IT Employment

Ask something
Discussion Locked

What would you do

0 helpful
17 replies

by voldar

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.

if being a IT manager, and looking for a new employee, having a bunch of CVs on your desk, who you'd choose?
This is a question I have asked myself a lot of times - not as being an IT manager but as being the candidate. (When I was the manager, I knew what to look for.)
What are the firms looking for in fact?
I had an experience recently, which gave me another way to see things about this mater.
In short, I applied for a job that I believed that suited me best, and in the end, after some interviews (3 ? HR, Technical, IT), phone calls to the ex-employers and present employers, etc., I had the answer: "You were the best of two we considered in the end, but we chose the other one!"
Sincerely, I was feeling upset at that time when I get the news, but then I thought maybe it was better for me not to be there. The only good reason for which they have chose the other guy may be the fact that the ?other one? was maybe from "inside", I mean he was from the company already. And I can take that, but what I don't understand is why they did the entire "circus" with the interviews, when they in fact already knew which is the "new employee"?
This is not meant to blame someone; it is just because I want to know better how things work in fact, so that I?ll better know next time how to deal such situations. Be more prepared, etc.
Don?t consider me as someone who?s crying and who?s claiming ?justice?, I was maybe not prepared enough ? my mistake, I will continue to pursue my search, that?s for sure. It?s only something that I hope you guys will explain me how in fact things work.

17 replies

by oz_media

When it comes down to one or two people in a cut list, eoerience is usually not the reason for the final decision. At that time it is more a decision as to who's personality won. An air of confidence in an interview CAN be great whereas in other interviews it may not be. An eager self starter approach may work with one and not another. It is usually a personal matter at that point. Not to say you have a bad personality at all, it's just that some people click better than others.

I wouldn't stress over it too much, everyone has a picture in their mind of who they want to hire and it's just a matter of finding the right match.

I have always gone for guerilla job hunting at 30-50 cold calls a day with a scripted intro. Money has always been a numbers game for me and the higher the numbers, the better the chances. I've see so many people apply for two or three jobs a week and wonder why they don't get employed, you just have to see more people and share your ideas as much as possible until someone hears you.

by voldar

yes, you are right. Maybe I looked too much confident in myself, or maybe the fact that the persons within the entire IT departement of the firm had not more than 2 and a half job experience, and I had a bit more - and sometimes, I presume, THIS is something that is hard to beat. And be sure I am not stressed. In fact, these are facts of life, they are supposed to exist. What I want is just to have a better perception of what/how does it works the thing.

by oldefar

My experience indicates the five currencies are as applicable to employee selection as to any other business transaction. The currencies are time, money, knowledge, security, and prestige, and the transaction has to provide an aggregate increase.

Time is not generally a key factor in hiring unless there is a related time sensitive objective - a project due date for instance.

Money is generally the last factor and comes into play when two roughly equal candidates are being decided between.

Security is a factor, especially with the position that includes a group interview. The manager may be concerned that a strong candidate might represent his future replacement if the manager does not feel secure in his job. Potential peers may feel their position within the group is at risk, or may be looking for someone to fit above them in the order as an ally and buffer.

Security is also at work when an internal candidate is given preference over a new hire. By hiring from within, those doing the hiring are reinforcing a policy that may later work to their advantage.

Knowledge is a factor. The candidates are considered based on the additional knowledge they bring to the organization.

The final factor is prestige. Each candidate considered impacts the prestige of the selecting individual or group. What passes as personality issues are quite often prestige issues. Potential peers will often decide against a candidate who clearly will outshine them. At higher levels, hiring the star performer is often a prestige enhancer. The same applies when the candidate will not directly compete in the same space - say a network engineer brought in by a team of system developers.

Each opportunity has its own mix and weights to these five currencies, but it is rare indeed when a new hire does not represent a positive gain in the aggregate of these currencies to those doing the hiring. If you can determine how the hiring group values each of these currencies, then you can focus your interview responses to show the most positive value.

by wordworker

Wow what great stuff, Oldefar. Just for fun - as I don't think captive employment will ever pay me what I'm making as a consultant - I applied for a job where I'd be managing someone to whom I once reported. And that person has applied for the 'insider' promotion. Based on your formula, I don't have a snowball's chance in a microwave of getting that job, do I?

by oldefar

Glad you liked the insight - Michael Vickers introduced the concept to me as a sales technique a couple of years ago.

The fact that the job would place you over a former boss is not necessarily a factor. He would not be the hiring manager, just competition for the job.

The inside position works on security currency at large companies up to middle level management. Note how many senior level positions are filled from outside. This is because at the senior level the emphasis is on prestige (our CEO used to run well respected company X), knowledge (personal network as much as industry specific), and security (yes, the board hired a jerk but it wasn't our fault - he was well respected in a similar position before).

Assuming the money is the same for both of you, your chances are very much related to how the hiring manager perceives the value you bring him in knowledge, security, and prestige.

by voldar

YES!
You are very right, when you've done well the homeworks, you should know what they want. I want to say again, I don't want to blame anybody, just to have more ideas about "how things work" - it's a new world for me (European experience is almost meaning nothing it seams to me, although IT work is the same everywhere).
About money, well, I have to say that sometimes (almost every times) they do represent an important step towards their objectives. But, yes, there are always exceptions.
Great post Oldefar, many thanks!

by oz_media

When moving from North America to Europe your experience is hard to describe. It begins in high school, A and O levels vs Grade 12. Then College and UNiversity certifications differ. About the only thing that is consistent is medical and educational degrees.

It makes it hard for an employer unlesss they understand the other county's system and requirements for education.

by voldar

is a two ways relationship europe - america/autralia/asia or "viceversa". I just don't understand why if talking about IT, they think that difference is that high. In fact, computers are the same everywhere in the world, software, NOSs, etc., still the same, language almost everywhere = english. So?
Where's the difference - unless we talk about "work experience in an american/european/asian/australian environment", but that's another storry. The fact that IT is outsourcing is the proof that there is no really difference between one or another guy. (unless the money thing, of course :))
If we talk about education, well, on a regular base, as a hiring manager, I suppose I have done my work and decided what candidates must have as a MUST. The rest, the better the candidates are, the happier I am :).

by dwdino

Hiring is 80% subjective.

It takes an employer minutes to sum up your experience, talents, traits, etc. What really counts is how does it feel.

One reason for multiple interviews is to see if different people get the same feeling/perspective.

I have been on many job interviews where I was ranked high on credentials. But the feeling wasnt right (mgmt style, coworkers, whatever). I have also been hired to a couple of jobs where there were more qualified individuals, but I was the fit.

So understand, "credentials" simple gets you invited to the interview; after that, it is all about feel.

by voldar

everything is subjective. I am very aware of this fact. What I was not able to understand at the time, it was only the fact they said to "you were the best but ...", which rised a serious question about "what whent wrong then". Never got the answer. If they'd said - "thank you for your interest, but we found another one who suits our needs better", believe me, I'd never had this thread open.
I am very aware that life is not only "good and sweets" but also a lot of "hard work" and sometime "bad things". But I am one of the people for which every foot in the b*t is at least a step forward :).
And yes, credentials are some kind of "Open Sesame", no more, no less, and yes, once the door is open, as usually, we have always two options. Although I am not very convinced that credentials = knowledge, I was facing the fact that good people without "credentials"="certs" where left out for exactly their lack of them.
Thank you for sharing your impressions, I also thought about this being like some kind of a "pocker game" : never know what the next card will bring you, but still, you love the game, the tention and the satisfaction of a good "card".
BTW, I am not a cards player and in pocker I am even wors, but I haven't found any other "metaphora" for describing the situation.
I loved Forest Gump, especialy a description of life: "life is like a box of chocolate, you never know what you really get". But I think this is exactly what makes life to be wonderfull.

Cheers!

by hal 9000

The answer to your question is already there {You are the best but....} the person in question must have already accepted your credentials but he/she may of thought that you where overqualified for the job that they wanted filling.

There are then two possibilities that would arise firstly you would get bored and leave for something better when it became available which also would entail more money or they considered you as a direct threat to their own position within the company.

Of course being confident sometimes is considered as smugness which turns some people off but at the same time being hesitant when answering questions has the same effect eg you have the paper to fill the job but are unsure of yourself and don't really know all that much. I know it is a fine line to walk and it is all with the person who does the interview who may be well practiced in hiding their body language {and they should be if they are sufficiently high enough up the food chain} to be in a position of hiring and firring people.

Or there is another possibility here if they chose some one from inside the company they could be on a cost cutting exercise and not fill the position that the person who they promoted left. Similarly there could be some "Office Politics" involved and the real decision was taken out of the person who did the interview hands.

If you continue to think on about it you'll eventually go mad, I know it is frustrating but them's the breaks and quite a lot of the time we really have no idea why certain things happen. While it is interesting to Hypnotize over things like this in the end it is a fruitless exercises and more importantly a wast of time that could be better spent on other things.

If you really want to put a person doing an interview on the spot you could always do as I once did and ask "Exactly why should I work here, whats in it for me?" I didn't want the job anyway but I was offered it after that display but even then I didn't apply for it but was told to go there and I would find something interesting the last thing that I expected was a job interview and I was a bit taken aback when I found out what the "Hell" was going on.

Col

by hal 9000

Firstly any decision like this is entirely subjective by the person making it. The fact that you made the short list and that they went through the "Whole Circus" as you put it only shows that you where seriously considered for the job.

However if the job went to some one in house it was only because the person making the decision already knew that person and thought that they would work well in the environment and where not likely to get bored with the job and move on.

Similarly if the job went to someone out side of the business it was for the same reason that in the person who made the final decision the person who they chose was more likely to go the distance and not leave after a period of time in complete boredom.

While I realize this may not be the case it is how the person who was responsible for making the final decision saw it. This may be the complete opposite with the next person who you go to a job for as everyone is different and has different priorities. Any suggestions made now for you to change may only prove counter productive with the next person you see for an interview.

The best advice that I could offer is be your self and you will eventually find a job in a place that you will suit. If you attempt to change your self to suit the job as you think the person who is interviewing you wants you will only end up in a "No Win" position where you are considered different to what you actually are so you have to put on an act which will not make you happy and will lead to you wanting to leave in a far shorter time frame. Currently IT is in a state of flux with a lot of the work being moved off shore so you want to find a position where you have some form of job security and are allowed to be your self without needing to change the way that you work to suit a company.

While it might not be tomorrow or even the next day you will eventually find a position where you will be happy and your self where you will be willing to work that bit extra just to make sure that the work gets done to your satisfaction.

There is one other thing that comes into play here you may appear to be over qualified to the person who is doing the final interview and in their eyes this means that you will likely get bored and move on in a short time which isn't what any company wants as it throws their IT section into Chaos which no one wants but the very qualifications that to one person makes you over qualified for a job in one company will be exactly what some one else likes and wants so be honest and carry your self as you would in some cases being confident is a draw back and in others it is a necessary attribute it all depends on the person making the final decision who already knows what he/she wants in a new worker and this is something that you can never tell before the event.

Col

by voldar

I will always be myself. I am not going to change myself "over night", and yes, I thought also I did a good job when qualifying for the "last final countest". I agree that you could never tell from advanced what a company is looking for in a "new worker", but it is up to me to try to find out during the interview.
Thank you for your advices, and yes, I am with you all the way long. I will look for what I want in terms of job, and I am sure sooner or later I will get there.
It is so refreshing to know that you are giving/sharing all your ideas - impressions - life experience to me, and I am very greatfull to you. All of you!

by hal 9000

Your welcome.

I only hope that what I posted was of some use to you and that you may have gleaned something useful from the other postings here.

Col

by voldar

thinking over about what happened, but going forward. Thank you for the tip about direct questions. I used it to find out what type of manager is the person who's hiring me, how he works etc. I use to think that if they want to know so much about myself, why can't I found the same about them?

by voldar

and it helped a lot! Made me better understanding some "blury" sides :).

by jamesrl

At one of my recent employers, my boss stressed a focus on 3 factors or questions;

Can they do the job?

Will they do the job?

Will they fit in?

If you got an interview, you've pretty much answered the first one satisfactorily - they know you have the credentials to do the job.

The second questions goes to internal drive - this is shown through the interview process. But in some cases you can show it by showing your eagerness - ask them interesting questions that show you know something about their business and the challenges they face. Do some homework on the company - search the net, ask your friends if they know anyone inside the organization. Show that you've put some time and effort into understanding them.

The last question is the hardest. Understanding a company's culture isn't easy, and if you don't have an inside contact, its hard to sort through the truth. You should glean something from the corporate web site, and from any newpaper clippings. Showing you will fit in often means demonstrating somehow that you are a team player, and somehow match up with corporate values. This is one area where insiders have an inside track - for better or worse they are a known quantity.

If you aren't hired due to the last question, don't feel bad - it may be one of those situations where you might be better off in a company thats a closer fit to how you work and act.

I hope you don't spend a great deal of time worrying about things that are out of your control. You can and should examine your interview behaviour and think about ways to improve - but beating yourself up without knowing all the factors is self defeating - it hurts your vital self confidence.

I placed 2nd at one company last year - and called to ask what I could do to improve my chances. I was told that I had all the qualifications - I needed to sell myself more. I thought that I had too much self confidence, and clearly that wasn't the case - they wanted me to be agressive and passionate - something I was afraid to do.

I just landed my current job through persistance and by doing my homework. I did lots of web research on the company before I came. I tried to understand the company's challenges before the interview. I anticipated the questions, and if they didn't ask them I did. That demonstrated that I wanted the job and understood the environment.

Good Luck, and keep you head high. Every interview is a learning experience and improves your chances at getting a good job.

James

This discussion is closed to new replies.