Modern job hunting

[Nano]

Having been on the other side of the table recently, for 1 day of interviewing you've got 5-6 spots to fill. You've received 25 applications, 10 have sent a CV when the advert said fill in the application form, Line 1 of the scoring matrix "Fully completed application form, score 0-3" they get a 0 & on the first zero you can stop marking, great we are down to 15. 5 haven't provided copies of their certificates, Line 2 of the scoring matrix "Have provided evidence of qualifications" boom, 10 left.
Now the hard work begins of reading the application forms, & if you've got 2 applicants for 1 spot that is when the nit-picking 'the advert said knowledge of Excel is essential but candidate A hasn't mentioned it' starts.

Daft way to recruit someone imo but it keeps HR happy.

That sort of box ticking is there to protect the company when someone complains. Last time I recruited I had a complaint afterwards from someone we had not offered an interview to and they were claiming it was discrimination due to them being disabled. We have a guaranteed interview policy for disabled people that meet the minimum requirements. We don't get told someone is disabled though so I had no idea from the application but they didn't meet the minimum requirements so they had never qualified for the guaranteed interview. I hadn't got close to considering them and thankfully the low scoring was evidence that they hadn't been discriminated against.

When I get a stack of applications I can tell after a quick scan of each one which ones are potentially suitable for interview. There are so many that just aren't and being able to score them as 0 for certain criteria saves a lot of time in filtering them out. Any application that is good but they have missed a qualification like a degree or GCSE English etc just gets something else scored favourably. We're not dismissing candidates for something that isn't particularly relevant. If you are being nitpicked for not having written something that is essential it's probably because the rest of the application isn't strong enough and they are looking for a way to not waste their (and your) time.

 

[JonnyHistory]

That sort of box ticking is there to protect the company when someone complains. Last time I recruited I had a complaint afterwards from someone we had not offered an interview to and they were claiming it was discrimination due to them being disabled. We have a guaranteed interview policy for disabled people that meet the minimum requirements. We don't get told someone is disabled though so I had no idea from the application but they didn't meet the minimum requirements so they had never qualified for the guaranteed interview. I hadn't got close to considering them and thankfully the low scoring was evidence that they hadn't been discriminated against.

When I get a stack of applications I can tell after a quick scan of each one which ones are potentially suitable for interview. There are so many that just aren't and being able to score them as 0 for certain criteria saves a lot of time in filtering them out. Any application that is good but they have missed a qualification like a degree or GCSE English etc just gets something else scored favourably. We're not dismissing candidates for something that isn't particularly relevant. If you are being nitpicked for not having written something that is essential it's probably because the rest of the application isn't strong enough and they are looking for a way to not waste their (and your) time.

I think all of your first paragraph makes sense and I can see why that kind of box ticking is important. But the second does not (for me ring true) I have experience hiring personally and am trying to job seek myself at the minute with a fairly stacked CV.

If you are in a senior role in a digital industry with two decades of experience having Word and Excel on your CV is definitely nitpicking as is things like GCSE's which are just irrelevant for anything other than entry level jobs in this industry. If I am to add every minutia of my 20 years of work the CV would become a short story and after a certain level some things should be seen as a given.

The role I was exampling in my previous post that fed back that excel and word were not specifically evidenced was for a head of department role that required the successful candidate (amongst other responsibilities) to build bespoke reports plugging in data from multiple sources. This is something I have lots of experience of and requires good IT skills to achieve, I evidenced prior jobs were I was successful in building new reports using a range of programmes and from a range of sources and how they were utilised to make more data led decisions in the marketing department.

I know when I personally recruited for senior staff of mid level managers I looked at their job history and skills and was able to gauge what level they purported to be at, the interview would then allow me to dig deeper into this and see if that was true. What I never did was look to see if they had copy and pasted the skills verbatim from the job advert or score people based on arbitrary criteria. When you reduce recruiting to numbers and keyword searches you may be "efficient" but you are not necessarily finding the best talent to interview.

 

[Laughing]

I don't think you should admit to helping Sunak fill his wallet.

Not my problem nyboro. To be honest most of the cash his wife is getting is through other companies recieving grants and contracts via her husband.

His wife owns very little of Infosys. 3% I think.

 

[hendrieswondergoal]

I don't like recruiters. I've met one good one in my life. But without getting into slagging them off, I'd just say it's best to side-step them. Obviously it might not work in every sector, BUT, I believe you're better off identifying companies you like or people you think you'd like to work for, and contacting them direct. Easier said than done, but I think it's the best way to avoid the relentless ghosting and shithousery that you get from (most) recruitment 'specialists'.

 

[JonnyHistory]

I don't like recruiters. I've met one good one in my life. But without getting into slagging them off, I'd just say it's best to side-step them. Obviously it might not work in every sector, BUT, I believe you're better off identifying companies you like or people you think you'd like to work for, and contacting them direct. Easier said than done, but I think it's the best way to avoid the relentless ghosting and shithousery that you get from (most) recruitment 'specialists'.

Agreed, and I have been trying to, most job adverts in this industry that in the hands of recruiters leave the company names off the post so it is difficult to identify targets to contact.

3 months unemployed is the longest I have went since me teens/early 20s and I think some of the issue is my own depression causing me to not be on it everyday when submitting applications I accept that, but depression aside the standard of recruiters certainty in my industry has become shoddy in my experience.

Those I have spoke to as well who have said my CV was not right for a role, when I press them and point to things on the CV that match the criteria they say are not there, have no idea what they have looked at or what my skills mean in real terms. No wonder companies get sent ***** all the time when you have people vetting who don't know what they are looking at!

I just need to suck it up and maybe just copy and paste the desired skills on the advert directly in my CV rather than giving my actual experience :/

 

[Norfolkred1]

Have been working for an Agency for the last 7 years, which suits me, I'll take work if I want it attitude. However the work has dried up and have done nothing for a while. I have found a temporary consignment from another agency which again suits me and a bit more steady and not wanting long full time work at my age. Did the CV sent it in and waited. Out of the blue I received a call for which I thought was a sociable chat which took around 3 minutes just talking about the job and my understanding. Following day received an email asking how the interview went yesterday!!! Anyway looks like I start in April for a month and see what comes out, If I want it.

 

[JonnyHistory]

Have been working for an Agency for the last 7 years, which suits me, I'll take work if I want it attitude. However the work has dried up and have done nothing for a while. I have found a temporary consignment from another agency which again suits me and a bit more steady and not wanting long full time work at my age. Did the CV sent it in and waited. Out of the blue I received a call for which I thought was a sociable chat which took around 3 minutes just talking about the job and my understanding. Following day received an email asking how the interview went yesterday!!! Anyway looks like I start in April for a month and see what comes out, If I want it.

Congratulations mate, what industry are you working in? and what is your secret

 

[Nano]

I think all of your first paragraph makes sense and I can see why that kind of box ticking is important. But the second does not (for me ring true) I have experience hiring personally and am trying to job seek myself at the minute with a fairly stacked CV.

If you are in a senior role in a digital industry with two decades of experience having Word and Excel on your CV is definitely nitpicking as is things like GCSE's which are just irrelevant for anything other than entry level jobs in this industry. If I am to add every minutia of my 20 years of work the CV would become a short story and after a certain level some things should be seen as a given.

The role I was exampling in my previous post that fed back that excel and word were not specifically evidenced was for a head of department role that required the successful candidate (amongst other responsibilities) to build bespoke reports plugging in data from multiple sources. This is something I have lots of experience of and requires good IT skills to achieve, I evidenced prior jobs were I was successful in building new reports using a range of programmes and from a range of sources and how they were utilised to make more data led decisions in the marketing department.

I know when I personally recruited for senior staff of mid level managers I looked at their job history and skills and was able to gauge what level they purported to be at, the interview would then allow me to dig deeper into this and see if that was true. What I never did was look to see if they had copy and pasted the skills verbatim from the job advert or score people based on arbitrary criteria. When you reduce recruiting to numbers and keyword searches you may be "efficient" but you are not necessarily finding the best talent to interview.

I do agree with that and I wasn't talking about you specifically but just relating how different places might do things differently. We're forced to use the online application form which does away with the CV and requires you to enter facts like qualifications and dates, job titles etc and then a section to explain why you fit the job spec. It's the same process whether you are hiring a band 2 for £20k or band 9 for £100k but the content is obviously very different. Big companies have bureaucratic processes unfortunately.

I would say though that if a process tells you it wants you to let your qualifications and explain how you m6et the job spec but you just copy and paste your CV in and fail to do so then it looks like you haven't followed instructions.

It's a filtering process and if someone has a lot of applicants and there's a quick way to filter people out because they haven't followed instructions then that's what they do. As much as it can be a pain in the **** to fill out the same information in several different online application portals the person reading your application doesn't know you have had to do it 50x and just sees the one time you've applied for their role and will judge what has been submitted.

Appreciate it is very different for different industries, different levels and different sized businesses. Personally I think CVs are far too empty to provide any sort of detail for whether someone might be suitable where an application process which asks you to describe how you meet specific criteria does give the employer some assurance. It might waste a bit of your time filling out an application but it saves you time turning up for an interview that you aren't suitable for.

 

[JonnyHistory]

I do agree with that and I wasn't talking about you specifically but just relating how different places might do things differently. We're forced to use the online application form which does away with the CV and requires you to enter facts like qualifications and dates, job titles etc and then a section to explain why you fit the job spec. It's the same process whether you are hiring a band 2 for £20k or band 9 for £100k but the content is obviously very different. Big companies have bureaucratic processes unfortunately.

I would say though that if a process tells you it wants you to let your qualifications and explain how you m6et the job spec but you just copy and paste your CV in and fail to do so then it looks like you haven't followed instructions.

It's a filtering process and if someone has a lot of applicants and there's a quick way to filter people out because they haven't followed instructions then that's what they do. As much as it can be a pain in the **** to fill out the same information in several different online application portals the person reading your application doesn't know you have had to do it 50x and just sees the one time you've applied for their role and will judge what has been submitted.

Appreciate it is very different for different industries, different levels and different sized businesses. Personally I think CVs are far too empty to provide any sort of detail for whether someone might be suitable where an application process which asks you to describe how you meet specific criteria does give the employer some assurance. It might waste a bit of your time filling out an application but it saves you time turning up for an interview that you aren't suitable for.

Appreciate all of that but essentially to me that is not finding talent, if you just copy and paste what they want to hear you end up having to weed more applicants out in the interview stage and miss out on people who have bothered to give real experience and not just adding key words from a job spec. It is just another example (again in my opinion) of unnecessary efficiency in certain tasks. If you want to find a genuinely good applicant I don't see how forcing everyone to put the same thing on a CV or application helps in finding talented workers.

I need to just do it though! It is obvious my approach is not working and things have moved on (negatively in my opinion but that is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things).

You have gave me things to consider though and agree with much of what you say even if I don't necessarily see the sense in it.

Edit to reply to ythis point specifically "I would say though that if a process tells you it wants you to let your qualifications and explain how you m6et the job spec but you just copy and paste your CV in and fail to do so then it looks like you haven't followed instructions."

What I am finding is the opposite to this, I am trying to show how my experience matches their criteria with real examples but because I am not putting the skills verbatim in my skills section and evidencing it within my job history it is just not being picked up on. Its as if recruiters WANT the copy paste approach I can only presume because its more efficient to control F and look for key words listed in the job spec.

 

[Boro in Devon]

I think that you need to re think your approach. You have identified that recruiters arent very experienced in your field and probably dont understand your skills, Often the same can be said of recruiting managers. When you have advanced skills it can be hard to understand that you may have more skills than the people looking to employ you, it is easy to assume that they can infer your skill set.

I have become fed up, reading cv's that look more like auto biography's. I have to read hundreds and I can reject one in 10 seconds if I dont like the style. This still leaves me to make a shortlist of ones that I will consider in more detail. Have a basic cv, that just lists your skills and the level reached, this can then be tailored to the role that you are applying for. As an employer I dont want to see that you worked on "x" project and you have visited "y". I want to see that you manage, organise, plan, negotiate and other soft skills together with hard skills for the role.

Cut down the length of your cv to 2 sides, this means that you have to cut out the waffle. The recruiting managers dont have the attention span to read more, when they have a huge pile to get through.

You mention your Excel and Word skills, you claim that you are proficient in using them. However in my area of Data Analytics, often in a marketing area I would question their proficiency if they are making reports in Excel. That was acceptable 15 years ago, but not now. There are far better quality data visualisation tools, and you dont manipulate data in Excel any more. I am afraid to say that it just says that your skills and knowledge in this area is out of date and you will require a lot of training. I would just say that your are proficient in Word and Excel and you can then expand at an interview when you understand what tools they use.

You need to learn how to play the game, you are probably dealing with recent graduates who do things differently to us of an older age. You can not assume that they will know or be able to infer and you may have to play their games to just get your feet under the table.

Hope that this helps, and good luck with your search.

 

[SilentProf]

I’m in the same boat. I was made redundant at the end of January and was on gardening leave before that. I was applying for internal roles exclusively before the redundancy date and that was enough of a pain having to tailor CV’s for each role and compete with hundreds of others also up for redundancy. Now I’m left going through the job sites and jumping through hoops to fill in repetitive irrelevant information on different websites is already getting depressing. I’m lucky that I have enough in redundancy payments and savings to last me a while but I find myself daydreaming about winning the lottery so I never have to do it again quite often.

 

[JonnyHistory]

I think that you need to re think your approach. You have identified that recruiters arent very experienced in your field and probably dont understand your skills, Often the same can be said of recruiting managers. When you have advanced skills it can be hard to understand that you may have more skills than the people looking to employ you, it is easy to assume that they can infer your skill set.

I have become fed up, reading cv's that look more like auto biography's. I have to read hundreds and I can reject one in 10 seconds if I dont like the style. This still leaves me to make a shortlist of ones that I will consider in more detail. Have a basic cv, that just lists your skills and the level reached, this can then be tailored to the role that you are applying for. As an employer I dont want to see that you worked on "x" project and you have visited "y". I want to see that you manage, organise, plan, negotiate and other soft skills together with hard skills for the role.

Cut down the length of your cv to 2 sides, this means that you have to cut out the waffle. The recruiting managers dont have the attention span to read more, when they have a huge pile to get through.

You mention your Excel and Word skills, you claim that you are proficient in using them. However in my area of Data Analytics, often in a marketing area I would question their proficiency if they are making reports in Excel. That was acceptable 15 years ago, but not now. There are far better quality data visualisation tools, and you dont manipulate data in Excel any more. I am afraid to say that it just says that your skills and knowledge in this area is out of date and you will require a lot of training. I would just say that your are proficient in Word and Excel and you can then expand at an interview when you understand what tools they use.

You need to learn how to play the game, you are probably dealing with recent graduates who do things differently to us of an older age. You can not assume that they will know or be able to infer and you may have to play their games to just get your feet under the table.

Hope that this helps, and good luck with your search.

Agree and 100% agree on the excel comment, but I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I use far more advanced tools and modelling but it seems some companies are not as advanced or those recruiting not understanding how the industry has moved on. Spreadsheets I use for collecting raw data but that just plugs into things like Looker Studio for example for the modelling and analysis were an API is not available to pull the data through. This is why I was so taken aback at the feedback.

For context though my CV is 2 pages, it is not war and peace but I am guilty of speaking about specific projects rather than my general skills.

I am looking for mid and high level managers roles predominantly and don't agree that I am competing with graduates but agree I need to rethink how I am approaching this and adjust, as you say things have moved on and I am obviously not adjusting appropriately.

 

[Boro in Devon]

Agree and 100% agree on the excel comment, but I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I use far more advanced tools and modelling but it seems some companies are not as advanced or those recruiting not understanding how the industry has moved on. Spreadsheets I use for collecting raw data but that just plugs into things like Looker Studio for example for the modelling and analysis were an API is not available to pull the data through. This is why I was so taken aback at the feedback.

For context though my CV is 2 pages, it is not war and peace but I am guilty of speaking about specific projects rather than my general skills.

I am looking for mid and high level managers roles predominantly and don't agree that I am competing with graduates but agree I need to rethink how I am approaching this and adjust, as you say things have moved on and I am obviously not adjusting appropriately.

I understand what you are saying. The point about being up against graduates may have been misleading. I was trying to say that the headhunters may be less experienced, as may the recruiters in HR at the company you are applying to.. When I was in my fifties I found that some of the managers that I worked for where younger than my own kids. They had spend a long time at university getting masters and PHD, spent a coupe of years at a professional services company and then got a high level job in business. They were very clever but could not do my job in analytics. I eventually stepped out of the industry and set up my own consultancy before selling that and opening other business out of the sector.

 

[JonnyHistory]

I understand what you are saying. The point about being up against graduates may have been misleading. I was trying to say that the headhunters may be less experienced, as may the recruiters in HR at the company you are applying to.. When I was in my fifties I found that some of the managers that I worked for where younger than my own kids. They had spend a long time at university getting masters and PHD, spent a coupe of years at a professional services company and then got a high level job in business. They were very clever but could not do my job in analytics. I eventually stepped out of the industry and set up my own consultancy before selling that and opening other business out of the sector.

I had my own agency for a while, and have considered going that route again but I find not being able to switch off from my work (running a business felt like it was 24/7 there) just drained me.

Thank you for your input here though, I think as you and others have alluded to, i need to just adjust regardless of my personal feelings on the processes or the wants of the recruiters.

I could rant about experiences I have had with the ineptitude of HR all day. And you are right to say many HR staff at companies will be less experienced, I need to be more mindful of that when applying, maybe dumb things down to an extent.

 

[swordtrombonefish]

I have been fortunate in not having any of this modern nonsense, to be honest the last two interviews I had were a matter of turning up for a prescribed time and asked if I could look at come configs and describe what was being achieved, I did, he was happy, we agreed a start date and I left. The other one was with a guy that I had done work for previously and we discussed football - his team Everton and mine obviously Boro. The latter guy asked me if I could start in two weeks, I said yes, he asked if the agency had furnished a rate and I said yes but I was hoping to up it a bit - he said he would we shook hands and I've been there since with retirement just 6 weeks away.

All this video cr@p would do my head in

 

[Blf]

It has all changed.
1974 my first job as an apprentice Spark at BSC had a 5 man panel. On the application form it had asked why I wanted to be a spark. I put that it's a good career and my Dad had been all over the world as a Sparky but had started at Dorman Long..
They asked me his name and the lead fella said he
knew him. Told me a few tales and it turned out 2 of the others knew him too.
I was asked if I knew what a Ohm was. I said yes and he asked if I could start the next month.

12 yrs or so later fed up of being a spark I went for my first job in nursing as an Nursing Assistant to see if I would like it and do the training ,it was a 2 man panel. Fella looks at me and said do you stand in the Holgate end to the right about half way back. I said yes and he said you and your 2 mates have me in stitches calling Billy Ashcroft banana feet all the time. Can you start Monday. The other fella said you haven't asked him a question yet. He said oh he will be fine.
That led to a 30 yr career in Psychiatry.
Different times indeed

 

[newusername]

That sort of box ticking is there to protect the company when someone complains.

Yes, at my firm the interview panel have to agree on the score for each application & question at interview.
This is due to a failed interviewee submitting a claim at an Employment Tribunal for discrimination. The scoring for all the applicants was examined & one panel member had marked them lower than the rest of the panel, which meant they scored slightly lower than the successful applicant.

 

[zzzzz]

Zero hour Contracts are just another subjugation of basic working rights.
One step away from the Workhouse.
Disgusts me.

 

[ThatFragranceGuy]

Having been on both sides of recruitment process, one thing Job hunters need to do is learn how to apply properly. Many firms now use portals to handle their application process and you might be the best candidate with the worst application letter/ submission but because of language used your form doesn't even pass an auto sift. It's unlikely to be basic things though and more things related to the role itself. For example a BA application that doesn't mention process modelling, requirements, time management etc would probably

These days they specify what they are looking for and the system will scan the hundreds of applications and score them based on how closely they fit, keywords used and other metrics. Reality is you can't effectively review 300 CV's for 2 jobs so they end up with a suggested talent pool and decide from there who to interview.

So you can't just blast out the same covering letter for every role, you need to tailor it specifically to the role advertisement which takes longer, but that bit of effort gets you a good score. Also worth learning how to write a good covering letter and effective cv as many peoples are horrible.

Without knowing about this people can submit cv after cv and get rejections or not hear back.

I do think applications are a wasted opportunity. Why not have a standardised format for cv info and experience and then just add a covering letter, be so much easier for all involved. I agree about the lack of salary info too, a job application is not an insignificant investment in time, you should know up front if it is suitable.

There is an argument that this automated system doesn't get the best candidates but in my experience it does because no one can objectively review 300 CV's and rank them to offer the best candidates, fatigue would set in and it would take ages. Yes. It's possible to bullsh*t the system, but you'd find that out at interview and it's possible to bullsh*t a cv and application form, which again should be found out at interview. It's literally giving you the people whose experience and application match the advertised roles best, it's just saving that manual review - which removes a lot of human error. Also ensures that the sifting can't be biased or misjudged as everyone is scored against the same criteria.

As for guaranteed interviews for disability, it flags all those, along with special needs for interviews, armed forces interviews and the like.

 

[Unravel_Morrison]

It has all changed.
1974 my first job as an apprentice Spark at BSC had a 5 man panel. On the application form it had asked why I wanted to be a spark. I put that it's a good career and my Dad had been all over the world as a Sparky but had started at Dorman Long..
They asked me his name and the lead fella said he
knew him. Told me a few tales and it turned out 2 of the others knew him too.
I was asked if I knew what a Ohm was. I said yes and he asked if I could start the next month.

12 yrs or so later fed up of being a spark I went for my first job in nursing as an Nursing Assistant to see if I would like it and do the training ,it was a 2 man panel. Fella looks at me and said do you stand in the Holgate end to the right about half way back. I said yes and he said you and your 2 mates have me in stitches calling Billy Ashcroft banana feet all the time. Can you start Monday. The other fella said you haven't asked him a question yet. He said oh he will be fine.
That led to a 30 yr career in Psychiatry.
Different times indeed

I hope you didn't call all your patients banana feet.