualify me for this position?
6. Would I hire myself for this position?
These are the most challenging questions one must face when interviewing for a position. Let’s face it, when you interview for a job that you really want, you are in full sales mode. You will tend to “stretch” to match your skills and experience to those required for the position. The primary reason candidates do this is because quite often IT WORKS. Depending on the positions you’ve held in the past, the companies you’ve worked for and what your references have to say about you, it’s not that tough to convince an employer that you are truly qualified for a certain position. And if the employer is anxious to fill the role and doesn’t really ask probing questions, you will likely get the job. And unfortunately, you will likely fail…very soon and very conspicuously.
Be honest with yourself. Do you really have what it takes to be successful in the position? Would you hire yourself for the position? I’m not saying that you have to be the best person for the position, but you better darn sure be well-qualified. However, when someone really wants the position, or perhaps desperately NEEDS the position; the focus is on getting the job, not determining if they can actually do the job.
This is a really tough subject. As a headhunter, I get paid to find people to fill positions with my client companies. As an experienced headhunter and an experienced industry professional, I tend to be overly critical in evaluating candidates, especially when the client has been very clear and specific in what they expect from the position. It’s also very frustrating when I see clients hiring people who are not truly qualified for the position. Increasingly, I’m taking the position that if a candidate is talented and motivated, a good fit for the company (not necessarily the position) and the company has a track record of hiring “off spec”; I should go ahead and submit the candidate. As a result I am more dependent than ever on candidates and clients being open, honest and transparent in the interview process; to interview with purpose. Frankly, I see other headhunters as well as internal recruiters taking the same approach in presenting candidates. So candidates beware. Just because you’re getting an interview, don’t assume that you are really qualified for the position. Take a look in the mirror. Check yourself, before you wreck yourself.
Next week, the final installment of this series.
Friday, April 22, 2011
THE PURPOSE
I’ll pick up the “Interview With Purpose” theme in the next blog. This week it’s about the THE PURPOSE. He spoke Aramaic and they called him Ea-shoa’ (Life Giver) M’shee-khah (Anointed One). I recommend that you get a Bible and read at least one of the four very brief accounts of his life and ministry (Matthew, Mark, Luke or John). Then read the Book of Acts and the Apostle Paul’s Letter to the Romans. Don’t let anyone “sell” you on Christianity. Read it for yourself. And don’t focus on all of the hypocrites you’ve known, or the dysfunctional churches you’ve attended or heard about; or the whacked-out televangelists you’ve channel surfed across. Just read the inspired words of those who were there and ultimately gave up their lives to follow Ea-shoa’ M’shee-khah, Life Giver, Anointed One, Jesus Christ.
Sunday, April 10, 2011
Square Pegs and Round Holes (Part II)
Now for questions 3 and 4 on the “Interview With Purpose” check list:
_3. What are the expected outcomes? How is success measured for this position?
_4. Will I have access to the resources required to be successful in this role?
Okay, I cheated and put two questions on number three. These are very closely related, but distinctly different. And the difference is critical. Let’s say you’re interviewing for a sales leadership role and the company says “We need to grow our top line revenue”. The obvious questions you must ask is how much and how fast? And if the answers you get are “As much as we can, as fast as we can”, start looking for the exits.
Let’s say the answers are more specific, 10% CAGR over the next 5 years. But, what they don’t say is that they expect the revenue growth will come from business that is more profitable than what they are currently doing and, oh by the way, their existing market has minimal growth potential. In fact, their core business is under competitive attack and their market share is likely to shrink and become less profitable.
How are you liking this job now? Always look closely at the expected outcomes, how are they measured and where is the starting point.
On to question 4, will you “have access to the resources required to be successful in this role?” Let’s stay with the example above. Perhaps you’re still interested and can see the potential for success. But, it will require hiring sales people with experience in other market segments and significant investment in new equipment and/or technology. Now this gets dicey. If you’re interviewing for a position, it is always risky to start asking questions about how much the company is willing to invest so you can be successful. I recommend that you don’t tackle this question head on. It’s better to ask open ended questions about the company’s resources (people, equipment, technology, access to capital, etc). Look for opportunities to connect their responses to a question such as, “So with the right person in this position, you feel that you’ve got all the other pieces in place to get to the next level?” A “yes” answer is a big red flag. While there are situations where there really is only one missing piece, those are few a far between. And the more aggressive the company’s expected outcomes, the more likely it is that they will need more than just you to achieve those outcomes.
Again, it’s all about interviewing with a purpose. If your purpose is just to get the job, then tell them what they want to hear and only lob softball questions that demonstrate you’ve done your homework and really want to work for these bozos. If your purpose is to get the right job, where you can be successful over the long run, then ask the tougher questions. The non-bozos will respect that approach.
Next time, questions 5 and 6.
_3. What are the expected outcomes? How is success measured for this position?
_4. Will I have access to the resources required to be successful in this role?
Okay, I cheated and put two questions on number three. These are very closely related, but distinctly different. And the difference is critical. Let’s say you’re interviewing for a sales leadership role and the company says “We need to grow our top line revenue”. The obvious questions you must ask is how much and how fast? And if the answers you get are “As much as we can, as fast as we can”, start looking for the exits.
Let’s say the answers are more specific, 10% CAGR over the next 5 years. But, what they don’t say is that they expect the revenue growth will come from business that is more profitable than what they are currently doing and, oh by the way, their existing market has minimal growth potential. In fact, their core business is under competitive attack and their market share is likely to shrink and become less profitable.
How are you liking this job now? Always look closely at the expected outcomes, how are they measured and where is the starting point.
On to question 4, will you “have access to the resources required to be successful in this role?” Let’s stay with the example above. Perhaps you’re still interested and can see the potential for success. But, it will require hiring sales people with experience in other market segments and significant investment in new equipment and/or technology. Now this gets dicey. If you’re interviewing for a position, it is always risky to start asking questions about how much the company is willing to invest so you can be successful. I recommend that you don’t tackle this question head on. It’s better to ask open ended questions about the company’s resources (people, equipment, technology, access to capital, etc). Look for opportunities to connect their responses to a question such as, “So with the right person in this position, you feel that you’ve got all the other pieces in place to get to the next level?” A “yes” answer is a big red flag. While there are situations where there really is only one missing piece, those are few a far between. And the more aggressive the company’s expected outcomes, the more likely it is that they will need more than just you to achieve those outcomes.
Again, it’s all about interviewing with a purpose. If your purpose is just to get the job, then tell them what they want to hear and only lob softball questions that demonstrate you’ve done your homework and really want to work for these bozos. If your purpose is to get the right job, where you can be successful over the long run, then ask the tougher questions. The non-bozos will respect that approach.
Next time, questions 5 and 6.
Sunday, April 3, 2011
Square Pegs and Round Holes
Last time we talked about interviewing “With Purpose” and left it with the question of how should a candidate go about determining their value to a potential new employer.
I think there are 7 questions a candidate should focus on when considering a new job opportunity.
_1. Can the company successfully compete in its market?
_2. What is the company “culture”?
_3. What are the expected outcomes? How is success measured for this position?
_4. Will I have access to the resources required to be successful in this role?
_5. Do my skills and experience truly qualify me for this position?
_6. Would I hire myself for this position?
_7. What are my other options?
Let’s take 1 & 2 this week.
The first question, “Can the company successfully compete in its market?” seems like a no-brainer; but I talk to candidates every day who find themselves working for companies that are not competitive. The candidate may be well paid, love their boss and think the company culture is great (hey, they took the job for some reason), but then they find out that the company cannot (or will not) deliver the products or services required to compete in the market place. My observation is that, in most cases, an experienced industry professional should have been able to figure this out before taking the job. Frankly, as a headhunter, if I know that an employer is struggling to compete in its market; I tell the candidate. And I tell the employer as well. If a company is in trouble, they better have a great plan to turn things around or you’re only taking a temporary job. If they have no plan or worse yet, are living in denial….walk away. As we say in Texas…you can’t polish a turd.
Number 2, the “Culture”. One of the most overused, least understood terms in business. I suppose as a candidate, whatever you consider to be important in a company’s culture is all that really matters, but company culture is a very big and complex subject. I like this definition: "The specific collection of values and norms that are shared by people and groups in an organization and that control the way they interact with each other and with stakeholders outside the organization.” [1]
We work in the transportation, logistics and supply chain space. It is a very large, highly fragmented market and I cannot think of a sector with more diverse cultures. This is something every candidate should seriously consider. Moreover, ours is an industry where some very successful, highly profitable companies do not have what most outsiders would describe as a healthy culture. Maybe a high functioning cult, but not a healthy culture. Know who you are, how you deal with people and how you like to be dealt with. Don’t join an organization where your style doesn’t fit. It almost never works.
Next time, we’ll talk about questions 3 and 4. In the mean time, before you take that next job…call me.
1. Charles W. L. Hill, and Gareth R. Jones, (2001) Strategic Management. Houghton Mifflin.
I think there are 7 questions a candidate should focus on when considering a new job opportunity.
_1. Can the company successfully compete in its market?
_2. What is the company “culture”?
_3. What are the expected outcomes? How is success measured for this position?
_4. Will I have access to the resources required to be successful in this role?
_5. Do my skills and experience truly qualify me for this position?
_6. Would I hire myself for this position?
_7. What are my other options?
Let’s take 1 & 2 this week.
The first question, “Can the company successfully compete in its market?” seems like a no-brainer; but I talk to candidates every day who find themselves working for companies that are not competitive. The candidate may be well paid, love their boss and think the company culture is great (hey, they took the job for some reason), but then they find out that the company cannot (or will not) deliver the products or services required to compete in the market place. My observation is that, in most cases, an experienced industry professional should have been able to figure this out before taking the job. Frankly, as a headhunter, if I know that an employer is struggling to compete in its market; I tell the candidate. And I tell the employer as well. If a company is in trouble, they better have a great plan to turn things around or you’re only taking a temporary job. If they have no plan or worse yet, are living in denial….walk away. As we say in Texas…you can’t polish a turd.
Number 2, the “Culture”. One of the most overused, least understood terms in business. I suppose as a candidate, whatever you consider to be important in a company’s culture is all that really matters, but company culture is a very big and complex subject. I like this definition: "The specific collection of values and norms that are shared by people and groups in an organization and that control the way they interact with each other and with stakeholders outside the organization.” [1]
We work in the transportation, logistics and supply chain space. It is a very large, highly fragmented market and I cannot think of a sector with more diverse cultures. This is something every candidate should seriously consider. Moreover, ours is an industry where some very successful, highly profitable companies do not have what most outsiders would describe as a healthy culture. Maybe a high functioning cult, but not a healthy culture. Know who you are, how you deal with people and how you like to be dealt with. Don’t join an organization where your style doesn’t fit. It almost never works.
Next time, we’ll talk about questions 3 and 4. In the mean time, before you take that next job…call me.
1. Charles W. L. Hill, and Gareth R. Jones, (2001) Strategic Management. Houghton Mifflin.
Saturday, March 19, 2011
Interview with Purpose
Almost daily I see articles posted on the internet about interviewing. Most are targeted at candidates. They focus on the toughest interview questions and the best answers. How to dress for an interview. How to sit. How to make eye contact. Gender-related interview tips. Generational considerations…how should a baby boomer candidate respond to a Gen Y interviewer? The only subject other than job interviewing with a wider array of tips and advice is golf. And I would say the outcomes for job seekers is about the same as the outcomes for golfers. You look and act like you know what your doing but your scores don’t get any better.
To be clear, it is important that you dress appropriately, speak clearly and know how to answer the basic interview questions. But the most important consideration for a candidate is not “How do I get this job?” The most important one is “Can I bring value to this organization?” That should be the primary purpose of your interviewing process. And nowadays it is definitely a process. Certainly for management and executive level talent, the process may go on for weeks and months. A candidate will go through multiple interviews with various people. It is tedious, stressful, necessary and, if done well, revealing.
Sadly, the truth is that most organizations do not do a very good job of interviewing. Even those who believe they have a very thorough interview and evaluation process, tend to select candidates based on factors other than “value to the organization”. Value is important and it is a factor, but it usually trails way behind appearance, personality, work history and how well does the hiring authority like the candidate. And herein lies the greatest risk for both the candidate and the employer. If, on a scale of 1-10, you are a 10 on the “personal” factors and resume, but only a 3 on value; you may get the job, but you aren’t likely to keep it very long.
“Value to the organization” is a big subject on its own and depends on multiple factors. That is a major reason why it is so difficult to determine a candidate’s value to the organization during the interview process. In most cases, it is actually the candidate who is best suited to make that determination. The problem is that most candidates want the job too much and are unwilling to make an honest assessment of their “value fit” for the position and/or the company.
Next time we’ll talk about what a candidate should consider in determining their value to a potential new employer.
To be clear, it is important that you dress appropriately, speak clearly and know how to answer the basic interview questions. But the most important consideration for a candidate is not “How do I get this job?” The most important one is “Can I bring value to this organization?” That should be the primary purpose of your interviewing process. And nowadays it is definitely a process. Certainly for management and executive level talent, the process may go on for weeks and months. A candidate will go through multiple interviews with various people. It is tedious, stressful, necessary and, if done well, revealing.
Sadly, the truth is that most organizations do not do a very good job of interviewing. Even those who believe they have a very thorough interview and evaluation process, tend to select candidates based on factors other than “value to the organization”. Value is important and it is a factor, but it usually trails way behind appearance, personality, work history and how well does the hiring authority like the candidate. And herein lies the greatest risk for both the candidate and the employer. If, on a scale of 1-10, you are a 10 on the “personal” factors and resume, but only a 3 on value; you may get the job, but you aren’t likely to keep it very long.
“Value to the organization” is a big subject on its own and depends on multiple factors. That is a major reason why it is so difficult to determine a candidate’s value to the organization during the interview process. In most cases, it is actually the candidate who is best suited to make that determination. The problem is that most candidates want the job too much and are unwilling to make an honest assessment of their “value fit” for the position and/or the company.
Next time we’ll talk about what a candidate should consider in determining their value to a potential new employer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)