|
A Right Recruiting Newsletter, 4/2007
Interviewing Expectations:
Over the last month or so, some feedback we have received from companies after a few interviews we scheduled got us thinking. Every now and then we run into situations where a candidates expectation of what constitutes an interview differs from a company’s. This disconnect often leads to disappointing news for the candidate. We’ve seen this occasionally every few years and it’s good to take a moment to remind people of the do’s and don’ts of interview behavior.
The single biggest mistake people make on an interview is to not initially take it seriously. Walking in the door, the candidate takes the attitude of "checking it out". This often happens with junior people making their first job change. To save time, if you are in that situation now, please get on our web site and look for the Newsletter explaining how everything (rules, expectation, behavior) is different when changing jobs then it was when you graduated and were looking for your first job.
To return to point, the candidate who walks in the door to check things out usually assumes that the interview is a one-way street. In other words, it’s up to them to decide if they are interested in the job. If they determine they are interested, then they take it seriously. Usually, about halfway through the interview they turn on the charm. I call it a Jekyll and Hyde interviewing strategy. Unfortunately, the results are often more like Abbott and Costello.
But, the company is also doing some deciding too. While the candidate is evaluating whether it’s worth expending a little effort to get the job, the company has already decided, frankly, that the candidate is a lost cause. Generally, the feedback from each side in these situations sounds like it is from two people who have never even met. The candidate is sure that they did well. The only part of the interview they participated in was after they decided that they wanted the job. The company, on the other hand, thinks the candidate is a dud because, by the time the candidate showed life, the company had already made a decision that the person wasn’t worth considering. By the time the candidate turned his switch on, the company had turned theirs off. It is almost physically painful to be in the middle of that.
The answer is pretty simple, especially if you can walk and chew gum at the same time. If you don’t have the ability to both evaluate the situation and simultaneously put you best face forward, you should stay in your current job. You can’t look at the beginning part of the interview as a movie being played for your benefit. You can’t just sit back and watch the show. You must be an active participant in the interview while you are doing your evaluation in the background. In fact, by participating, you are making your personal evaluation better. Questions and comments about the situation not only make you look better to the employer, they also provide you with more information about the job and company. The goal of every interview should be to make it feel like a conversation. Imagine meeting someone who spent the first half-hour of a conversation staring at you figuring out whether you were even worth speaking with. What would your impression be?
Even if you decide you don’t want the job, you benefit by avoiding making a bad impression. I am constantly amazed at how small our large part of the country can be. People move on to other jobs and throughout your career you may cross someone’s path multiple times. The HR person or manager who you couldn’t bother to interact with today may see your resume 5 years from now. Then they may be hiring for a job you really want. Maybe it is human nature, but I think negative impressions stick with people for longer than positive impressions. Why have one more person than necessary think you are a dolt?
Interestingly enough, more senior people sometimes make the same mistake, but for different reasons. There used to be a type of interview called an "informational interview". This was a meeting where both the company and candidate met informally to learn about each other and feel each other out. If things went well it moved on to a more formal stage at a later date.
For those who have had those type of interviews before and expect their first interview to be of an informational nature, that world does not exist anymore. Fifteen years ago, if you were interviewing with a small company in a different industry 25 miles from your home, it would have been hard to dig up any info on them. Hence, companies recognized the need to educate and inform the candidate about their business and products early in the first interview. The candidate would sometimes literally watch a movie or video and then have someone explain the organizations business to them. After that, there would be a little chit-chat and, if everyone liked each other, a more formal interview might be scheduled.
People whose last interview has been 10 or more years ago think the process has stayed the same. It hasn’t. Companies don’t invest as much time explaining their business to candidates. They engage the candidate immediately and expect the same from the candidate. No more movie theater.
It’s pretty obvious as to why. You can let your fingers do the walking. Mr. Google and his friends can put more info about a company on your laptop in 5 minutes than the company can present in an hour. Almost every company now expects the candidate to have done their homework and to come into the meeting knowledgeable, with questions and comments already prepared. This can come as a shock to someone who is expecting an informal, informational meeting designed to break the ice.
You need to see through the smiles and handshakes and see the interview through the company’s eyes. They are about to decide whether to invest six figures or more a year in you. This is actually more important in good companies than in bad ones. Bad ones may be hiring for a project or they may have so much turnover that they know that you will leave in a year or two anyway. Good companies expect the person they hire to be with them for years and to have a career there. The companies you most want to impress are the ones who will be the most critical in their evaluations of you. If you are interviewing for an $80,000/year job, a good company is figuring out whether you are worth a $750,000 investment over 5 or more years. A bad company is thinking, "Boy, if this schmoe can get just me through the next six months, I can cut them loose and only lose $45,000 in salary and benefits. Gee, that’s cheaper than a contractor." That is why, sometimes, a bad company under the gun on a project will promise almost anything and overlook almost anything to get someone on board. Don’t fall for that.
As an aside, if you don’t think that employers think like the bad company above, you are mistaken. That’s one of the reasons some companies don’t work with recruiting firms. Hiring through a recruiter requires a $10,000 or more investment on their part. If a manager knows that they won’t need the person beyond today’s project he won’t make that hiring investment. That’s why consulting firms often hate to work with recruiters. They never know when they will have to lay someone off.
Our next potential interview mistake is an odd one. Having spent the last page an a half preaching about the need to take an interview seriously, my advice in the next area may seem almost the opposite of what I’ve been saying. It’s not, as you will see why.
A lot has changed in the business world over the last 15 years. One area that doesn’t get mentioned often is business attire, or business casual. This can affect the interview in funny ways. It almost destroyed someone’s chance at a job last month, but not in ways that you think.
Most companies are business casual now, thankfully. However, most candidates know that on an interview, a company expects a slightly better level of dress, maybe a tie with khakis or a sport coat. I know of no company outside of the financial world that expects a full blown suit/tie combo in an interview. However, this is not a paragraph on why you should wear a tie to an interview. It’s a paragraph on common sense. Here is what happened earlier this year.
A fellow is interviewing for a job. The company wants to see him at 3PM and he insists that it be changed to 4PM. For the company, that is a little inconvenient because it means that at least 2 people will have to stay late to finish a 2 ½ hour interview. After some give and take, the company was getting annoyed. I asked the candidate what time he got out of work. The answer was 3PM. I then asked why he couldn’t leave 30 minutes early one day and get there by 3PM. His answer floored me. He needed an hour to drive home and put on a suit and tie for the interview. He read a book saying that a suit and tie should be required, as a show of respect.
Here was my advice. The book was right, in general, but the earth has revolved a few times since a suit/tie was law in an interview. Basically, the candidate, in his attempt to show respect was doing the opposite. He was forcing at least two people on my client’s interview team to work late just so he could change his clothes. The issue was easily resolved. I asked the company if they would mind if he showed up casual since he was coming directly from work. At 3PM he did not have to go home before the interview. He couldn’t wear a suit to work without tipping anyone off to the interview. Of course, they were fine and all worked out well.
The lesson is not that I am just soooo smart. The lesson is common sense. Fewer iron clad laws and rules in the business world require that communication be clearer among all parties. If you have a problem doing something, say why. The resolution may be easier than you think.
Thanks for your time. Jeff
|