March 2011

A reader writes:

I am a new manager in a rather large department and am working on my budget for 2011/12. It’s due on Monday and I am in a panic because I am terrible with numbers. I look at the spreadsheets and break out into a sweat. Luckily, we have a wonderful accountant here who helps me out and has even been doing some hand-holding through this process, but I am having trouble focusing because of the anxiety surrounding the budget process. What advice do you have for a manager who is good with handling personnel issues, but terrible with working with numbers and budget forecasting?

I’m buried under a large stack of resumes, so I’m going to give you a short answer and then see what advice our readers have for you.

I’m not really a numbers person myself, but ultimately numbers and math are just a logic puzzle. And I bet you’re good with logic. My advice is to stop seeing this as numbers and spreadsheets and forecasts, all of which can be intimidating when you think of yourself as “terrible with numbers,” and instead see it as a series of decisions you need to make about how you want to prioritize your programs and resources. And then it’s just a logic problem to make it fit together within whatever constraints you have.

Also, I strongly suspect that you’ve convinced yourself that you can’t do this, and that’s why you’re having the panic reaction … but it’s more of a self-imposed mental barrier than anything else. You think of yourself as bad with numbers, and therefore you’re breaking out in cold sweat because … ACK — numbers!  But if you really look at it, and ignore the fact that it’s a spreadsheet you’re looking at, and maybe even pretend that you’re someone who’s good with numbers (seriously, tricking yourself in this way can work), you might find that it’s actually easier than you think.

Alternately, if you’re reading this and thinking that I am a crazy person to even suggest the things above, is there someone in your department who’s good with numbers? If so, can you sit down with them and talk through the priorities and trade-offs and so forth that you want reflected in your budget, and have them help you with the actual numbers? I bet there’s someone on your staff (you say it’s a large department!) who has the skills you need.

What other suggestions do people have? I feel certain that we have some other non-numbers-people out there who will have good advice.

{ 28 comments }

As I mentioned yesterday, I wildly underestimated what the response would be to my resume review offer, so I’m going to end it earlier than the one-week period I’d initially planned. It’ll close it at midnight (EST) tonight.

Everyone who responded, I’m still planning to get back to all of you within the seven days I promised, but if any of you are not on a tight timeline and wouldn’t care if I took a little bit longer, that would be awesome to know…

{ 5 comments }

A reader writes:

Can you give some general advice to us desperate job-seekers when answering ads on sites like Craigslist?  As a rule, if a job posting sounds interesting but there is no e-mail contact other than the generic Craigslist one, and if there is no info about the company, I send a quick e-mail saying I am interested, please let me know the company name and a direct e-mail address so I can forward my resume, etc.  Not surprisingly, I do not hear back from over 90 percent I message.  I figure if they are not willing to let me know who they are, I am not going to send a bunch of confidential information about myself, no matter how desperate I am for a job.

I know there are a lot of scams with phantom jobs – at worst, this can be dangerous, at best, this is a big fat waste of time.  I also look out for vague job descriptions, wildly outrageous or weird sounding rates of pay (like “$17.94 to $29.32 per hour”) or repeated similar-sounding postings.  But lately a new one is in the works – I received a response that basically said, “This is a confidential search, and as such, please let me know your phone number and I will contact you with more information that way” and was signed with someone’s first name only.  The  kicker was the email was sent not from some company, but from a hotmail-type account that could have been anybody.

Am I being too careful?  It just struck me as very odd that a legitimate company looking for an employee would not even tell you who they are or how to contact them, while expecting applicants to send them resumes containing names, addresses, phone numbers and work history!  Or is that actually happening these days, and why?

Oh, and can you remind applicants NOT to include Social Security Numbers (USA) or Social Insurance Numbers (Canada) on job applications?  I can’t believe how many people I know who have done this.  These numbers should be guarded like cash – with this information, an unscrupulous company or person could possibly steal your identity.  SSNs and SINs are only to be revealed to employers once you actually have a job, so they can report income to the government.

First, yes, absolutely on not including your Social Security number. There’s no reason — none, zero — to include this on a resume or job application, and yet I still see people do it unsolicited.

As for scams in job ads, there are plenty — and not just in Craigslist. They’re on Monster and the other big job boards too, but Craigslist is cheaper so there are more of them there.

On the other hand, there are also some legitimate companies engaging in hiring practices that look weird at first glance but end up not being scams — just being perpetrated by people who are sort of inept at hiring. Vague job descriptions could certainly fall in that category.

It’s also true that legitimate companies do sometimes engage in confidential searches, where you wouldn’t immediately be told who the employer is for all kind of reasons. Here’s a site that explains the recruiter’s side of it.

But someone using only a first name and a Hotmail account? At best, that’s a seriously unprofessional company. And it certainly looks worse than that. Either way, you probably don’t want to work there.

As for how to deal with these weird maybe-scam/maybe not ads, I’m not sure I’d recommend your tactic of emailing and asking for the company name and a direct email address. If they wanted to share that information, it would be in the ad, so you’re mostly wasting your time by sending those emails (as it sounds like your low rate of response is confirming). I think you’ve got to decide you’ll either apply and wait for more information or not apply at all, but I doubt those emails will do you any good.

If you do apply and you get a response like the one you quoted above (“this is confidential but send me your phone number”), do you really have much to lose by just letting them call you? Your phone number isn’t especially sensitive information, and you can always end the call if it becomes apparent the job is a scam or otherwise uninteresting to you. Plus, if the pitch is ridiculous, that might be fun to hear.

I think your frustration is coming from the fact that you’re engaging halfway when you see these ads. I’d say either apply or don’t apply, but trying to push them to give you more information on your timeline rather than theirs probably isn’t going to be very successful.

Also — Craigslist and its ilk aren’t great sources for job hunting in general. You absolutely can find legitimate jobs there, but they shouldn’t be a main pillar of your job search. Industry-specific sites and publications, networking, blah blah blah. That’s what you really want to focus on.

{ 29 comments }

oh my

March 30, 2011

Update to the resume feedback offer:  The response was higher than I’d thought it would be, so I may cut this off earlier than the original one week I’d planned on. Or raise the price. Or something. So if you want it, and you want it at this price, act sooner rather than later because I’ll probably change something about it on Thursday…

 

{ 2 comments }

Update: Due to the overwhelming response to this, this offer expired at midnight (EST) on Thursday, March 31.

I get a lot of requests to give people feedback on their resumes, but because it’s time-consuming to do it well, I usually turn them down unless they’re friends or family.

But here’s something historic:  For one week, and one week only, I’ll give you feedback on your resume.

The cost: $75

What you’ll get: As you can probably tell by the price, I’m not going to entirely rewrite your resume for you. People who do that charge a lot more. What you’ll get for 75 bucks: I’ll read your resume, I’ll give you suggestions for improving it, I’ll tell you where I think it’s weak and where I think it’s strong. I’ll tell you if your design sucks. I’ll tell you if you’re coming across as generic and/or unimpressive and how to fix it if you are. I’ll tell you what you need to change to have a resume that will make a hiring manager excited to interview you.

(Oh, and because I obsessively edit things, I might not be able to stop myself from editing it too. Fair warning.)

To be clear, this isn’t multiple rounds of revisions, or a rewrite service, or anything like that. It’s really just a bunch of notes on what I’d like to see you doing differently.

Limited time: I don’t want to be a full-time resume reviewer, so this is a one-week-only offer, not something I’ll be offering regularly. So if you want it, lock it in now.

(For those of you who’d rather not spend the cash, a lower-price alternative is to buy my ebook, How to Get a Job: Secrets of a Hiring Manager, where you’ll find lots of resume advice — just not customized to your particular resume. In fact, if you buy it this week, you can get a 20% discount by using this code: spring2011 )

{ 4 comments }

Someone told me recently that I was his only manager who ever asked him to specifically report on what he wasn’t getting done. Other managers wanted to know plenty about what was happening — but because they never asked him about what he wasn’t getting to, he assumed he’d just better be getting to all of it.

This works fine if a person’s workload is completely manageable. But when workload is high, it can lead to all kinds of bad things:

* employees who are chronically trying to get an unreasonable amount done, which leads to mistakes and burn-out

* some things necessarily not getting done, and these may be the wrong things

* some things necessarily not getting done, without the manager realizing it and having the opportunity to step in

As a manager, you want your people to proactively tell you about what’s not happening that ideally would be happening. And that’s because you want to be part of choosing what those things will be — not just letting them get selected by default. And you want to have the chance to say, “Actually, X is really important, so let’s push back Y instead / bring in temp help / get Joe’s department to help out with this / use this as the impetus to finally think seriously about adding a new staff position.” Or, if none of that is feasible, you want to at least know.

Alternately, if the problem isn’t the workload but is in fact the employee’s productivity, you want the opportunity to know about that, and to know that these specific things are going undone. You’ll find out eventually, believe me — but if you wait until you find out on your own, the problems may be way worse than if you’d caught them early on.

So you want your employees to proactively talk to you about what things they’re regularly not having time to attend to. And since many (maybe most) people won’t do that on their own, you need to ask them, and you need to make it safe for them to give you an honest answer.

But instead, what I often see are managers who pile on more and more work without asking what’s reasonable, who signal to their staff that they better just find a way to cram it all in, and who are then shocked when they eventually learn that some things aren’t getting done.

This is not to say that you should excuse employees who don’t maintain a high level of productivity; believe me, I have very high expectations when it comes to productivity. Some people who have worked for me would say they’re too high, in fact. (But they’re not.) But it does mean that if you don’t approach issues of workload in a realistic way, with a premium on encouraging people to communicate, you’re basically guaranteeing that some important things won’t get done (or at a minimum won’t get done well) and you won’t even know about it until it’s too late.

So try it. Ask: “What things are you finding that you don’t have time to get to?” And then keep asking periodically. Chances are very high that you’ll learn things you didn’t know.

{ 35 comments }

Over at U.S. News & World Report today, I list 10 common mistakes that you might be making on your resume. Yes, you. Go read it.

{ 8 comments }

It’s time for short answer Sunday once again — eight short answers to eight short questions. Here we go…

Weird interview question

I was recently asked in an interview if I thought I was smarter than my current boss. I ended up saying that I think I am equally intelligent but we sometimes have differing opinions on the best course of action or recommendation, which is largely accurate.  How do you respond to this question? I don’t want to throw my current supervisor under the bus OR be perceived as unsure of my own skills/intelligence by saying she is much smarter than me, whether true or not.

This is a really weird interview question, and I can’t figure out what they hoped to accomplish with it. I suspect that they have no idea what they hoped to accomplish with it, or how it would help them evaluate you for the job, and instead they’re just throwing out random questions because they don’t really know how to interview.

Anyway, I think your answer was fine.

Asking for comp time

I just started a new job two weeks ago!  So far, everything is going great and there are a lot of exciting things on the horizon.  The problem is that I have significantly less time off than what I had been getting at my old job and it’s not negotiable at this point.  That doesn’t bother me necessarily, but I found out that I will be working at events on the weekend — at least five over the next four months in other cities.  Is it okay to ask for an extra day here and there for personal affairs?  I have a summer full of weddings that require traveling, graduations and a big trip that had been planned way before I started. I think it’s only fair but would love to get your thoughts.

If you’re being required to work at events over the weekend, it’s completely reasonable to say to your boss, “Hey, since I’m working all day Saturday, can I take my ‘Saturday’ on Tuesday instead, without it pulling from my accrued vacation time? Or do we do any other kind of comp time?”  However, your manager’s answer will depend on the culture and practices at your new company; some do this as a matter of routine and others don’t. It’s a perfectly reasonable question though, and you should ask it.

By the way, I’m hoping that you’ve already told them about that big trip and aren’t just planning to spring it on them!

Applying for a teaching job at a Catholic school as an agnostic

I have a question about religion in the workplace. It’s not typically a subject I discuss with others, and I’m not a religious person. However, I’m looking for a teaching job, and found a local school hiring in my content area for the upcoming school year. I checked out their website, and their teaching philosophy and attitude towards students and staff fits me to a tee. The only catch is that it’s a Catholic school, and I identify as agnostic/atheist. I respect the diversity of others, and get along well with people of all faiths. I don’t push my beliefs on others, and expect to be treated with the same respect. Should I apply for this position even though I’m not Catholic? If I do apply, and get an interview, should I mention that I’m not religious? What should I do if they bring it up?

You should absolutely apply for the position. There are lots of schools run by religious organizations where religion doesn’t play a significant role in their teaching, and that’s particularly true if you happen to teach, say, math. There are others, of course, where a non-religious teacher might not feel as comfortable, and if you get an interview, that’s when you can learn more about that. If you get an interview, ask them what role religion plays in their curriculum and what duties related to religion you might have, if any. I don’t think you need to volunteer that you’re not religious unless you want to; their answers to those questions will probably let that conversation unfold (or not) naturally.

Am I obligated to help another department?

Several months ago, I was hired in one department of a medium-sized nonprofit organization through a temp agency to fill in while they sought someone new for their department. I ended up working in this department for about six months, including about a month after they had hired the new employee to help her transition into her new role. During that six months, I went from being trusted to answer the phones while everyone was out of the office (I spent a lot of time reading) to compiling documents for committee meetings and taking minutes and organizing projects. Needless to say, there was a lot for me to show the new hire when she started. (By the way, I have no resentment at her for getting the job, I REALLY didn’t want it).

Now I’m back at the same organization in a different department getting ready to take over for someone going on maternity leave. I’m learning the ropes in my new job, but I have quite a lot of down time, and for the time being, I’m sitting at my old desk, which means my old boss notices quite frequently that I’m not busy. The problem arises when she assigns me little tasks because I know what I’m doing, but I feel like that’s not my job anymore. Am I obligated to help her? Should I just wait until my desk moves (two weeks) and hope that I’ll be out of sight, out of mind?

You have a lot of time with nothing to do, your old boss is asking for your help, and you don’t want to help her because it’s not your job? That’s pretty much the opposite of the way people get better jobs and good references. Particularly in a temp job, if the organization is paying for your time, it’s reasonable for them to ask you to help out in other areas when your primary area doesn’t need you.

But you report to someone else now, so check with your new manager. Explain that the old boss has been asking for your help, that you do have time to help her, and ask what she’d like you to do.

Explaining why I turned down a position

I recently interviewed for a managerial position. In the interview, I mentioned that I was offered a supervisory position by the person who recommended me for the job I was interviewing for, but turned it down. They asked why I turned it down and I told them that I did not feel as though what I would have to bring to the table to make the changes necessary would be valued. I told them I was looking for a position with true group cohesion and communication so that everyone would be free to not only express their ideas but to have them taken seriously. Was this okay to say? Do managers frown on those who pass up positions?

Hmmm. It’s totally fine to turn down a position, but — depending on the way you worded it — the specific reason you gave might sound a little grumpy/prima donna-ish/negative. So I don’t love that particular answer, frankly.

How to resign when my boss is away

I have 3 bosses. One is currently in town and working, one will be gone on vacation until Tuesday, and the third will be on vacation for 1 1/2 weeks.  I would like to give my official 2 weeks notice tomorrow (Friday), but only one boss will be present. I am concerned that my one boss will panic and call the other two bosses, interrupting their vacations – which will not help me as I attempt to leave without burning any bridges.  What would you do? I could wait until Tuesday when there will be two bosses present, but I cannot wait 1 1/2 weeks for all three to be back at work.  Do you have any resignation etiquette advice for this situation?

Resign now. It’s not your fault that two of your three bosses are away, and if your boss who’s there freaks out and calls the others, that’s really not your fault or your problem. You know you’re leaving; you owe it to them to share that information with them.

Is 8 months long enough to stay at a first job?

After graduating in May with a Master’s degree in administration from an ivy league university, I struggled to find a job for a couple of months.  Despite several excellent interviews (and second and third interviews), hiring managers told me that I ultimately lacked experience and that they decided to go with another candidate.  I was ultimately hired in my chosen profession, but the pay was about 10K less than I’d hope to make (i.e. 33K instead of 43K).  Now, with 8 months of work under my belt, I’m hoping to leverage my experience into another full-time position.  Does this seem like enough time?  Do I need to wait a full year?

I’d love to stay in my current role, but with loans and other expenses (I live in an expensive northeastern city), it’s difficult to sit tight as I increasingly need to cut costs to make ends meet.  Additionally, how can I answer potential employers’ questions about why I’m leaving my current role?  Should I say it’s because of the money?

Ideally you’d wait a full year, at least, so that you look like someone who keeps commitments and isn’t a job hopper — especially with a low level of experience in this job market, when you’re competing against people with more experience and solid work histories. When you do start looking, it’s better to explain that you’re looking for new responsibilities and challenges rather than just more money.

Should I bother pursuing this job?

This week 3 recruiters contacted me for job opportunities. They just found me on LinkedIn. One of them asked my expected salary and i said I’m making x. She said, “oh, I can work with that.”  I explained I’ll need more to consider changing jobs. She said she can negotiate for more after the probation period is over.

Should I even bother going for the interview and skill test? Its software position and it may be good practice. I may say no later. Or its just a waste of time? I never applied for this job but might do it for $5-10k more. I didn’t get any promotion or raise in my current job for 3 years, and at times received warnings about my performance.

If you’re getting performance warnings at your current job, I’d seriously consider these other opportunities, unless you have explicitly been told by your manager that you’ve turned your performance around and are now performing at a high level. So yes, I think it’s certainly worth your time to learn more about these other positions; you’re not obligated to accept them if offered, but having options is always a good thing.

{ 27 comments }

A reader writes:

So, I got a new job (hooray!) and I have an assistant who reports to me.  When updating my LinkedIn profile today, I noticed that my assistant has himself listed in my position and has since February of this year (while the position was vacant).

Given that I am just starting with this company, I don’t want to rock the boat, or make this person in any way think I consider myself to be “better” than him, but I can see this getting confusing down the road.  Any suggestions on how I should approach this or if I even should?

Secondly, is it weird that this rubs me the wrong way?  Have you ever encountered a LinkedIn profile where people are grossly misrepresenting themselves?

No, it’s not weird that it rubs you the wrong way! And it’s not because you think you’re better than him, but rather because he’s, you know, lying.  (And is it wrong that I think this is actually pretty funny?)

However, I suppose it’s possible that he did legitimately assume the title on an interim basis while the position was vacant. Any chance that was the case? In fact, if you ask him about it, that’s what’s I’d say — “Hey, did you temporarily have a different title while my position was open? I noticed on LinkedIn that you’re listed as (TITLE), and I wondered if that’s because you’d been serving as the interim (TITLE).”

And frankly, you should ask him about it, because if that innocent explanation is indeed the case, it’s better for both of you for you to know that than for you to go around incorrectly thinking of him as a liar.

But if it turns out that the explanation wasn’t innocent at all and he just decided to inflate his title, then you’re doing him a favor by diplomatically inquiring about it like this, because he should realize how easy it is to get caught doing this sort of thing, and asking in this way at least lets him save a little face.

And if it does turn out that he was lying, assume you have someone with an integrity problem on your hands and be on guard for other instances of it.

Either way, he does need to change his profile, because he can’t be out there misrepresenting his role at your company.

Want to read an update to this post? The reader’s update several months later is here.

{ 41 comments }

A reader writes:

How reasonable is it for a firm to develop potential employees at their own expense? For instance, say I run an organization that will need a full time HR person in the future (within a year or two). I know someone who I feel would make a great employee, is smart and would mesh well with the culture, but they would need additional education to be a generalist. Can a company justify spending the money to develop a person they feel would be great? Or are there just too many good HR generalists out there to make the expense worth it?

Well, it depends on what your goals are. Do you care more about hiring people who you know and like, even if they’re not the most qualified, or do you care more about hiring the best-qualified people who are most equipped to get you serious results? I know that sounds like a loaded question, but it’s a genuine one.

But we’ll get back to that in a minute. First I’d want to know why you’re so motivated to hire this particular person without a track record in what you need — and whose education you’d need to pay for — when there are tons of talented people out there who do have a track record of achievement in what you need and who you wouldn’t need to pay to educate.

If it’s because the person is a friend, I’d strongly urge you to resist the temptation to hire friends, particularly if the friend isn’t undeniably the best person for the job. This is because (a) successful hiring isn’t about providing a job-placement service for people you know; it’s about hiring the person who will get the best results on the job, and (b) managing friends — or being managed by a friend — is fraught with problems and complications.

If it’s not that the person is a friend, but rather is because you think this person has a lot of the “soft skills” that would eventually make her a huge success in the position, then you should still weigh her candidacy fairly against that of other people. In other words, you shouldn’t just anoint her — you should go through a full search process and objectively evaluate her against other applicants. At the end of that, if you determine she’s still most likely to do the best job, even adjusting for the costs of training, then great, hire her. But I’m skeptical this would be the outcome in the specific example you pose, since there are tons of experienced, talented HR people who are also smart and would presumably mesh well with your culture.

(The one exception there would be if your culture is something that hardly anyone meshes well with. If, for example, you’re an office of nudists or everyone has to speak Latin and you have trouble building a candidate pool as a result, then you might have an argument for paying to develop the right person.)

Now, getting back to the question of your goals:  If this is a for-profit business that you’re the owner of, ultimately it’s your prerogative to decide that you care more about hiring specific people who you know than you care about hiring the most qualified. There’s nothing that says that every business owner has to have the same goals; if you deliberately decide that you’d rather hire friends/family than get the best results/profits possible, that’s totally up to you. (However, if that’s your philosophy, you should be very, very transparent with prospective employees about that, so they know it up-front. And you should be transparent with yourself too; don’t fool yourself into thinking that you’re not making this trade-off.)

However, if you’re (a) hiring at a for-profit business owned by someone else or (b) working at a nonprofit, then you really have a different set of obligations. Particularly at a nonprofit, your obligation to your donors and the constituencies you serve is to hire the best possible people. That means casting a wide net and getting the deepest pool of candidates possible, so that you can ensure you’re hiring the most qualified people. In that context, it’s difficult for me to imagine that you could justify hiring someone who isn’t ready for the job when there are tons of people who are, let alone then shouldering the financial burden of training and educating them. Your donors aren’t donating to the cause of one specific person’s career development; they’re donating because they expect you to use their money to advance your organization’s mission — and no matter how personally fulfilling or kind it may be, a commitment to providing a job for one specific person is contrary to that mission.

{ 25 comments }