Still trying to figure this one outI have been out of work now for 10 months. Why you ask? Because of dealing with recruiters that say "Oh you have outstanding skills and qualifications" and we will let you know if something comes up". Never mind the fact that they called you in regards to a specific position but that just goes by the wayside. Any way I did go on a interview for a company that needed a person with construction background (I have 25 years)plus a BS Degree and their accounting system is one that I have been using for nine years. During the interview the hiring manager wanted to shake my hand and said that they have never found anyone who knew their accounting system. Proceeded to tell me about the position and it was a complete fit. Was also interviewed by one of the partners (there are two) who oversees the financial end. Nailed it there as well. When I get home my recruiter called and said "THEY WANTED ME" AND UP THE SALARY AS WELL." No more than a hour later the hiring manager called and said they were going to make a decision but have to do the background check. OK I know everything on the background check would come out excellent. So I waited for four days for the call and when the call came from the recruiter she said that they were going with a FRESH OUT OF COLLEGE with a MBA , NO EXPERIENCE. Why? It does not make any sense that they would inform me and my recruiter that they really wanted me.. The only thing I can come up with is that the other Partner has a best friend or family member that wanted their child working so this company passed on someone who is experience and willing to work for someone who does not have a clue. Obviously they found someone else. Why? Who knows. You may be right, it might be the boss' s no good nephew. It might be someone that they just took an immediate liking to and figured they could train the way that they wanted them. Either way, you know that you have strong skills that are desireable, that your resume is fine, and that you interview well. Keep slugging. The right fit will come along. I can probably tell you why.... Because they decided, erroneously IMHO, that they would rather pay for a fresh-out-of-school grad with no experience whom they can pay dirt-cheap wages to and "train" themselves. Unfortunately, they probably thought you would "want too much money." Many companies do not realize the value of paying an experienced person more money vs. the learning curve involved in trying to teach a new-to-the-field entry-level person, and the strong possibility that once this person is trained, he or she will just move on to another job. My husband, who has years of outstanding experience and is exceptionally talented in his field, went through this a few years ago. He was invited for several out-of-state interviews, paid for by the potential employers, interviewed and got oohs & aahhs and rave reviews for his background, was told "you' re out leading candidate" or "so far, you' re the best we' ve seen" more times than I can count--only to be told later that "we (or they) decided to hire more of an entry-level person and train them ourselves." The ostensible reason was they wanted to groom someobody their own way, but the real reason was they didn' t want to pay a good salary. He was fortunate enough to find a company that ended up paying him more than their budgeted salary--precisely because they needed his experience and talent, knew they needed it, and were willing to pay for it. So, take heart, you will find a company that values your experience and will be willing to pay for it. It may take some time, but the right company will come along, as long as you keep looking for it. I am in the same boat as you. I have been unemployed since December, 2005, and only worked four months temp positions since last summer. I have 24 years of experience in my field (Full Charge Bookkeeping/Office Management). I can' t tell you how may times I have gone on an interview, even two, and thought I had the job in the bag, and pfffft----------there it goes to someone else. My husband says it' s because they found someone else to work for less. I know he' s right, but the trouble is, that some of these same jobs are ending up back being advertised a few months down the road. The person either wasn' t the right fit, couldn' t do the job (there' s the no experience factor rearing it' s ugly head), or surprise! surprise!: they found a better paying job, and up and quit. These companies deserve exactly what they are getting. One of these days, they are going to get fed up with having to interview, train and hire people (or pay big bucks to the recruiters to do the same for them), only to have these same employees keep quitting on them. Maybe then they' ll get the old adage: "You get what you pay for." As my husband always says, they are being "penny wise and pound foolish." In my case, I let them know straight out in my cover letter what salary range I am looking for. None of the six job offers I have had in the last year have come in above or over my low end of my range. Most have been for 5-20% less than I am looking for, which is the salary I received at that position I quit, and two temp jobs since. The recruiter I have been working with lately told me with my experience, skills and personality, I should actually be asking for AND GETTING more. Bless her. I have asked more, on occasion: forget about it!!! Keep on forging ahead. There is bound to be an employer out there that will see your worth, and hire you, on your terms. I feel the same about myself. Good luck!!! Wow, I' ve been there, done that and have a t-shirt to prove it. I' ve gone through the whole recruiter process of "I' ll call you when something comes up". I' ve also gone through the whole "Oh, wow, I' ve never had a better candidate than you. Oooh, Ahh." I' ve actually gotten numb to it now and I' ve told myself that I will not get excited anymore until I have the offer letter in my hand. The others are right, the company may have thought that would hire a candidate that they could underpay. It still doesn' t diminish what you brought to the table. Keep working it out and you will find your fit. I went through a similar situation where I had gone through 3 interviews and was about to get invited to a 4th until the HR director called me and said they had an "internal" candidate apply for the job. My thought was..."where was this internal candidate when I was doing the previous 3 interviews?". Of course, the internal candidate(somebody in the company' s kid) ended up getting the job. It still didn' t mean that I wasn' t a good candidate, I was just a victim of circumstance. It may not even be the money issue. With the last job I posted, I figured either I wanted someone totally experienced who could hit the ground running or someone with some minimum skills that I could train the way I wanted them. There' s a lot to be said for somoene who doesn' t come with any "bad" habits and will do things your way. A few thousand dollars spread within the posted job range didn' t concern me in the least. I probably would not have gone for someone in between those two extremes either. As it turned out, I didn' t get a totally experienced candidate so went with someone very trainable that is working out great.
Just out of curiosity, what is the down side of being "in between"? I think I currently belong to this category because I don' t have years and years of experience, but not exactly fresh out of school either. I' ve lost jobs to candidates will less experience, and don' t really undestand why (I know it' s not financial because my salary requirements are very flexible). I always thought that some experience is better than none, but I guess not... Should I be downplaying my experience? Putting more emphasis on my ability to learn? Focus more on my personality and what attracts me to the field rather than the related work I' ve done in the past? I feel like I am missing something...
It is one of those things that' s hard to explain. Someone totally knowledgeable knows what I want them to know, knows how to get everything done and needs very little supervision. Someone brand new but "trainable" takes a lot of maintenance, but it is stressfree maintenance. They' re not going to go off and do something on their own because they know that they don' t know. They' re not going to go waltzing into political trouble because they know they' re not at that level. They' re not going to argue with me on everything because they know they' re learning and I' m mentoring. Someone in the middle may know just enough to think they know everything. I inherited in the job (her leaving created the opening) was in that middle group. She "thought" she knew everything. She didn' t. I was constantly telling her the same things over and over because she was sure she knew better. Generally speaking, however, some experience IS better than no experience. You just have to find the right spot. You need a "worker bee" spot. Not an expert spot or a trainee spot in your field. Play up your strengths, play your willingness to learn and do things their way but also that you don' t need constant supervision. Those are the kinds of things hiring managers want to hear. While I am sure you' re right that sometimes this is the case, I know for a fact that it is sometimes, maybe most of the time, a question of money. In my husband' s case, he has 20 years of experience in his field; has two related, but different skill sets, both of which he is an expert in; and can hit the ground running in either position. Does not need babysitting, training in software, etc., and often has to teach less experienced people how to use the software and/or read blueprints, translate a flat view into a 3-D or orthographic view, etc. He has only been in his new position about 3 months and is already working on two designs his company is going to patent. No "in-between" about him! In cases in which he "lost out" to an entry-level person, the difference in money was far more than a "few thousand." He was looking in the high 30' s to high 40' s range (which was back then the "going" range for somebody with his experience). He interviewed with companies that needed both his skill sets (which very few people in his field can do equally well, or at all) but when they found out he would not take less than his stated range (they were hoping he was desparate and willing to work for less), they would inevitably hire someone untrained and inexperienced and pay them in the $20' s! Thinking they could "train" someone to do what DH could do--as well and in a couple of months. Of course, subsequently we would see these same jobs posted over & over & over again. This happened in at least 3 firms he interviewed with. One company had the job posted & re-posted for over a year! They were hiriing, but the people weren' t working out.) He finally ended up, several years later, working for one of these companies in a contract position, making 3 times what they originally offered him. They kept calling him and calling him every few months, and when they finally realized they couldn' t find anyone else who could do what he could, the recruiter literally said, "Ok, they need him and they' re willing to pay him what he wants." My point is, this particular company screwed around for almost 3 years, hiring & firing people, going through the search process time & time again, when if they' d been willing to pay an experienced person a good wage, they would have had him all that time and, I' m sure, saved money in the long run. And I think, when companies find someone who has everything they want, along with a lot of years of experience, they will often not even contact that person under the assumption that he/she won' t work for the salary they want to pay. Of course, if they don' t ask, they won' t know. But they' re probably right! I think we can all agree that there is a correlation between experience and money. The poster has 25 years experience, and 25 years of salary build-up. The position may not need 25 years of experience and the company may not be willing to match 25 years of salary build-up. It may also be that they want this person to take the company in new directions... something that 25 years experience may lose out against an MBA. | |
|
Career Tips
|