A reader writes:
Today I experienced something I had before. I felt tricked and cheated after I found out that the interview I had 3 weeks ago was fake - they had a candidate, but arranged to have interviews nevertheless. This already happened to me twice.
I feel frustrated for my wasted time, effort and the negative outcome of the interview. I hope you understand my frustration. I was just wondering - should something be done? And what can be done?
What do you suggest? It's not really any different from when candidates go to job interviews when they're pretty unlikely to accept the job. It wastes everyone's time, but there's no federal interviewing board that's going to start fining people for it.
Yes, sometimes companies have a candidate in mind but feel like they should do a full round of interviews anyway (or in some cases are required to). In some cases, they're not actually open to any of the other candidates they're interviewing; in other cases, they are.
There aren't really any ways you can find out ahead of time whether this is the case. Companies that do this are unlikely to tell you they're doing this, and companies that aren't (the majority of them) are likely to take the question as odd and paranoid.
It's a risk you take when you interview -- but then so is rejection, no matter how open to hiring you they are. I'd let it go.
Sunday, August 23, 2009
Friday, August 21, 2009
bad interviewee behavior: more tales
My friend writes:
I call a lot of people to interview them for various positions. I could have an admin person set up these interviews, but I prefer to do it myself. Lately, I've noticed a rash of bad behavior -- applicants think that because I'm the one calling, I have nothing to do with the hiring process.
In one recent incident the applicant (married mid-30ish male) flirted with me of the phone, flirted with me during the interview (despite ring and mention of Wife and Kid), then asked half-way through about the organizational structure. When he realized I was in a position directly above the position he was applying for, you should have seen the look of horror on his face. So much so that my supervisor (who was in the interview with me) said after he left "what is wrong with men these days that they still can't fathom that women could be anything but secretaries. society has failed."
Also:
If you are an applicant and I call to set up an interview, don't ask, "why has it taken you so long to call me?"
If I say the location of the position is X, please don't ask if you the job is REALLY in X, can work from another office, or if you can work from home. Nor should you show up at our office surprised about the location. You applied for the job --the location is stated on the application.
If you have multiple questions about the position, that's fantastic. Do not call me 7 times in 4 hours. That is what the interview is for.
If I repeat the question during the interview, it means you didn't answer the question. Just answer the question.
Ok. I feel better now.
Yes.
Thank you.
Since we're complaining, I'm going to chime in:
I had an applicant this week who was extremely hard to set up a phone interview with -- none of the days or times I suggested worked, despite repeated tries. Since I have tons of strong candidates for the job, I finally asked if she had any flexibility at all, since otherwise I'd need to just focus on the other candidates. She agreed to make a time work today (after telling me in detail how hard it might be for her). Then, once we finally got on the phone, she told me that she knew the position was in D.C. but she didn't see any reason why it couldn't be done from her city, many, many states away. I explained that in fact this was not a position that could telecommute, and explained why. She then proceeded to lecture me about how there was no reason for that, and how she was quite sure she could do it as a telecommuter, while I repeated over and over, "It's really not possible." I finally cut her off and told her we were going to need to end the call.
Now. First of all, she could have mentioned this up front and we could have avoided all the scheduling drama. Second, during the scheduling drama, she at one point suggested we do the call at 8 p.m. If I'd made time to do it during my evening, only to discover she wasn't even willing to meet the clearly stated location requirement of the job and hadn't bothered to say that earlier, I would have been quite annoyed. And thirdly, I did 20 phone interviews this week. That's a lot, and it's my absolute limit -- and she took one of those slots from a candidate who might have gotten an interview otherwise.
This is bad behavior.
I call a lot of people to interview them for various positions. I could have an admin person set up these interviews, but I prefer to do it myself. Lately, I've noticed a rash of bad behavior -- applicants think that because I'm the one calling, I have nothing to do with the hiring process.
In one recent incident the applicant (married mid-30ish male) flirted with me of the phone, flirted with me during the interview (despite ring and mention of Wife and Kid), then asked half-way through about the organizational structure. When he realized I was in a position directly above the position he was applying for, you should have seen the look of horror on his face. So much so that my supervisor (who was in the interview with me) said after he left "what is wrong with men these days that they still can't fathom that women could be anything but secretaries. society has failed."
Also:
If you are an applicant and I call to set up an interview, don't ask, "why has it taken you so long to call me?"
If I say the location of the position is X, please don't ask if you the job is REALLY in X, can work from another office, or if you can work from home. Nor should you show up at our office surprised about the location. You applied for the job --the location is stated on the application.
If you have multiple questions about the position, that's fantastic. Do not call me 7 times in 4 hours. That is what the interview is for.
If I repeat the question during the interview, it means you didn't answer the question. Just answer the question.
Ok. I feel better now.
Yes.
Thank you.
Since we're complaining, I'm going to chime in:
I had an applicant this week who was extremely hard to set up a phone interview with -- none of the days or times I suggested worked, despite repeated tries. Since I have tons of strong candidates for the job, I finally asked if she had any flexibility at all, since otherwise I'd need to just focus on the other candidates. She agreed to make a time work today (after telling me in detail how hard it might be for her). Then, once we finally got on the phone, she told me that she knew the position was in D.C. but she didn't see any reason why it couldn't be done from her city, many, many states away. I explained that in fact this was not a position that could telecommute, and explained why. She then proceeded to lecture me about how there was no reason for that, and how she was quite sure she could do it as a telecommuter, while I repeated over and over, "It's really not possible." I finally cut her off and told her we were going to need to end the call.
Now. First of all, she could have mentioned this up front and we could have avoided all the scheduling drama. Second, during the scheduling drama, she at one point suggested we do the call at 8 p.m. If I'd made time to do it during my evening, only to discover she wasn't even willing to meet the clearly stated location requirement of the job and hadn't bothered to say that earlier, I would have been quite annoyed. And thirdly, I did 20 phone interviews this week. That's a lot, and it's my absolute limit -- and she took one of those slots from a candidate who might have gotten an interview otherwise.
This is bad behavior.
Thursday, August 20, 2009
complaining about work on Twitter
A reader writes:
I'm a fan of twitter and have recently started a departmental twitter feed for my branch library. I'm encouraging my student staff to come up with ideas for posts, and they've been very enthusiastic.
However, one of them sent a tweet from his personal twitter account, while he was at work, which talked in a disparaging way about another department.
I approached him and asked him not to say negative things about our workplace and fellow staff on a public account, or if he wanted to, not to mention any specifics that would link it to our library. He is 19 or 20, and though he said he would refrain, I don't think he got the picture.
How can I say this without sounding like I'm snooping, but let them know it's not appropriate? I don't want to say "no tweeting at work," but I also don't want the privilege taken away from myself too, when the higher-ups see negative tweets from workers during working hours.
As his account is public, has his picture, and he mentioned both departments by their proper names, it seemed in poor taste, especially since he tweeted it during his shift. It seems akin to someone complaining about work on facebook, while at work, when you're friends with your boss.
I'd just be straightforward. Tell him, "I know this is your personal Twitter account, but the fact is that you're connected on it to many people at work. Sending out a message that disparages another employee isn't okay, just like it wouldn't be okay if you printed up a flyer about him and passed it out in the parking lot. Just because it's your personal account doesn't mean that it doesn't have ramifications or affect the way you'll be perceived."
You'd also be doing him a favor to spell out for him that this stuff isn't private, now or in the future. If he's job-searching and a prospective employer searches for him and pulls up his twitter page, it's not going to look good to have posts like that there. As many others before me have observed, this generation is so comfortable with social media and so used to living their lives on it that they don't always understand the need to censor themselves in public spaces where they might be observed and judged by people they want something from (like a job, professional respect, etc.).
I'm a fan of twitter and have recently started a departmental twitter feed for my branch library. I'm encouraging my student staff to come up with ideas for posts, and they've been very enthusiastic.
However, one of them sent a tweet from his personal twitter account, while he was at work, which talked in a disparaging way about another department.
I approached him and asked him not to say negative things about our workplace and fellow staff on a public account, or if he wanted to, not to mention any specifics that would link it to our library. He is 19 or 20, and though he said he would refrain, I don't think he got the picture.
How can I say this without sounding like I'm snooping, but let them know it's not appropriate? I don't want to say "no tweeting at work," but I also don't want the privilege taken away from myself too, when the higher-ups see negative tweets from workers during working hours.
As his account is public, has his picture, and he mentioned both departments by their proper names, it seemed in poor taste, especially since he tweeted it during his shift. It seems akin to someone complaining about work on facebook, while at work, when you're friends with your boss.
I'd just be straightforward. Tell him, "I know this is your personal Twitter account, but the fact is that you're connected on it to many people at work. Sending out a message that disparages another employee isn't okay, just like it wouldn't be okay if you printed up a flyer about him and passed it out in the parking lot. Just because it's your personal account doesn't mean that it doesn't have ramifications or affect the way you'll be perceived."
You'd also be doing him a favor to spell out for him that this stuff isn't private, now or in the future. If he's job-searching and a prospective employer searches for him and pulls up his twitter page, it's not going to look good to have posts like that there. As many others before me have observed, this generation is so comfortable with social media and so used to living their lives on it that they don't always understand the need to censor themselves in public spaces where they might be observed and judged by people they want something from (like a job, professional respect, etc.).
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
more resume shenanigans - leaving off dates of employment
I'm seeing what might be a trend of people using a chronological resume format but leaving off any indication of how long they held each position.
This is really not a good idea. It looks like you're trying to hide a series of short stays and in a pretty inept way, because it jumps out like it would if you left off any other important piece of information (like an email address, which I've also seen some people do).
As of today, I'm going to start emailing candidates who do this and asking them to submit a version of their resume that does include the time periods they held each position, since otherwise I'd need to spend time on the phone interview having them walk me through it for each job, which is tedious and not how I want to spend interview time. These shenanigans will not stand!
This is really not a good idea. It looks like you're trying to hide a series of short stays and in a pretty inept way, because it jumps out like it would if you left off any other important piece of information (like an email address, which I've also seen some people do).
As of today, I'm going to start emailing candidates who do this and asking them to submit a version of their resume that does include the time periods they held each position, since otherwise I'd need to spend time on the phone interview having them walk me through it for each job, which is tedious and not how I want to spend interview time. These shenanigans will not stand!
Monday, August 17, 2009
new HR coordinator without resources asks whether to leave
A reader writes:
I graduated in 07 with a BA. Since than, I’ve been working FT while completing my MBA in HR as well. I began my HR career working as a recruiter for a staffing agency for about a year, but soon found out that sales is not what I really want to pursue. As a result, since Nov. of last year, I found another position working as a HR Coordinator for a local company. As for my MBA, I will be done with it this Sept. My ultimate goal is to work in corporate HR.
Now, you may ask me what is the problem? Everything is sounding to be on the right track. Well… the problem lies with my current position. I accepted this position thinking that I would learn a lot from it and that it would prepare me for a future corporate position. However, to my surprise, that is not the case at all. I get no guidance from this position. Besides me in the HR department, there is only one other person and she is solely responsible for payroll. So as a result, I have to rely on myself to research on things. For instance, right when I started, I was asked to redo the employee handbook by myself. Everything that is going here, I have to research and figure it out on my own. Now I know some people will say that this is a good learning experience but I really don’t think so. There are so many aspects of HR and I would rather work for someone who’s experienced and not put the company at risk.
So for the last couple of months, I’ve been trying to apply for other positions but have found no luck. I think the main reason for that is because my length of employment. I’ve only been at this position for 8 months and already I’m applying somewhere else. If this is the case, do you advice that I should stay with this position longer and apply later or should I continue my application? Does short length of employment really raise a red flag?
First, let me say that I'm not in HR and so I'm hoping that people who are will weigh in here as well.
For what it's worth, you wanted a position you'd learn from, and having to figure stuff out on your own is a damn good way of learning. There are a lot of people who'd love to have a job where they're given that kind of autonomy and responsibility. (Although I hope they're providing you with access to legal counsel so that you have someone reviewing your work to ensure you're complying with the law.)
Out of curiosity, did you realize when you accepted the job that there would be no experienced HR person working with you? I'm trying to figure out how this ended up being a surprise.
But in any case, if this really isn't what you want and you just aren't the type of person who wants to teach yourself (and you're not alone if that's the case), you can certainly look for other jobs. Yes, short stays are a red flag, so you'd want to make sure that you stay in your next job for a good long period. And obviously you shouldn't quit this job before you have another one lined up.
(I want to really emphasize that to everyone: Do not quit your job without having another one lined up. The economy is astoundingly bad. I'm advertising for several positions right now, and I've been blown away by the swarm of highly qualified applicants for relatively low-paying positions. You do not want to be jobless if you can help it.)
But I'd stay. It sounds kind of awesome to me, as long as your boss is willing to give you access to legal people when you need them. But maybe actual HR people are about to tell me I'm wrong, so stay tuned in the comments section.
I graduated in 07 with a BA. Since than, I’ve been working FT while completing my MBA in HR as well. I began my HR career working as a recruiter for a staffing agency for about a year, but soon found out that sales is not what I really want to pursue. As a result, since Nov. of last year, I found another position working as a HR Coordinator for a local company. As for my MBA, I will be done with it this Sept. My ultimate goal is to work in corporate HR.
Now, you may ask me what is the problem? Everything is sounding to be on the right track. Well… the problem lies with my current position. I accepted this position thinking that I would learn a lot from it and that it would prepare me for a future corporate position. However, to my surprise, that is not the case at all. I get no guidance from this position. Besides me in the HR department, there is only one other person and she is solely responsible for payroll. So as a result, I have to rely on myself to research on things. For instance, right when I started, I was asked to redo the employee handbook by myself. Everything that is going here, I have to research and figure it out on my own. Now I know some people will say that this is a good learning experience but I really don’t think so. There are so many aspects of HR and I would rather work for someone who’s experienced and not put the company at risk.
So for the last couple of months, I’ve been trying to apply for other positions but have found no luck. I think the main reason for that is because my length of employment. I’ve only been at this position for 8 months and already I’m applying somewhere else. If this is the case, do you advice that I should stay with this position longer and apply later or should I continue my application? Does short length of employment really raise a red flag?
First, let me say that I'm not in HR and so I'm hoping that people who are will weigh in here as well.
For what it's worth, you wanted a position you'd learn from, and having to figure stuff out on your own is a damn good way of learning. There are a lot of people who'd love to have a job where they're given that kind of autonomy and responsibility. (Although I hope they're providing you with access to legal counsel so that you have someone reviewing your work to ensure you're complying with the law.)
Out of curiosity, did you realize when you accepted the job that there would be no experienced HR person working with you? I'm trying to figure out how this ended up being a surprise.
But in any case, if this really isn't what you want and you just aren't the type of person who wants to teach yourself (and you're not alone if that's the case), you can certainly look for other jobs. Yes, short stays are a red flag, so you'd want to make sure that you stay in your next job for a good long period. And obviously you shouldn't quit this job before you have another one lined up.
(I want to really emphasize that to everyone: Do not quit your job without having another one lined up. The economy is astoundingly bad. I'm advertising for several positions right now, and I've been blown away by the swarm of highly qualified applicants for relatively low-paying positions. You do not want to be jobless if you can help it.)
But I'd stay. It sounds kind of awesome to me, as long as your boss is willing to give you access to legal people when you need them. But maybe actual HR people are about to tell me I'm wrong, so stay tuned in the comments section.
Saturday, August 15, 2009
emotional after performance review
A reader writes:
Some background: I am in my mid-twenties and I work as an assistant for a small, nationally renowned non-profit. I love a lot about my job: I get to research topics I love, and I get to apply skills that satisfy me. I have a heavy workload that has increased substantially over the past few months. I often work straight through the day without a lunch break, stay late when I need to, bring work home when I need to, and check my work email from home constantly.
I had my first ever annual performance review last month. Before this formal meeting, my boss and I had met sporadically, and our discussions tended to focus on particular projects she had planned for me. The only explicit feedback I received about my work was in November, and it was that I was "doing excellent work." Since that comment, I had not received any pointed feedback about my performance, negative or positive. Instead she would casually ask, "How's it going?" and I would say something like "I'm working on a lot right now, but I feel good about everything." As my review crept closer, I was naturally somewhat anxious, but felt I had reason to believe that I was going to receive generally good feedback.
Boy, was I in for a surprise: my boss told me that there was an issue with follow through, citing a few examples of minor tasks I had failed to execute, and said she was worried a pattern was emerging. She said I needed to participate more at staff meetings, and that I'm not a team player. My grade was "needs improvement." I felt completely blindsided, and was so shocked and hurt by the feedback that I burst into tears. She also asked me if I'm really serious about working in this field. In my emotionally vulnerable and unstable state, I admitted that, while I do value a lot about my job, I sometimes think about other paths. My boss told me we would meet again in a month to reevaluate my standing.
I took the review really badly: I was on the verge of tears for the remainder of the workweek and couldn't sleep at night due to anxiety. I felt like I had been working quite hard, that for each of her examples of my failures, there were dozens of things that I had executed well and promptly. My job can be very stressful, I put a lot of pressure on myself to perform well. I thought I was succeeding; to be told the opposite was demoralizing and mortifying. Looking back on my tears makes me cringe; I fear that I came off unstable and incapable of hearing criticism.
I've reflected on my feedback and concluded that some of it was valid. The next week I requested a follow-up meeting with my boss: I told her that I had let some things slip due my increased workload, and that I was going to make an extra effort to make sure nothing falls through the cracks in the future. I asked her for more regular feedback, suggesting that she call to check in with me like she does with my colleague (my boss works three-day weeks). This plan seems to be helping, and I've gotten some good feedback related to my areas in need of improvement.
But my despair persists: my department is very small, and I'm now concerned that everyone perceives me in the way my boss described me. I feel sheepish and embarrassed around my colleagues. I'm also worried that my boss shared my emotional response to her criticism with them, which compounds my paranoia. Finally, I'm concerned that my admission to considering other lines of work set off an alarm in my boss's head. Is there anything I can do, besides doing my job well, to improve my standing? I'm worried about being blindsided again.
It sounds like you're doing all the right things here, aside from being really, really stressed out about it. Being open-minded about the feedback, asking for a follow-up meeting, and requesting more feedback were all exactly the right ways to respond to this.
Based on your boss' feedback, it sounds like you were doing the big things well, but forgetting about some of the little things. If you were letting smaller tasks slip through the cracks, she was right to point out that it was becoming a pattern -- but this is exactly the kind of performance issue that's really easy to fix, and she probably knows that. I cannot tell you how many people I've had to have that conversation with -- it's probably the most common issue I have to address with people. The vast majority of people are able to fix it once they're focused on it -- and you sound like someone who's fixing it.
Now, I'm not sure what she meant by "not a team player," and if you're not sure either, get details from her about that one so that you know specifically what she'd like to see you do differently.
But remember -- this is what bosses do: they give feedback and tell you about ways you could do better. It's normal.
It can also be a shock if you're not used to it. I think many smart people go through this right around your age: If you're like a lot of smart people, up until now you've been used to hearing exclusively positive feedback. You were smart, school and peers affirmed that, and it's part of your self-identity. And then when you start working and come across a boss who sees areas where she wants you to improve, it can be really jarring. It can make you doubt yourself or think you're in the wrong job. Don't think that way. Instead, take the feedback for what is it: matter of fact information about areas where you need to focus your attention more. Take that feedback and use it, and you'll find that stretching yourself to grow in that way can be pretty gratifying.
Seriously. Don't freak out. You're on the case here, and it sounds like it's going to work out fine.
About your two other concerns --
It's unlikely that the rest of your department has even noticed or thought much about the points your boss made. Your boss' job is to pay attention to your work and think about these things; theirs is not, and I promise you they're not scrutinizing you like that. Most of the time when I talk to an employee about performance issues, the issues are ones that their coworkers wouldn't have much way of knowing about. It sounds the same here. And unless your boss is hugely unprofessional and a jerk, she didn't tell them that you had an emotional response originally -- I can't tell you how inappropriate it would have been to do that, and unless you have some specific reason to believe she did, err on the side of assuming she conducted herself normally in that regard (meaning that her conversation with you is none of your coworkers' business).
And last, regarding whether your boss is alarmed that you acknowledged that you sometimes consider other lines of work -- unless you're working in the mafia or something, this is not a big deal. If it's bothering you, go back to her and tell her that your conversation made you realize how much you want to stay in this field and ask her for her continued help via feedback and advice.
But really, I think what's going on here is that you're smart and conscientious and horrified by what I suspect is the sort of feedback you've never encountered before. Keep telling yourself that this is normal, bosses have these kinds of conversations with people all the time, and generally the issues raised get fixed and people just roll forward. Not a disaster, not even close to a disaster. You're doing all the right things, and now you just need to stop beating yourself up.
Good luck!
Some background: I am in my mid-twenties and I work as an assistant for a small, nationally renowned non-profit. I love a lot about my job: I get to research topics I love, and I get to apply skills that satisfy me. I have a heavy workload that has increased substantially over the past few months. I often work straight through the day without a lunch break, stay late when I need to, bring work home when I need to, and check my work email from home constantly.
I had my first ever annual performance review last month. Before this formal meeting, my boss and I had met sporadically, and our discussions tended to focus on particular projects she had planned for me. The only explicit feedback I received about my work was in November, and it was that I was "doing excellent work." Since that comment, I had not received any pointed feedback about my performance, negative or positive. Instead she would casually ask, "How's it going?" and I would say something like "I'm working on a lot right now, but I feel good about everything." As my review crept closer, I was naturally somewhat anxious, but felt I had reason to believe that I was going to receive generally good feedback.
Boy, was I in for a surprise: my boss told me that there was an issue with follow through, citing a few examples of minor tasks I had failed to execute, and said she was worried a pattern was emerging. She said I needed to participate more at staff meetings, and that I'm not a team player. My grade was "needs improvement." I felt completely blindsided, and was so shocked and hurt by the feedback that I burst into tears. She also asked me if I'm really serious about working in this field. In my emotionally vulnerable and unstable state, I admitted that, while I do value a lot about my job, I sometimes think about other paths. My boss told me we would meet again in a month to reevaluate my standing.
I took the review really badly: I was on the verge of tears for the remainder of the workweek and couldn't sleep at night due to anxiety. I felt like I had been working quite hard, that for each of her examples of my failures, there were dozens of things that I had executed well and promptly. My job can be very stressful, I put a lot of pressure on myself to perform well. I thought I was succeeding; to be told the opposite was demoralizing and mortifying. Looking back on my tears makes me cringe; I fear that I came off unstable and incapable of hearing criticism.
I've reflected on my feedback and concluded that some of it was valid. The next week I requested a follow-up meeting with my boss: I told her that I had let some things slip due my increased workload, and that I was going to make an extra effort to make sure nothing falls through the cracks in the future. I asked her for more regular feedback, suggesting that she call to check in with me like she does with my colleague (my boss works three-day weeks). This plan seems to be helping, and I've gotten some good feedback related to my areas in need of improvement.
But my despair persists: my department is very small, and I'm now concerned that everyone perceives me in the way my boss described me. I feel sheepish and embarrassed around my colleagues. I'm also worried that my boss shared my emotional response to her criticism with them, which compounds my paranoia. Finally, I'm concerned that my admission to considering other lines of work set off an alarm in my boss's head. Is there anything I can do, besides doing my job well, to improve my standing? I'm worried about being blindsided again.
It sounds like you're doing all the right things here, aside from being really, really stressed out about it. Being open-minded about the feedback, asking for a follow-up meeting, and requesting more feedback were all exactly the right ways to respond to this.
Based on your boss' feedback, it sounds like you were doing the big things well, but forgetting about some of the little things. If you were letting smaller tasks slip through the cracks, she was right to point out that it was becoming a pattern -- but this is exactly the kind of performance issue that's really easy to fix, and she probably knows that. I cannot tell you how many people I've had to have that conversation with -- it's probably the most common issue I have to address with people. The vast majority of people are able to fix it once they're focused on it -- and you sound like someone who's fixing it.
Now, I'm not sure what she meant by "not a team player," and if you're not sure either, get details from her about that one so that you know specifically what she'd like to see you do differently.
But remember -- this is what bosses do: they give feedback and tell you about ways you could do better. It's normal.
It can also be a shock if you're not used to it. I think many smart people go through this right around your age: If you're like a lot of smart people, up until now you've been used to hearing exclusively positive feedback. You were smart, school and peers affirmed that, and it's part of your self-identity. And then when you start working and come across a boss who sees areas where she wants you to improve, it can be really jarring. It can make you doubt yourself or think you're in the wrong job. Don't think that way. Instead, take the feedback for what is it: matter of fact information about areas where you need to focus your attention more. Take that feedback and use it, and you'll find that stretching yourself to grow in that way can be pretty gratifying.
Seriously. Don't freak out. You're on the case here, and it sounds like it's going to work out fine.
About your two other concerns --
It's unlikely that the rest of your department has even noticed or thought much about the points your boss made. Your boss' job is to pay attention to your work and think about these things; theirs is not, and I promise you they're not scrutinizing you like that. Most of the time when I talk to an employee about performance issues, the issues are ones that their coworkers wouldn't have much way of knowing about. It sounds the same here. And unless your boss is hugely unprofessional and a jerk, she didn't tell them that you had an emotional response originally -- I can't tell you how inappropriate it would have been to do that, and unless you have some specific reason to believe she did, err on the side of assuming she conducted herself normally in that regard (meaning that her conversation with you is none of your coworkers' business).
And last, regarding whether your boss is alarmed that you acknowledged that you sometimes consider other lines of work -- unless you're working in the mafia or something, this is not a big deal. If it's bothering you, go back to her and tell her that your conversation made you realize how much you want to stay in this field and ask her for her continued help via feedback and advice.
But really, I think what's going on here is that you're smart and conscientious and horrified by what I suspect is the sort of feedback you've never encountered before. Keep telling yourself that this is normal, bosses have these kinds of conversations with people all the time, and generally the issues raised get fixed and people just roll forward. Not a disaster, not even close to a disaster. You're doing all the right things, and now you just need to stop beating yourself up.
Good luck!
Friday, August 14, 2009
EmailYourInteriewer success story
An update on EmailYourInteriewer.com, which lets job-seekers send an anonymous, polite letter to employers who interviewed them and then never bothered to get back to them: It's now generated 95 letters to employers.
A couple of employers have written back to apologize. Here's one of those replies:
Please let your candidate know that I apologize if this occurred. I conduct second or third interviews around the country and make it the responsibility of the hiring manager to follow up w/ all candidates. I will follow up w/ the managers who currently have opening to ensure they are communicating w/ all applicants.
Hurrah!
If you've been frustrated yourself by not hearing back from companies after interviewing, why not politely let them know. Go here, and the work will be done for you. (Just make sure to follow the rules.)
A couple of employers have written back to apologize. Here's one of those replies:
Please let your candidate know that I apologize if this occurred. I conduct second or third interviews around the country and make it the responsibility of the hiring manager to follow up w/ all candidates. I will follow up w/ the managers who currently have opening to ensure they are communicating w/ all applicants.
Hurrah!
If you've been frustrated yourself by not hearing back from companies after interviewing, why not politely let them know. Go here, and the work will be done for you. (Just make sure to follow the rules.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
