This thought-provoking piece by Mark Jaffe on BNet.com raises some interesting points for those considering a professional move.
Mark Jaffe's point about approaching an interview situation as though you've already been paid a sizable, non-refundable consulting retainer echoes a strategy that I've long espoused. In job hunts, as in life among the carnivores of the Serengeti, the hungry never get fed. If you seem desperate, or show weakness, you’ll find yourself alone and starving... or eaten.
My personal approach – perhaps to the detriment of friends and classmates - did not extend much beyond this. “Enter that room knowing you’re the right person for the job. If they don’t recognize that, it’s their mistake!” My motivation for this approach was much less nuanced than Jaffe’s. I was hoping to create an aura of confidence, and to potentially shift some of the power in the situation back into the hands of the seemingly powerless candidate.
Jaffe’s approach is a much better one, and entirely more useful for professionals interested in making strategic career decisions. For example, in winning my last position, I impressed the CEO, he impressed me and we appeared to be a match made in Heaven. However, I made the mistake of assuming certain conditions and strategies were given. By virtue of this error, I spent a good part of the next two years fighting, unsuccessfully, to create those conditions and implement those strategies. In retrospect, I could have better spent that time building a different business.
Jaffe’s piece allowed me to isolate the folly in my approach to the position. I failed to ask the really hard questions. Presumably, companies seek to hire people because there is a problem that must be solved, or some need that isn’t being met. Accordingly, what is the harm in fully understanding the true scope of the void you are expected to fill? To the employer, there is at least the benefit of a thought-provoking discussion about the future of the business, if not an introduction to an insightful and aware employee. For the candidate, there is better understanding of the role, the expectations on whoever fills it, and how this position may or may not fit within a greater career strategy… not to mention the impression of confidence, fearlessness and insight.
I concede that not all interviewers will appreciate this questioning; however, if an interviewer should take umbrage to direct questions about the company, this is an invaluable signal to a candidate. While you might not land the position, one would have to question the desire to work for an organization that doesn’t welcome thorough investigation.
The final point raised by Jaffe’s piece is one of necessity versus strategy. One’s ability to execute any of this is contingent on one having the power to follow one’s conclusions. I would love to say that hard questioning would have led me to conclude that my previous spot was wrong for me. However, at the time I had just graduated from business school, and didn’t have any other compelling offers to consider. While I can’t say with 100% certainty that I wouldn’t have accepted the position, at least I would have better known what I was getting into, and perhaps how better to navigate the situation once there. Jaffe’s strategy seems perfect for those who have the power to wait, but it still holds some benefits even to those who really need to land something immediately.
No comments:
Post a Comment