Interview This!

Many job seekers believe that elaborating on their experience and skills in a cover letter enhances their chances of getting an interview. Although this belief underlies much of the available “advice” on writing cover letters, it is completely mistaken. The simple truth is that hiring managers have limited time and nearly unlimited resumes to screen; they just don’t have time to read cover letters.

(I should point out that “cover letter” in this context means a letter, or more typically, a cover message, as in an email message that accompanies your attached resume or application. Almost all resumes are sent by email these days, so “cover letter” refers to the email message you send to an employer or recruiter, or the text message inserted into the appropriate spot on an online application.)

The most efficient way to screen resumes is, well, to screen the resume and not bother with the cover letter. A quick review of a resume is all that’s required to place it in one of three categories: not qualified (the vast majority of all resumes); possibly qualified; and, almost certainly qualified. If the resume screener has enough candidate resumes in the “almost certainly qualified” category, the resumes in the other two categories are set aside (with the cover letter never having seen the light of day).

If the number of potentially qualified candidates must be reduced, the resume screener will take a more detailed look at the resume and possibly read the cover letter. It’s at this point the tactic of packing lots of info into the cover letter may backfire: information in the cover letter might be used to reject the candidate. Remember, the resume has survived the first cut and is now sitting in the “to be interviewed” pile, so the ideal letter for this situation says simply, “Please consider me for the position you recently advertised”, as it avoids providing the screener with any information that may be used to reject the candidate.

Rest assured that if the cover letter is long-winded, contains stupid comments (”out-of-the-box thinker”; “I’m a people person”), contains some otherwise benign detail that is viewed negatively, or any one of a thousand other problems that the job seeker may not anticipate, the resume will move out of the “interview” pile and into the “not now, maybe later” pile.

Since one cannot know with certainty how the person reading the cover letter will react to any particular bit of information, it is best to let your resume carry the full load of securing an interview. Don’t risk providing a reason in your cover letter to undo what your resume may have already accomplished.

Michael G Smith

Job candidates sometimes outsmart themselves when discussing compensation with a prospective employer. Forget what you may have learned about negotiating tactics, as you may sabotage the job offer.

Here’s what can happen: if you stretch the truth about how much you currently earn, or provide an inflated “minimum” amount of compensation you are willing to accept, the prospective employer may offer the job to another candidate who has asked for less.

Say, for example, you tell a prospective employer that you wish to earn $100,000, figuring you can then “negotiate” down to $90,000, an amount with which you would be pleased. The other candidate, however, may ask for $90,000, which is the number he or she really wants. Naturally, the employer takes both candidates at their word and proceeds to offer the job to the employee who will cost less (assuming, of course, both candidates have roughly equal skills).

Suppose you give the employer an honest, minimum compensation number and they then make an offer that is lower? This is not a problem; it doesn’t make a bit of difference what amount you ask for, or what amount they offer, since you alone control whether you accept the offer or not. If the offer is too low, turn it down and reiterate that the number you provided earlier–your minimum compensation amount–is truly the minimum offer you will accept.

If the employer is unwilling to come back with an offer at, or above your minimum, then either the employer has another candidate that is not quite as desirable as you, but somewhat less expensive, or the amount the employer offered is simply the most they are able to spend.

In my experience, employers do not typically reduce the amount of compensation they plan to offer when they learn the candidate is willing to accept less. Surprised? Think about it; if the employer decides that, for a variety of reasons, salary “X” is the right amount to pay for a certain quality of employee doing a particular job, then why pay a different amount? If money had been the most important consideration, then the employer could easily have sought out a less expensive employee.

I have also found that it is much better for the employer to find out before the offer is made that the compensation amount is not acceptable to the candidate. It is usually easier for the hiring manager to secure approval for higher compensation during the process of preparing the offer, especially if the request is based on specific information provided by the candidate. Once the offer is made and rejected, though, the manager’s harried effort to secure more money will likely be seen as an attempt to salvage a bungled hire.

Michael G Smith

Question: Are there employers hiring “remote” or e-commuting team members in the area of web production, content management or web editing?

I have read a lot of articles about this growing trend, and some envious examples of people working from the beach. But, in reality, are American companies willing to trust and hire someone for their talents and ability to produce without their regular presence at an office (not contractor or self-employed)? I’m looking for perspective and insight from both management with employees working from home, and from individuals who work from home.

- Is e-commuting a benefit that is offered upfront and detailed in job listings, or is it something that is usually negotiated?
- If you work from home in a tech-related, full-time job (not contractor or self-employed), could you share some tips on how you did it?
- What are some ways to “sell” the idea of working from home to your boss?

I’m not looking for a new job, but more wanting to understand the HR and Management related issues around this topic.

Josue Sierra
Marketing Lead at JPMorgan Chase

Answer
From the employer’s point of view, e-commuting is not viable for most jobs and as a result, some employers are hesitant to open the door to that option. Nearly all management positions require the manager to be on site in order to mentor their staff and direct their activities. By the same token, less experienced employees who wish to develop management skills and eventually become managers themselves cannot expect to do so if they work off site.

From a quality of life perspective, working from home appears to offer advantages—flexibility in regard to work hours, less micro-management, and lower commuting costs. However, individuals who have worked from home or in a one-person office are aware of the disadvantages of this arrangement— loneliness (no social interaction with office peers), difficulty in getting motivated, and lack of real-time information flows that may affect the direction of the project you may be working on.

Taking these considerations into account, there are certain types of work where the trade-offs are worthwhile. By foregoing the requirement that an employee work on site, an organization can gain access to a larger pool of qualified candidates and possibly lower their costs as well. In fact, this is exactly what outsourcing is, since there isn’t really much difference between having an off site employee and an off site vendor—the considerations underlying the decision-making process are much the same.

To answer your last question first, selling the idea of working from home is tough, since your boss already has the preferred situation and is not likely to settle for less. The only real leverage you have is if you offer to work from home instead of quitting. This may appear to contradict what I’ve just said above, but keep in mind that you’ve already been hired and so the employer has already considered the question of hiring someone to work off site. The reasons for hiring someone off site—access to a larger candidate pool and potentially lower cost—don’t apply to you as an existing employee.

From the employer’s perspective, converting an onsite employee to an off site one has few advantages (your office or cubicle becomes available to another employee, yet only if you never work in the office), but many disadvantages (less accountability, and more difficult and slower communication). Unless the employer is faced with losing the employee and having to find a replacement, there is no advantage to the employer in agreeing to your proposal.

As for job listings, sometimes the employer will state upfront that the position can be performed from home. If the employer does not mention that in a job posting, you should raise that point during the first conversation with an interested employer and see how they respond.

Michael G Smith