Interviewing Tips: "What ELSE are you applying for?"

CHICAGO, IL - One of my most promising employees is interviewing a ton of candidates for a role in Chicago.  The job is content related, which puts it on the edge of our strike zone as recruiters.  In fact, we took the search because we wanted to get better at working with online content editors.

Don't forget, as contingency recruiters, it's our prerogative -- and occasionally we will stretch into strategically adjacent areas when we know the client is working with other recruiters and will not be harmed by our lack of experience.  Plus, we always maintain full disclosure with our clients.

So my colleague is interviewing a candidate who is an offline print magazine editor, and the candidate is insisting that he can do the job online.  He has no online experience whatsoever.  Yet my colleague is having a tough time regretting the candidate.  He talks a good game, and "he sounds like he could do the job," she says.

Hiring managers and new recruiters, please ask yourselves:  "What would this candidate do if he did NOT get the job for which he is applying?"

If the answer is anything other than "applying for another job just like it" -- then you know he is not the right candidate for the role.

Comments

[Ted Grigg]

Thanks for your excellent post.

I think your test for the candidates‘ validity makes good sense. Unfortunately, it leaves me a little cold.

So my comments here are difficult to express, because the concepts are highly subjective.

I know you are correct in your assessment, but I find that truth somewhat disheartening for the many I know who are now out of work. They must show versatility, or they can't support themselves or their families.

It used to be that a talented candidate could interview for a given job that might not be a perfect match. But the company wanted the candidate to work for them anyway. So they would create a new job or place them in a different role to match the candidate's core skills.

But the new game requires an almost perfect match for a given job.

My concern is this: Today's work world is is job driven rather than talent driven.

So the only way to win now requires highly targeted resumes, focused elevator speeches and personal branding. That is all good, except that it can narrow the individual's true scope.

A talented individual is not a company, nor a unique selling proposition, but rather a mass of potential that seeks an exciting vision.

If yesterday's company wanted the CRM specialist, today the new job is online marketing. And MBAs go in and out of demand depending upon the mood of the job market.

Many roles overlap and borrow skills from different areas of expertise. Yet the job market seems to demand the brand of the day instead of true marketing know how.

Its no wonder then, when narrow job descriptions are filled that talented individuals sometimes feel artificially boxed in. They are hired based on what is in vogue at the moment only to loose the job in less than 2 years.

People quickly grow out of these narrow definitions.

Talented people not only grow quickly but they experiment and need to stretch their wings well beyond written job descriptions.

We must find a way to let such people find their way within today's fast paced organizations in order to tap into the vast reservoir of human talent that they represent.

It takes talented managers to recognize, hire, mentor and retain talented candidates.

Candidates that display a "difference" in their thinking styles or possess above average creativity find many of today's work environments bland and devoid of tolerance for the thinking they bring to the table.