10 minute interview vs. 10 years of experience

I was sent to an interview via an agency. I spoke with the HR person for about 7 minutes, answering the typical questions ("what is your greatest weakness?"). Then I was introduced to the person I would report to, and spoke with them for about 3 minutes. Then I took a test, which took a couple hours.

I followed up with the recruiter and was told that I did very well on the test, and they wanted to use me for freelance work. I asked if that could lead to full-time work.

The recruiter told me I would never be considered for full-time work at the company. It was a bit vague - something about me not being a good fit, that I had a different "energy" or "vibe" than they were looking for (I didn't even know I had a 'vibe'...).

My question: is a 10-minute job interview enough to draw the conclusion that it would be a bad idea to hire me as an employee, "ever"?

I have solid experience in the job, and my test showed them I was capable of it ... Does this sound like a good hiring process?

I welcome your thoughts, whether you're in HR or on the other side of the fence.

And good luck to everyone who's here trying to find a job.

The 10-minute interview tells the HR person/recruiter all of the following:
- Are you a drinker? (works best in afternoons)
- Are you a smoker?
- Do you have a good/professional appearance?
- Finally, if the position is already filled internally, should they keep your resume on file?

Unfortunately, they made a decision that quickly. Maybe they didn't like the way you dressed or something else that they found "offensive".

Last spring I drove about 75 miles to an interview at a bank. I interviewed with the bank president, who seemed fairly distant after a prior phone interview that went well.

When I called the headhunter that sent me up there, his only comment was that we had been in a small conference room and it smelled like smoke after I came in.

I don't smoke, but my wife does, and apparently the smell got on my suit. So I had all my suits cleaned and keep them in garment bags now to be safe.

You just never know what people will use to decide. You just have to get as many interviews as you can.

Hey Frankie,

A person usually gets hired for 2 reasons. The first reason is that they have the skills set to do the duties of the job. Secondly, they are the right "fit".

For example, if you interview at a place where all the employees are in their early twenties and your fifty, good chance you won't get the job (you don't fit in). If you are a smoker and the boss hates smokers, again, not the right fit.

That is why when you interview you must "act" like the person interviewing you. Take on their characteristics. If he likes baseball then you better "act" like you like baseball. If the person interviewing you is a bit nerdy and introverted, then you shouldn't be forceful and extroverted. You need to show a similar vibe or be the same fit as others working there.

To answer your specific question, 10 minutes is not enough time to evaluate a person fairly. But, that's how some of them are.

And, Good Luck also in your job search.

PS
Career Hunter, I always take something away that I can use from your posts. You write well.

Dean Suraci in Cornwall, New York said: Hey Frankie,

A person usually gets hired for 2 reasons. The first reason is that they have the skills set to do the duties of the job. Secondly, they are the right "fit"...

In my experience KSAs are the LEAST important thing in the hiring process. If they were more important than random first impressions/pheremones/"fit" (as determined mostly by people you WON'T be working with... i.e. the HR stooge) I would have had a professional level job by now.

Hi Just another number,

What are KSAs?

Knowledge, Skills and Abilities.

KSA is the term most often used by OPM or other Government/Govt regulated job listings.

I sympathize with you, but here in America we do have the opportunity to turn to other employeers. Finding a just and fair one without any unamerican attitudes that are more monitary loving ones is difficult.

I have been a contract security officer for over 25 years, and on my last long lasting job, the building manager let me go unjustly, but I wanted to leave anyway.

On my last job, the manager let me go because I did not fit in; what a farce. I did fit in, as I know when I am on friendly terms with paying tenets. What a poor system of judging people.

Thanks, all, for your helpful comments. I lament that "fit" plays such an important role in corporations these days. The type of work I do does not involve interacting with clients, customers, or the general public. In my previous work in this field, I've worked with many literal geniuses, many of whom didn't have the greatest social skills. But it didn't impede their ability to make a great product, and to interact sufficiently well.

I think that companies in this situation would be better suited by knowledgable, dedicated experts than by fresh-scrubbed, suited, shiny-shoed people who say "yes!" "definitely!", "absolutely!", etc., but don't know too much about what they're doing. (I am exaggerating to make a point - I know that there are some people who know a lot about what they are doing and appealing to HR types too.)

It seems that style is winning the battle against substance.

I have had several interviews lately so I assume my resume and skills must be good. I am very outgoing and can talk someone's ear off but for some reason in interviews I clam up. Just had an interview for a position I want badly , when I went in it was sprung on me this was a panel interview which I got nervous. They asked five pages of questions and I really couldnt think what to say.

How do I figure out what I keep doing wrong?

Hi, I'm a Healthcare Recruiter and in regards to the "you're not a fit" response, I first must offer you a brief explanation of what it is we do. As recruiters/head hunters, a client will call in what is called a "job order", by doing this we are expected to already be aware of the fact that they only want the best of the best, and that they themselves have probably already interviewed 10+ candidates that they didnt like. they also have to pay me a fee to "head hunt"...and by fee I mean a very large one. with that being said, we sometimes go through 20 candidates before the client decides to hire someone. ten minutes is absolutley enough time for a client to decide if you are the right candidate because part of my job is to already have you "screened" before you walk in to the facility. once I have provided them with feed back about you, and told them how wonderful you are, its up to you to 'sell' yourself. first impressions are everything and if in the first 10 minutes you dont live up to what I - as the recruiter said...your out. sorry, its sad but true.

You know Bianca, it wouldn't have to be true if you didn't let it.

YOu have described precicely why it is almost impossible for someone like me to get a job. None of you people actually care about our Knowledge, Skills and Abilities - all you care about is whether or not we give you the right warm fuzzy.

Clue: INTPs/People with Aspergers/ASDs don't give warm fuzzies. We do the job. Efficiently.

But efficiency doesn't seem to matter as much to folks as whether or not the candidate is part of the "in" crowd.

Kind of like high school..

Just another number in Chicagoland, Indiana said: You know Bianca, it wouldn't have to be true if you didn't let it.

YOu have described precicely why it is almost impossible for someone like me to get a job. None of you people actually care about our Knowledge, Skills and Abilities - all you care about is whether or not we give you the right warm fuzzy.

Clue: INTPs/People with Aspergers/ASDs don't give warm fuzzies. We do the job. Efficiently.

But efficiency doesn't seem to matter as much to folks as whether or not the candidate is part of the "in" crowd.

Kind of like high school..

------------------------------------
In response the above comment, I think you are misunderstanding my point, and I'm not quite sure you understand what a recruiters "job" is...we do not owe anyone a service, we are not the state, we are not unemployment and people pay for our services. you need to read up on what a staffing firm does. let me ask you this, ...how do you think I make my money and increase revenue? not by placing people with little to no skills in positions. I make money by placing high level professionals into positions that seek their skill set- that is what I'm paid to do, that is what I went to school for. the comment about the "in crowd" shows your lack of understanding. and to say that I dont "care about your knowledge"...the people who have knowledge and intelligence absolutley get jobs- on their own and through me... I'm not a social worker- so not to sound rude, but its really not my job to "care" about your feelings. if you have the skill set, if you are "marketable", and if you have a sense on how to sell yourself or present yourself, you will find a job...let me ask you this- what is your profession? do you have a degree? how many years did you stay at your last job? answer these questions, and then maybe it will shine some light on your current situation.

Ok, let me point out a few things - you are concerned about "how (I) sell yourself or present (my)self"...

Exactly what does that have to do with my abilities?

My chosen "career field" is Crysis Systems Analysis/Threat assessment. I was in the Service for 8 years. Post service, I earned a degree in Crisis Communications (and a minor in Ethics) from a "Name" Jesuit University... yet in the past 8 years since graduation I haven't been hired for anything but temp work. Nothing. Do you want to know why? I "creep people out". I don't make eye contact. I stutter. I misinterpret body language and emotional cues. I don't "get" interpersonal relationships. You see, I have a pervasive developmental disorder known as Aspergers Syndrome, which means I am an extremely high functioning Autistic.

However, none of that means I can't do the job. It only means I can't get past the touchy-feely HR people.

I don't want you to be a social worker. I want you people to stop making judgements on "First Impression" fluff & presentation.

High Schoolers are all about picking the "right" people to have around them... and so you get cliques of "Sociable", "Pretty" Morons. HR should be above that.

I think Just Another Number is right on, and that Bianca in Boston has provided a better example of the phenomenon I complained about than I could.

First impressions shouldn't mean ANYTHING compared to someone's documented experience and references.

Presentation should mean VERY LITTLE in industries where you don't interact with clients, customers, or the general public.

Bianca, your attitudes are responsible for great inefficiencies. You contribute to the phenomenon whereby showy, well-dressed, possibly attractive people are favored for jobs over candidates who maybe don't have the greatest "people skills" (which is why they're not in a people skills profession - incidentally, your writing is fairly bad so it's a good thing you're not in a business-writing profession).

Nobody using a computer program (for instance) knows whether or not the programmer shined their shoes frequently, whether they had expensive shoes that hurt their feet but looked "good" or "professional", or whether they did the programming at home in their slippers.

Nobody reading a newspaper knows if the reporter had pervasive body odor, or wore expensive perfume, or didn't smell good or bad.

Do you get the point? Superficial considerations are what you are about, they are what a ten minute interview is about, they are what thinking first impressions matter when considering seasoned job candidates ... You are just plain wrong (tho' your attitude does seem suitable for customer service, sales, etc., type positions).

Dean Suraci in Cornwall, New York said: Hey Frankie,

A person usually gets hired for 2 reasons. The first reason is that they have the skills set to do the duties of the job. Secondly, they are the right "fit"..... You need to show a similar vibe or be the same fit as others working there.

Unfortunately, my experiences are that the above are true in most industries. YOu can have the skill set and even dress the part. Still, there is the "fit" aspect and it will usually tip the decision one way or the other.

We all have a unique personality and vibe. Even if we pretend to "fit" at the interview, I think one's real personality will eventually come out and maybe cause one to go out the door.

frankhotdogs in New York, New York said:

The recruiter told me I would never be considered for full-time work at the company. It was a bit vague - something about me not being a good fit, that I had a different "energy" or "vibe" than they were looking for (I didn't even know I had a 'vibe'...).

I am not in HR. I have in my lifetime been on many job interviews that I fit the job description and I had "the" experience. However, when I went through the interview process- I was not a good "fit" with the group. And I was not hired.

Career Hunter in Denver, Colorado said:

You just never know what people will use to decide. You just have to get as many interviews as you can.

Very good comment. It is a numbers game. AND when you have the experience- it comes down to "fit".

Sometimes you can tell from the interview because there just is not a "click" between you and the hiring person. SOmetimes you walk out of there not knowing.

Some people are really good at getting a job and keeping it or changing jobs. I do not know - but they seem to have a special gift for adapting.

Stranger experiences are (1) met a fellow who worked for a large corporation. Was there for a few years and made a move to a different department. Then all his troubles began and he could not please the supervisor to save his life. In about 6 months he was out of a job. I was shocked. He looked like a guy that would fit in anywhere.

SO, he was a good "fit" in one department and then not a "fit" in a different department, or the supervisor just did not like him. Boom, and there goes the guys career and 6 months later he still did not have a job. I was shocked.

kmm in Wilmington, Delaware said:
Stranger experiences are (1) met a fellow who worked for a large corporation. Was there for a few years and made a move to a different department. Then all his troubles began and he could not please the supervisor to save his life. In about 6 months he was out of a job. I was shocked. He looked like a guy that would fit in anywhere.

SO, he was a good "fit" in one department and then not a "fit" in a different department, or the supervisor just did not like him. Boom, and there goes the guys career and 6 months later he still did not have a job. I was shocked.

You also have to take into account that the hiring process is imperfect. You will be interviewed by two kinds of people: HR types who know how to interview but know nothing about the day to day details of the job, and hiring managers who think they know what they want but know nothing about interviewing.

Many times in my current job search, I walked out of the interview convinced that I had it nailed, but never heard back from the employer. On the other hand, twice in my career I have been offered jobs after being passed over for the preferred candidate, who left the job after a week or two because he or she was a bad fit.

Career Hunter in Denver, Colorado said:

You also have to take into account that the hiring process is imperfect. .....Many times in my current job search, I walked out of the interview convinced that I had it nailed, but never heard back from the employer. On the other hand, twice in my career I have been offered jobs after being passed over for the preferred candidate, who left the job after a week or two because he or she was a bad fit.

Good comment. THat "fit" issue is a funky one. Yes. I was offered the job. At interview I was sent directly to hiring attorneys. I am a Paralegal. A week later I get the job. I thought this was going to be "the job" and I would be there for a long time. Well- did not work out that way.

Started in mid August and was terminated with severence package mid January. It was a horrifying experience. If I did not "fit" why did they keep me so long. Why did they put me on health benefits. Lot of why(s). Although I did not really realize it at the time, as I was busy with my work, I had relationship issues with the Big Boss. I would characterize it as "awkward" and "uncomfortable". Big Boss was also incompetent and he was relieved of his job as General COunsel and moved to another department in December. I went out the door in January. Even got a $1,200 x-mas bous.

I was beside myself as to what happened. So many mixed messages. And this company is growing big time and they rarely fire people.
Perhaps it was all about "fit" or perhaps it was the plan along That I was only needed for the last quarter, the busiest in the year. It blew my mind.

Charlie Fischer in San Francisco, California said:

On my last job, the manager let me go because I did not fit in; what a farce. I did fit in, as I know when I am on friendly terms with paying tenets. What a poor system of judging people.

Good comment. Curious- How long were you at the last job before they decided you were not a "good fit"?

Bianca in Boston, Massachusetts said: ------------------------------------
" if you have the skill set, if you are "marketable", and if you have a sense on how to sell yourself or present yourself, you will find a job...

Bianca- since you are in HR- in reference to your above comment, who don't you give some pointers on making oneself "marketable" (unless that means good resume and cover letter- the way you get in the door) and second- Tips on how to sell yourself.

Displaced Legal Professional in Denver, Colorado said:

I think the long and short of interviewing is to be prepared and be yourself. Preparation involves such basic things as researching the company and interviewer(s) as thoroughly as possible. Most people know or should know not to badmouth a previous employer. People know or should know to answer only what it asked, to give short but complete answers, and not to volunteer information. Finally, just be yourself. As Popeye the Sailor Man said, "I yam what I yam and that's all what I yam."
Continued, below....

DLP- good comment. BEing yourself- which means of course, being your best professional business self- Being prepared for the questions. Absolutely. Then there is the occasion when you are in front of the hiring person and he/she says, you have no experience in _____. Only thing I know to do is think on your feet quickly and sell them on your present abilities ...and this is why I will be able to do this job.

Never got the job when that "no experience" was stated. I had experience in litigation, not corporate. THey call me in, and I am going to go in.

Displaced Legal Professional in Denver, Colorado said: Continued from above....

I would not take such an offer. It's bad psychology. You will always be thought of as second best. They will treat you accordingly without even realizing it. I don't take a back seat to anyone, nor am I second best to anyone. Screw 'em.

Long ago, when I was in college, I got the office job because the first person did not show up or called, etc. You bet I took that job.

Truefully, I do not have a problem if I am called in for the job because the chosen candicate declined the position at the last minute. I believe they chose the wrong person to begin with.

The interview process is imperfect.

Displaced Legal Professional in Denver, Colorado said:

Hey, what else can you expect from a headhunter??

These people lie and break promises. They are often rude. They add another, unnecessary level of bureaucracy to the job-seeking process. Most of the time headhunters don't understand the jobs being sought, yet they evaluate for them. They lack depth. They are a total waste of time."

If Bianca is a headhunter, not HR in a corporation- forget her comments.

Folks, if you have to put the word into quotes ("fit", "click")...
then it's baloney.

Why not just say, "We are looking for someone who is passive, and you don't appear to be" or "We are looking for someone who shows a great deal of energy, and you don't", or "We care a lot about what people wear, and you are not particularly well dressed".

True professionals can adapt to different management styles and the behaviors of their peers. I've worked for hands-on and hands-off managers; sensitive, caring people and serial harassers; etc. I found a way to work with each of them, no matter how they differed from or matched my preferred style.

Displaced Legal Professional in Denver, Colorado said: They did, but "last minute" is key. It's different if they hired someone else ahead of you and you were not the first choice. That obviously means they didn't like you as well as the first person.

Here again, bad psychology. I don't take second place to anyone. As I've written on these boards for a while now, employment is no longer inclusionary but exclusionary. It's now a process of "last man (woman) standing." Not "we want you."

I don't know. I do disagree with you here. So they liked the first person better. BUT now they cannot have the first person. I am now the person they need and want. So , again, I have no problem with it. I do not see it as bad psychology. I see it as my opportunity to have a job.

Last man standing. How does that apply to my above comment?

frankhotdogs in New York, New York said: Folks, if you have to put the word into quotes ("fit", "click")...
then it's baloney.

Why not just say, "We are looking for someone who is passive, and you don't appear to be" or "We are looking for someone who shows a great deal of energy, and you don't", or "We care a lot about what people wear, and you are not particularly well dressed".

True professionals can adapt to different management styles and the behaviors of their peers. I've worked for hands-on and hands-off managers; sensitive, caring people and serial harassers; etc. I found a way to work with each of them, no matter how they differed from or matched my preferred style.

Frank..As to first part of comment,they cannot and will not come out and say that.

Second part. I do not know if it is true professionals or personality types. Some people do have a gift to adapt better than others.

thanks kmm - why can't they just come out and say that? can you sue someone for saying that you have a different energy level than they desire for a job?

yes, some adapt better than others, and there's no way in heck you can determine that from a 10 minute interview.

frankhotdogs in New York, New York said:

First impressions shouldn't mean ANYTHING compared to someone's documented experience and references.

Presentation should mean VERY LITTLE in industries where you don't interact with clients, customers, or the general public.

whether they had expensive shoes that hurt their feet but looked "good" or "professional", or whether they did the programming at home in their slippers.

Nobody reading a newspaper knows if the reporter had pervasive body odor, or wore expensive perfume, or didn't smell good or bad..

FIrst impressions mean eveything (in most cases). I know a female who is a computer programmer. When she is interviewing for the job, she wears a suit and business pumps. Professional look. BUT, when she is working at the job, I see her going to work in wrinkled jeans, wrinkled pants - basically a mess most of the time. It is acceptabe in that environment, not at the interview.

As to the reporter who wrote the newspaper article- no, we will not know if he smells or not. It is funny that come up. I worked in a law firm in my 20's, the runner also used the lunch room and he had bad bAD - need for deoderant problems. AND he was there working - and I was ready to throw up. DID he use deoderant on his interview?? I do not know.

frankhotdogs in New York, New York said: thanks kmm - why can't they just come out and say that? can you sue someone for saying that you have a different energy level than they desire for a job?

yes, some adapt better than others, and there's no way in heck you can determine that from a 10 minute interview.

I do not know about a lawsuit- but they will never come out and say it. They use "fit" or didn't think it would work out.

If a headhunter sent you out, you may never know. Assume it was "fit".

SOmetimes, the person you meet to interview you just does not like the interviewee - maybe it is an insecurity. SOmetime, it is a wrong personality type. Interviewee has an outgoing personality, they want a more laid back person. Again, "fit" Best I can come up with.

kmm in Wilmington, Delaware said: FIrst impressions mean eveything (in most cases). I know a female who is a computer programmer. When she is interviewing for the job, she wears a suit and business pumps. Professional look. BUT, when she is working at the job, I see her going to work in wrinkled jeans, wrinkled pants - basically a mess most of the time. It is acceptabe in that environment, not at the interview.

kmm, you are demonstrating my point - that first impressions should not mean very much. my hope is to challenge people's knee-jerk reactions, and the conventional wisdom, because they have done a disservice to the whole workplace and to me in particular.

I was told to wear a suit... I wore a jacket and tie because it was 95 degrees and I didn't want to sweat like a pig in wool... the interviewer wore a freakin' mumu! (orange at that - is that professional interview wear nowadays?) oh well, their loss too.

Thanks for writing back. It is interesting to hear people's opinions. For argument's sake ...

"By wearing something other than you were told, you demonstrated to that company that perhaps you don't do what you're told and cannot follow directions."

... I would say that this 'demonstration' could be quickly undone by checking someone's references. Which do you think someone should go by in hiring someone:

A) The candidate wore a jacket and tie when the employment agency person suggested to him that he should have worn a suit.

B) I called his four references and they all check out. He has a solid track record of 10+ years' experience, and has done everything stated on his resume, and everyone he worked for thought highly of his work and incidentally (gasp) he fit in just fine too.

If you think A is a better tack to take in hiring someone ... I think you (not you specifically, Displaced Legal Professional, but "you" as in anyone who would think A is best) are an idiot.

Incidentally, the recruiter who sent me on this interview did not know the definition of the position. So who is that person to make a snap judgment on my ability to do a job?

Displaced Legal Professional in Denver, Colorado said:

didn't think you were good enough to be their first choice. Because if you were good enough they would have called you first - not second.... IMO, they may resent that and take it out on you, without giving you a fair chance to hit it off with them. That's what I mean regarding bad psychology.

Ok interesting view point. However, even when we are the first choice, does not mean we are going to be treated well or not stressed out so badly that I, myself, wanted out in 6 months.

They had no qualms about replacing me. So if I am working there as first choice, and they could care less that they are killing me in there - why would they care that they have to make offer to number two because number one declined.

We can disagree. It is not an argument, it is a discussion of thoughts and opinions. Cool with me.

Displaced Legal Professional in Denver, Colorado said: ...to which you contributed. I agree with Cindy. Interviews are one time when one must make a positive first impression - not to make a negative statement or advertise your non-conformity.

The interviewer's attire was not of your concern. If you were told to wear a suit, you should have worn a suit, even if it was 120 outside. By wearing something other than you were told, you demonstrated to that company that perhaps you don't do what you're told and cannot follow directions.

An interview is not the time to test knee-jerk reactions - that is, unless you don't want an offer. There are times to express individuality and times to conform. An interview is one time you should conform.

And I concur. It is hard enough to get a job and not coming in dressed for the position - it more or less gives off message that you do not want to "fit" and be a "team player".

kmm, again, that is lazy/dopey to gauge whether someone "fits" and is a "team player" by whether they wear a suit to an interview.

Do you think HR folks might be able to remember a few instances that a new hire came in wearing suits, with shiny shoes, plenty of hair gel, white teeth, saying "absolutely!" a lot, and turned out to be a fraud, or unknowledgeable, or "a bad fit"? I'm sure it has happened. I am sure there are plenty of instances where people have been lazy by gauging someone's appearance rather than their qaulifications. Again, I am not talking about customer-, public-, media-, etc., facing positions, but "knowledge worker" type jobs.

Garsh, you think I'm an idiot _and_ you like me : )

Er I didn't mean to turn this into suit vs. no suit... I just had a general gripe about whether you could fairly evaluate someone in 10 minutes. I think the answer is, "often, no". It may well be that some employers value someone wearing a suit over someone who knows what they're doing (all other things held equal), hence the expression "empty suit". And literally or metaphorically, I think that is unfortunate, and I think it's an assumption that is rightly challenged.

I'm not some wacky nonconformist. I am however someone opposed to superficial consideration.

Good luck to you in your search, DLP... if I may call you that rather than typing your entire moniker.

Displaced Legal Professional in Denver, Colorado said: No, sir, with all due respect, you were the idiot. You apparently thought you were exempt from following directions (A) and expecting your record (B) would speak for you.

Employers use many criteria when selecting someone for a job, not just one, as you must have been hoping. In your situation, "A" and "B" are the criteria. You needed to fulfill both. Using your "A" and "B" examples, I submit you never got to "B" because you never made it past "A."

While I don't think agencies know what they're talking about most of the time, this time they did. You should have been smart, listened and played the game.

You sound like someone who doesn't like to play games, Frank, and I like that. However, there's a time and place for everything. To succeed in an interview and, to a very large extent, at the job, to some degree you must play the game.

Excellent comment. It is all about playing the game. AND bringing both "A" and "B" to the table.

Displaced Legal Professional in Denver, Colorado said: No argument, such as you and I have been through on other discussions. Just a little philosophy and psychology.

In that regard, Cindy, I'll riddle you another one. What if you applied and interviewed for a job, **received a formal rejection for that job,** and they called and asked if you were still interested? How would you react?

Good riddle- Hum- that would be a tough call. I would probably think - some nerve - If I needed a job, ask for more money.

Displaced Legal Professional in Denver, Colorado said: ... To succeed in an interview and, to a very large extent, at the job, to some degree you must play the game.

And that game is rigged against anyone who is not an Extrovert.

Which means that those of us with certain disabilities, say, Asperger's Syndrome, or who are highly Introverted, say, INTP or some such, get screwed by the HR "People Person" who can't stand introverted geeks... no matter how well qualified.

Hello Bianca,

I was a Staffing Manager with Robert Half. I handled temp-to-perm, for manufacturing and industrial positions. I'm now looking to work with another company though, and was wondering about the outlook for healthcare staffing. I have a few different interviews set up so far, and the most promising are for healthcare companies. Any advice? Is it better than say finance or IT staffing?

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Best Wishes,

Ryan

Bianca in Boston, Massachusetts said: Hi, I'm a Healthcare Recruiter and in regards to the "you're not a fit" response, I first must offer you a brief explanation of what it is we do. As recruiters/head hunters, a client will call in what is called a "job order", by doing this we are expected to already be aware of the fact that they only want the best of the best, and that they themselves have probably already interviewed 10+ candidates that they didnt like. they also have to pay me a fee to "head hunt"...and by fee I mean a very large one. with that being said, we sometimes go through 20 candidates before the client decides to hire someone. ten minutes is absolutley enough time for a client to decide if you are the right candidate because part of my job is to already have you "screened" before you walk in to the facility. once I have provided them with feed back about you, and told them how wonderful you are, its up to you to 'sell' yourself. first impressions are everything and if in the first 10 minutes you dont live up to what I - as the recruiter said...your out. sorry, its sad but true.

frankhotdogs in New York, New York said: Garsh, you think I'm an idiot _and_ you like me : )

Er I didn't mean to turn this into suit vs. no suit... I just had a general gripe about whether you could fairly evaluate someone in 10 minutes. I think the answer is, "often, no".

Frank - I would say that in the 10-minutes, they decided they were no longer interested in evaluating you further. It happens. Distressful, yes.

Just another number in Chicagoland, Indiana said:

And that game is rigged against anyone who is not an Extrovert.

... no matter how well qualified.

Frank - As to only wanting extroerts. No necessarily. I had an interview and the hiring person noted that I had an extroverted personality. I knew then she did not want an extrovert. Wanted perhaps a more low-key personality.

As to how well qualified. I think it is important that one is able to "communicate" effectivly one's abilities in the interview. Example: they make a comment on the job duties. Diplomatically jump in and point out how your skills match that need.

Thanks all for your comments and suggestions - I appreciate differing perspectives and didn't post this just to hear my opinion echoed.

Don't forget, I also took a test which took a couple of hours, and did fine on it - I think that buttresses my argument that the superficial outward stuff is too heavily emphasized.

But... it's any employer's prerogative to decide what types of people they want in their organization. I have always made a point of not having a separate work identity/personality, because I value being myself, and I value honesty in my relationships. I find workplace politics distasteful, and I think you'll find more of that where there's an emphasis on a personality/temperament/demeanor type rather than the work that people produce.

It puts me in mind of a case where a co-worker's boss came in, all smiles, and said, "It's your birthday next Tuesday, let's set up a lunch!" Two minutes later the boss went to the vice president to ask that my co-worker be fired (basically because the boss didn't like my co-worker; I know all this because I was closer with the VP than anyone else knew). I would hate to be that dishonest, and lose my identity like that, all for the sake of earning a buck.

Displaced Legal Professional in Denver, Colorado said: I agree, but only to a point. Even extreme introverts can summon up enough loquaciousness to get through an interview.

There's more to it than loquaciousness.

Displaced Legal Professional in Denver, Colorado said:
Perhaps. But can they not play the ADA card? Just a thought.

No, not really that useful. I've been fighting this for 20 years. Asperger's has only been on the DSM since 1994... and then as a childhood pervasive developmental disorder. It's not really widly accepted as an adult "disability" because we really aren't "disabled" - i.e. prevented from being able to do meaningful work. We are just prevented from being HIRED because we make HR people uncomfortable - so we don't get a second interview.

Ryan in Los Angeles, California said: Hello Bianca,

I was a Staffing Manager with Robert Half. I handled temp-to-perm, for manufacturing and industrial positions. I'm now looking to work with another company though, and was wondering about the outlook for healthcare staffing. I have a few different interviews set up so far, and the most promising are for healthcare companies. Any advice? Is it better than say finance or IT staffing?

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Best Wishes,

Ryan

Hi Ryan,
Thank goodness, it sounds like I'm finally dealing with an intelligent, educated professional!! Anyways, to answer your question....Healthcare is the place to be right now. I've been in healthcare for my entire recruiting career and can say that the economy or "market" very rarely affect my paycheck. A hospital will always need a nurse or PA, a doc's office will always need LPN's and MA's so on, and so on...also, there are so many "niches" in healthcare, making it more interesting to play in. As far as IT or finance, I cant offer too much advice. We have both of those divisions here and the recruiters do well, its just a matter of what you find interesting I guess. good luck! let me know what you decide!

Headhunters what a joke. I think I have talked about everything one can talk about when it comes to these people on other forums. If you Headhunters are such heroes, then why are 99 percent of the comments on Indeed negative? It's a tragedy what these heroes are doing to people looking for a job. Well, back to the topic of the 10 minute interview.

Just another number in Chicagoland, Indiana said: There's more to it than loquaciousness.

No, not really that useful. I've been fighting this for 20 years. Asperger's has only been on the DSM since 1994... and then as a childhood pervasive developmental disorder. It's not really widly accepted as an adult "disability" because we really aren't "disabled" - i.e. prevented from being able to do meaningful work. We are just prevented from being HIRED because we make HR people uncomfortable - so we don't get a second interview.

As I do not understand "Asperger's" - again, somehow i would suggest (perhaps at the unemployment rescource center) do a trial interview and have it critiqued for content and efective communication of skills - even if you are not looking the the interviewer in the eye. SOme how, some way- the communication of your qualifications has to be made.

Displaced Legal Professional in Denver, Colorado said: My thoughts exactly. I would probably tell them in so many words to go to hell.

I ran the question past my wife, who has also worked in law. Same response regarding nerve and particular if they gave a formal rejection.

Interesting idea, but see my comment, above, about where they should go.

If I was in the market for a job now - today's economy - rejection letter or not- I would take the job. These are very, very bad times.

Just another number in Chicagoland, Indiana said: Ok, let me point out a few things - you are concerned about "how (I) sell yourself or present (my)self"...

Exactly what does that have to do with my abilities?

It means everything. We are judged in the work world and in our social environemnt outside of work by the presentation of our selves.....

Comment from TIm Gunn : to the effect of " we cannot control how people perceive us, we can control how we present our selves"

Bottom line, IMHO- to get a job, (1) one must be able to effectlively communitcate our skills for that job in the interview and (2) we must dress accordingly for the position. If you cannot meet (1) or (2) - forget it.

frankhotdogs in New York, New York said:

Do you get the point? Superficial considerations are what you are about, they are what a ten minute interview is about, they are what thinking first impressions matter when considering seasoned job candidates ... You are just plain wrong (tho' your attitude does seem suitable for customer service, sales, etc., type positions).

I am commenting on the above specifically. Again "presentation" is the key to selling yourself - that includes two elements: articulation of your skills and ability to answer the interview questions and (2) dress code. Interview 101