Rethinking the Job Application Process

[Zapbasket]

I'm noticing a recurring problem in my job application process. Either I am greatly overqualified for the jobs I find, or I lack the years of experience in one particular line of work necessary to garner a more senior position. I have a very diverse and accomplished background, a terrific education, and strong leadership capabilities that manifest in every professional experience I have ever had. I am also nearly 35 years old and I feel my collective experience qualifies me for more senior positions than the ones I typically find. So far, I feel no job I've had to date has been equal to my actual abilities. None have paid very well, either.

 

Part of the problem, I think, is that my background is very diverse. My professional career started at an earlier age than most: I was a professional musician and also published nearly 50 magazine articles before graduating high school. I spent a long time in undergrad first completing a music conservatory degree and then two academic degrees, and then got a masters in the humanities. My work experience has been principally in writing / editorial, but ranging the gamut from pharma advertising to academic publishing. Most recently I have been a ski instructor.

 

One potential employer told me she was "confused" by my resume. "How can one person," she said she wondered as she looked over my resume, "be involved in so many things?" I was so frustrated with that and wanted to reply, "It's called a combination of being multi-talented, having a lot of energy, and working very, very hard...which I think we could agree makes me an ASSET to any place I might work." The job for which I was applying with that employer was far beneath my skills and capabilities, and of course, I did not get it. One employer even told me at an interview, "You are by far the most qualified person we have had apply for this position." And I didn't get that job, and the only reason I can think of is because they feared I'd split as soon as something better came along as the pay was low and the position was much less than previous positions I have held in this particular field.

 

This is a recurring problem for me. It's rare that I even get an interview. I present myself very well in interviews: I'm attractive and know how to dress, I speak well and listen well, I ask intelligent questions and show up to interviews having fully researched not only the companies but the key players working there. I'm cordial and friendly, I have a sense of humor, I'm humble without being damagingly self-deprecating, and I don't smell.

 

The main thing that I'm thinking is getting in my way is the eclectic-ness of my background. I wish employers would see that as a sign of initiative, drive, and talent, but it seems instead they view it as a sign of a dilettante, or I-don't-know-what. If it's that they think I'm a dilettante, that's just plain stupid, since in every area I reached a very high level of accomplishment only attainable through very strong dedication and discipline.

 

So how can I alter my approach to the job application process? What does it seem I might be doing wrong that I can do better in order to obtain a position more in line with my capabilities? I'm thinking the answer is to return to school for my Ph.D., and then I'll be more able to invent my own job position rather than hope to find one that suits me.

 

I just don't want to go on yet another unrewarding wild goose chase. I want to shake things up in my approach, with the goal of a better outcome, e.g., more interviews and job offers in jobs that better befit my cumulative experience, drive, and skills. Any recommendations are welcome; thanks

Edited July 26, 2011 by GreenCove

[Art_Critic]

Why not dumb down your resume a little, only put the important things on it that are related to your job search.

 

and at age 35 your resume should not contain pre high school items on it.

 

An employer will only want to see the most current things in detail, maybe the last 2 or 3 jobs and rest can just be a line item mention without any detail or left off if they are not relevant to your job search.

 

and you are right.. if you are over qualified then they will think they won't be able to keep you and you will flee as soon as you can find a more fitting job.

No company wants to invest their time and money in someone only for them to leave after 6 months.

[analystfromhell]

I'd recommend really tailoring your resume so it only addresses the skills which would be useful in that position. It's rare for an employer to care what went on more than 5-10 years ago unless you had an applicable job for an extended period prior to that. Just focus on what they want to hear.

[quankanne]

it's all a big mystery on what someone is looking for on an approach. I've been writing for newspapers since college, but thanks to the economy and a dearth of journalism jobs in this area, my resume is one of those "she's obviously overqualified for this position" resumes, when the irony is that for the kinds of jobs I'm applying for, I'm underqualified (no PC skills)!

 

my godchild works for a headhunter downstate and sent me some materials that her office hands out. One thing I noticed was that their sample resume put actual work experience at the bottom and left it at "name of company, position, dates employed" – the top of the resume was nothing but "these are my skills" then, "here's how I've used them/how they can help you." I guess realistically, people want to know right up front what you're specifically good at ...

 

and maybe that's the hook needed when you've got the kinds of qualifications and background experience that you've got ...

[spiderowl]

Wow! I do sympathise. At an interview for the last job I went for, the interviewer said 'you seem to do so many things'. In actual fact, she was looking way back on my CV and seemed to think I had several jobs on the go. It was her mistake but I feel she was outfaced by all the different things I'd done.

 

I don't know what to suggest really except to say maybe focus your CV on the abilities and experience for that particular job. Maybe employers are confused when faced with lots of abilities - it's not something I'd thought about before, especially in this day and age when we are asked to be multi-skilled. But, I guess they want multi-skilled in very specific ways.

 

The other thing I would say is that it's an incredibly competitive job market out there at the moment. With employers receiving sometimes 70+ applications per job, the chances of getting it are remote unless you are the perfect fit. Also, employers are more likely to take a chance on someone they already know, who has specifically relevant experience as opposed to generic but relevant skills, or the one they just happen to feel fits best into their team personality wise. If you are choosing between lots of very talented people, you can only choose one. Getting an interview is a sign that you are worth their time so try to take comfort from that.

 

I'm thinking now I may be better off using my many talents to develop my own business of some kind. I feel I've had enough of writing out excellent applications and coming a close second to the winning candidate. In such a competitive environment it feels like a futile exercise. There are other possibilities for the talented as self-employed, though I know it's tough getting anything started with no funds.

[sm1tten]

Be careful with pursuing a graduate degree. I went into a full time PhD program, so for all intents and purposes being a doctoral student was my job. I left with my MA. On the job market, I'm either grossly overqualified because of my degree, or I have a gap in my unemployment because I didn't want to be perceived as overqualified. I also have a really wide varied background and the MA isn't helping. A lot of it does depend upon the discipline though.

[Hot Chick]

Could you apply at the places you had writing jobs, such as the pharmacutical place or the academic writing job? Maybe they could use you back.

[Zapbasket]

Why not dumb down your resume a little, only put the important things on it that are related to your job search.

 

and at age 35 your resume should not contain pre high school items on it.

 

An employer will only want to see the most current things in detail, maybe the last 2 or 3 jobs and rest can just be a line item mention without any detail or left off if they are not relevant to your job search.

 

and you are right.. if you are over qualified then they will think they won't be able to keep you and you will flee as soon as you can find a more fitting job.

No company wants to invest their time and money in someone only for them to leave after 6 months.

 

Ah, I should have been more clear: I don't put the pre-high-school items on my resume. I only meant that in some areas I established a very high level of competency at an early age and that's partly why my skill base is so diverse.

 

Interesting idea about "dumbing down" the resume. In my latest resume that I tailored for a job at a think tank near where I live, I mentioned my most recent work as a ski instructor and also mentioned my background as a professional musician. I took my resume in person to the company headquarters and the executive director looked it over, and to my dismay those two items were the ones that stood out most to her...not my requisite 10+ years of experience in the areas directly pertaining to the position.

 

I just tend to take companies literally when they say they're drawn to employees who maintain a diverse range of interests and skills. On this company's website, they say they feel the employees who have the most to offer are the ones who can speak as intelligently about aikido as about physics (for example). So I tried to simultaneously reflect that kind of diversity in my resume, while also making clear that I have the over-ten years of experience in the area directly pertaining to the position. I don't yet know whether I scored an interview for this position as the exec. director said the direct supervisor for this position is on vacation and they won't be interviewing until he returns. I should hear next week or the week after.

 

Perhaps the diversity card needs to be played at the interview stage and not before, then? Maybe it would have been less distracting if I had left out my affiliation with music and skiing and only mentioned those jobs directly relevant to the position? I kept my resume no longer than a single page....

[Zapbasket]

it's all a big mystery on what someone is looking for on an approach. I've been writing for newspapers since college, but thanks to the economy and a dearth of journalism jobs in this area, my resume is one of those "she's obviously overqualified for this position" resumes, when the irony is that for the kinds of jobs I'm applying for, I'm underqualified (no PC skills)!

 

Oh, that bites. The good thing is that you can easily learn the requisite PC skills, as I'm sure you already know! I just spent some time the past week teaching myself about InDesign with the help of some guidebooks I checked out of my local library. Soon you'll be happily overqualified for those positions ;-) It's so tough for journalists these days....

 

my godchild works for a headhunter downstate and sent me some materials that her office hands out. One thing I noticed was that their sample resume put actual work experience at the bottom and left it at "name of company, position, dates employed" – the top of the resume was nothing but "these are my skills" then, "here's how I've used them/how they can help you." I guess realistically, people want to know right up front what you're specifically good at ...

 

I recently reformatted my resume just in the fashion your godchild recommends. The issue is, though: where you list "here's how my skills have benefited the companies for which I have worked in the past," what if you can't point to a direct "bottom line" correlation to your contributions? "My fantastic interpersonal skills won the trust of the gamut of grumpy academics so that they wanted to publish their tomes under the imprint I managed"...but I can't really provide any numbers; I just know I won over a lot of authors who otherwise would have gone elsewhere.

 

The other thing is, since in none of my jobs do I feel I was truly given the authority and license commensurate with my demonstrated abilities, I don't feel that any of my "accomplishments" on any given company's behalf genuinely reflect what I truly am capable of. I am proud of the fact that the CEO of one company felt able to dump the more expensive executive director of my division and give cheaper-because-younger-and-less-experienced me all of his managerial responsibilities, but I am not going to suggest on my resume that I "get others fired" and I am NOT proud of the fact that I didn't insist on being given the title of "executive director" rather than "managing editor" when I was carrying an executive director's responsibilities, and I didn't insist on a hefty raise to reflect the greater responsibilities.

 

Basically, I feel the biggest accomplishments are embedded in the diverse path I have forged for myself. I am most proud of my multifacetedness...even though not one company for which I have worked has ever capitalized on that mutifacetedness. So I am really at a loss for how best to present what I have to offer.

[Zapbasket]

Could you apply at the places you had writing jobs, such as the pharmacutical place or the academic writing job? Maybe they could use you back.

 

I did that :-(

 

I thought it would be a piece of cake. But I'm not as valuable as the innumerable people who live right there and would love to have those jobs. I understand that, but it sucks to realize how interchangeable you are :-(

[Zapbasket]

Be careful with pursuing a graduate degree. I went into a full time PhD program, so for all intents and purposes being a doctoral student was my job. I left with my MA. On the job market, I'm either grossly overqualified because of my degree, or I have a gap in my unemployment because I didn't want to be perceived as overqualified. I also have a really wide varied background and the MA isn't helping. A lot of it does depend upon the discipline though.

 

I entered a PhD program years ago and also left with the MA. Perhaps for some jobs I really should leave that off the resume. But then, who really cares about an MA in literature?

 

I want to go into psychology. I have some background both in my academic pursuits and in my work history. I am hoping that psychology is a field where you can always find or make work for yourself--in private practice if not at an institution.

 

What is your discipline? Do you ever think about returning to school to obtain the Ph.D.?

[denise_xo]

In my latest resume that I tailored for a job at a think tank near where I live, I mentioned my most recent work as a ski instructor and also mentioned my background as a professional musician. ...

 

Perhaps the diversity card needs to be played at the interview stage and not before, then? Maybe it would have been less distracting if I had left out my affiliation with music and skiing and only mentioned those jobs directly relevant to the position? I kept my resume no longer than a single page....

 

Yes, I think this is the way forward. I would not include skiing and music on my resume for a think tank position, unless it was in the 'hobbies and interests' section (if you have one, I usually don't). I work very carefully at tailoring my CV to particular positions, so that the skills sets I promote and the description of my tasks at various previous jobs are very selective relative to the job ad.

 

I also think that generally applying to positions where you are over qualified is a difficult strategy for getting results, no matter what your CV looks like. I've been turned down several times in those circumstances. It doesn't matter how qualified you are, if you don't fit the profile they are looking for.

 

I'm doing a PhD at the moment, and one thing it has done for me is to allow me to pursue quite interesting consultancy work on the side for international organisations. I used to work for one of them, and IMO the work you get as a consultant is often more substantially challenging and interesting than what you get on the 'inside', but that of course depends on what kind of work you are interested in in the first place.

[sm1tten]

I entered a PhD program years ago and also left with the MA. Perhaps for some jobs I really should leave that off the resume. But then, who really cares about an MA in literature?

 

I want to go into psychology. I have some background both in my academic pursuits and in my work history. I am hoping that psychology is a field where you can always find or make work for yourself--in private practice if not at an institution.

 

What is your discipline? Do you ever think about returning to school to obtain the Ph.D.?

 

My discipline is history. I would only go back because I'm an intellectual at heart who loves being a student. There are a lot of jobs you can get with the kind of training a social science degree has (usually requiring some extra training or certification)... but for a PhD you're really training to teach and I didn't enjoy teaching. (One of the reasons I left, also, was that it was a poor academic fit - but that's an entirely different topic.) In fact, I get the "why aren't you teaching?" question in every interview.

[WTRanger]

I've had to hire people over the years and the one thing that stands out with the in-depth and eclectic resumes is that you can't really trust the person. Not saying that is you, but this is generalizations from experience. The wide-range of jobs and skills points to a person who won't stick around for long. A person who will jump at the next "cool" adventure and leave you having to re-hire the position.

 

Have you ever heard of jack of all trades, master of none? That's what these resumes also signify. What are you really good at? Why are you putting this experience down when it has zero bearing on what you are applying for? Why you are even applying? I don't want someone who is multifaceted, I want someone who knows what they are doing in the EXACT position I would hire them for. I want them to pay attention to the job I give them and not try to reinvent the wheel on my dime. All those questions roll through my head during resume reviews. For what it's worth, I spend all about 15-30 seconds on the resume so if it's wordy, then it usually gets tossed into the "No" pile.

 

Sorry, but in a recent position I was hiring for I got well over 300 applicants and most of them were so completely unqualified for the position it really started to piss me off why they even applied. Not to mention I run a small shop, so it's a lot of resumes to churn through to find someone good. If I'm not wowed within 2-3 lines, it's onto the next.

 

In this economy, last thing I want to do is keep re-training new employees and spending money doing so. I want someone who will be with my company for a while, not just for a fling or two.

[Zapbasket]

 

I'm thinking now I may be better off using my many talents to develop my own business of some kind. I feel I've had enough of writing out excellent applications and coming a close second to the winning candidate. In such a competitive environment it feels like a futile exercise. There are other possibilities for the talented as self-employed, though I know it's tough getting anything started with no funds.

 

Thanks for your reply, Spiderowl. I hear you on wanting to walk away from the job application process to focus on developing your own business. My boyfriend did that for several years and actually did a great job, but his main business liaison screwed him over and he didn't have the capital to re-invest in his business to enable it to recover. A friend of mine in the area just left here for 6 months to go to a large city, stay with friends, network, and write up a business plan because, as she said, "I don't want to work for someone else anymore." I really like her approach because if she's unable to launch anything within this time frame, she's got a Plan B, to return to this rural community and pick up her seasonal job again and then regroup for another go at her own business.

 

I don't really see myself as an entrepreneur but I think I will ultimately be happiest working either as an independent contractor or in the arts under my own name. I think perhaps one reason why "multifacetedness" is threatening to potential employers is that by definition it can't be "contained" within one pre-defined job role. I very strongly felt in most jobs I had that I quickly outgrew their parameters, and so when on top of that I felt I was underpaid (30k-ish salary and such), I felt it was time to seek to move on.

[Zapbasket]

 

I also think that generally applying to positions where you are over qualified is a difficult strategy for getting results, no matter what your CV looks like. I've been turned down several times in those circumstances. It doesn't matter how qualified you are, if you don't fit the profile they are looking for.

 

I think you're right. In this economy, though, I've felt willing to take ANYTHING at times, just to have the income. I even applied a year or so ago for a floor position at The Container Store, and especially in light of the other people they had to choose from, I couldn't BELIEVE I wasn't hired. Now, looking back, it's more understandable, because I'm sure they knew that as soon as something more in line with my training and interests became an option, I'd be out of there. Even so, I think it's a pretty narrow way to go about hiring people, since pretty much no one takes a floor position at a place like The Container Store planning and hoping to spend the remainder of their career there, and in that position.

 

 

I'm doing a PhD at the moment, and one thing it has done for me is to allow me to pursue quite interesting consultancy work on the side for international organisations. I used to work for one of them, and IMO the work you get as a consultant is often more substantially challenging and interesting than what you get on the 'inside', but that of course depends on what kind of work you are interested in in the first place.

 

That sounds ideal. In what field are you pursuing your Ph.D.? (if you don't mind my asking )

[Zapbasket]

I've had to hire people over the years and the one thing that stands out with the in-depth and eclectic resumes is that you can't really trust the person. Not saying that is you, but this is generalizations from experience. The wide-range of jobs and skills points to a person who won't stick around for long. A person who will jump at the next "cool" adventure and leave you having to re-hire the position.

 

Have you ever heard of jack of all trades, master of none? That's what these resumes also signify. What are you really good at? Why are you putting this experience down when it has zero bearing on what you are applying for? Why you are even applying? I don't want someone who is multifaceted, I want someone who knows what they are doing in the EXACT position I would hire them for. I want them to pay attention to the job I give them and not try to reinvent the wheel on my dime. All those questions roll through my head during resume reviews. For what it's worth, I spend all about 15-30 seconds on the resume so if it's wordy, then it usually gets tossed into the "No" pile.

 

Sorry, but in a recent position I was hiring for I got well over 300 applicants and most of them were so completely unqualified for the position it really started to piss me off why they even applied. Not to mention I run a small shop, so it's a lot of resumes to churn through to find someone good. If I'm not wowed within 2-3 lines, it's onto the next.

 

In this economy, last thing I want to do is keep re-training new employees and spending money doing so. I want someone who will be with my company for a while, not just for a fling or two.

 

Thank you so very much for this. You just articulated exactly the mentality, I am sure, of the majority of hiring managers across industries right now. I can certainly see the validity of that point of view, even while much of it ("jack of all trades, master of none,") unfortunately does not apply to me or to the majority of those like me.

 

But: I have a hunch that a successful job application these days must appease the concerns you share here.

 

Even though I have worked across a range of industries and my extensive musical training aside (you can certainly rest assured that no professionally trained and accomplished classical musician approaches anything near dilettantism), I recognize that all of my job roles have included writing and editing components--even if they weren't explicitly writer / editor roles. My fledgling game plan for now, then, is to further develop that writing and editing experience on my resume so that I can be eligible for higher level jobs in which those roles are central. I'm looking into a grant-writing certification course, for one, and learning programs like InDesign.

 

Thanks again for your input.

[WTRanger]

If it's experience you want, I suggest looking into freelance writing. There's a ton of freelance websites that have jobs listed every day. You'll get experience not only in what you want as far as writing, but also billing and estimation of time and budgets.

 

Get those real world skills before you get any more degrees or education. And most importantly, simplify your resume. If it's not on one page, it's too long.

[Zapbasket]

If it's experience you want, I suggest looking into freelance writing. There's a ton of freelance websites that have jobs listed every day. You'll get experience not only in what you want as far as writing, but also billing and estimation of time and budgets.

 

Get those real world skills before you get any more degrees or education. And most importantly, simplify your resume. If it's not on one page, it's too long.

 

I have a lot of freelance writing experience, fortunately / unfortunately. Those freelance writing websites are mostly a crock, attracting some real hack writers. It's a tough business.

[WTRanger]

Yeah, freelancing is tough but that's how I started my company. I freelanced until I got my name established with several companies that I now exclusively work for.

 

It's a grind and it humbles you when you realize that someone out there can do the work for 1/8th the cost of you. Sure, it's crap work but it's cheap. However, you also learn to make yourself stand out from the pack. That skill is priceless and it can't be taught in some classroom.

 

Sites like Guru and Elance, it's a writers market out there.