Beating Sexism, Destroying Diversity

A few months ago, one of my LinkedIn connections invited me to be on his podcast to discuss diversity, specifically in IT. As I am a firm believer in the importance of having a diversified workforce, I was happy to accept. Little did I know that the man had an agenda.

What he wanted was for me to confirm that IT companies discriminate in their hiring practices. I would not do it. I told him that my IT clients were fully diversified. He countered that the Big 4 IT companies, according to a study, were far from diversified. I explained that those companies began operations when diversification was not even a thing and that they had a lot of catching up to do. On the other hand, my clients had always practiced diversification. I also pointed out that the Big 4, being just that, big, slanted the statistics. Most IT firms are small businesses not colossal behemoths. Remove the Big 4 from the analysis and the numbers will improve dramatically. They won’t be perfect, but they will be more indicative of an industry that is doing what they should be doing, hiring women and minorities.

Around this time, (I don’t remember exactly as we continued to speak once the interview ended), the host stopped the recording. He said that he was going to do me a favor and not continue with, or post, the interview. He said that would be getting into trouble if it were to air. I told him that it was his call, wished him well, and ended the Zoom call. Then I had a good laugh.

Today, I am not laughing.

As my readers know, I read Inc. and Fast Company magazines religiously. They usually provide a wealth of usable information (although, note to editors, especially at FC, they are getting a bit too political). I was therefore unpleasantly surprised when the October 2021 issue of Inc. arrived and the very first article after the letter from the editor was about a company whose founder decided that she was facing sexism and had, as far as I am concerned, chosen to react with what I consider to be a fraudulent strategy. Put simply, she lied and Inc. apparently is endorsing the strategy.

What happened was that after she had met with potential clients, she followed up with emails to which her prospects did not respond. As, at the time, the company had only two employees, both women, she decided to create a fake employee, “Paul,” and give him an MBA. So, while the emails from the women were ignored, the emails sent by “Paul, MBA” did receive responses. Today, the company has $5.5 million in annual revenue. So I guess the lesson is, lying works, ethics be damned! (If my emails are ignored, I pick up the phone! But what do I know? I’m not making millions.)

I fully understand that new business owners will do practically anything to get their first clients. The problem is that the editors at Inc. titled the article, “One Way To Beat Sexism.” The founder did not “beat” sexism, she circumvented it, assuming that sexism was, in fact, the problem.

This got me thinking. If by creating a fake male employee the founder was able to beat sexism, which is bad, then why not use the same practice to beat diversity, which is good. This is really “two wrongs make a right.” You are the victim of sexism. A wrong. You create a fake male employee, a second wrong. You then get clients which is good. And you make millions of dollars, which is even better.

The problem is, if this strategy can “beat” sexism, it could also be used to “beat” diversity. Why have a diverse workforce when you can just create a bunch of fake email signatories?

I am pleased to announce that I have now hired staff. In addition to myself (Jewish and male, two boxes checked), I am being joined by Mary, MBA, (Christian and female, two more boxes checked), Fatima, CPA, (Muslim and Arab, two more boxes checked, in addition to being a woman), and Jose, Eng. (Hispanic, one more box checked in addition to him being Christian, probably Catholic, and a male). So, let’s see, in addition to myself, I now have two women working for me, one man, and together we represent at least three religions, and four races. Not bad. I think I will add Xi and, can someone tell me what an African-American first name is that everyone will recognize the person as being Black? And that should do it. My company is now diversified, or at least everyone will think it is. Impression is reality!

Sexism is bad. If you think a prospect is sexist, here’s a crazy idea, don’t work with them. Why would you want to help them build their business?

Diversification is important. It’s good business to have a workforce that reflects the demographics of your community or your clientele. It just makes good sense and is great for the bottom line. But it has to be real. Just because one person got away with creating a fake employee, doesn’t mean everyone should. It’s too important to add trickery to the mix.

How to Write a Perfect Resume

A friend sent me an email he received from a resume writing company that boasted, in the subject line, that they create “perfect” resumes. More power to them. There are just a few problems with their claim:

First, there’s no such thing as a perfect resume. And perfection, in any event, is overrated. There is a debate over who said it first but, whoever it was, was correct, “Perfect is the enemy of good.” If you are shooting for perfection, you will never finish writing your resume. Sometimes “good” is “good enough.”

Second, a resume is a tool. That’s all it is. It’s purpose is to get the recipient to invite you for an interview.

Third, I disagree with those people who say that most recipients of resumes spend 10 seconds reading them. That’s wrong. As I have written previously, they spend five seconds scanning them. Scores of resumes can arrive every day. Who has time to actually read them all? No one. And this is a good thing because…

Four, since the recipient does not have time to actually read a resume when it arrives on their desk, their first impression is going to be visual. So the document needs to be clean, neat and well-organized. Unless you are applying for a job as a graphic designer, there is no need for graphics (which, by the way, can play havoc with some Applicant Tracking Systems). Infographics look great on a report but are a waste of space on a resume. They are just clutter.

Fifth, since many initially scan the resume, not actually reading it, don’t kill yourself when you discover, after you send it, that there is a typo. In a recent unscientific poll on LinkedIn, 75% of respondents, including yours truly, responded that they would consider a candidate whose resume had typos. (Of course, this is within reason. There is a limit! And when the company does a keyword search, the typo may become problematic if, and only if, it’s in a keyword.)

Sixth, the important thing is to grab the recipient’s attention. You do that by simply starting the resume with half a dozen bullet points highlighting relevant professional accomplishments. For veterans, I always suggest, if it’s true (and it usually is) that they write, “Highly decorated veteran of the US…” and then state the branch where they served. (I once had a veteran client who could not get a job interview to save his life. After two hours he finally told me that he was a Silver Star recipient! Once that became the first bullet point at the top of his resume, his phone started ringing! A resume is no place for modesty.)

As for the rest of the resume, you want to show the recipient that you know how to prioritize. Don’t list every responsibility you ever had, just the main ones. Think of the resume as a “tease,” the trailer to a movie to get the recipient to buy the ticket and go and actually see the movie, meaning that they invite you for an interview.

And forget about being perfect. Excpet for my humbal self, I no of know won who is perfekt. If the resume gets you the interview, it’s perfect enough.

Postscript

While writing this article I came upon a survey/poll on LinkedIn asking the question if LinkedIn profiles will replace resumes. My response was to the effect that, while resumes are legally binding documents, LinkedIn profiles are not. Of course, people disagreed with me, which is their right. One person said resumes are not legally binding because they are not signed. In fact, they are. When you note on your cover letter that your resume is attached, since you “sign” the letter (even if it’s an email) you are also signing the resume. And if you are attaching it to an online application, most have a warning that by submitting the application you are confirming that, to the best of your knowledge, the information is accurate – including the resume. As all resumes are part of a job application, I believe they are legally binding. (Not everyone agrees.) After all, you can be fired for lying on your resume.

My view is that a LinkedIn profile is more like an ad. Not everyone on LinkedIn is looking for a job. I’m not. So if someone comes to me for my services, because they saw my profile, why should that be any different from my advertising my services, making the same claims as I make on my profile, in a newspaper or on a billboard? What’s the difference? Why shouldn’t “true in advertising” still apply? And an organization called “LinkedIn” even wants lies in profiles on their site reported! (One person who disagreed with me suggested that I do research before I express an opinion. I had to laugh!)

Of course all of these questions will remain questions until someone sues their employer for firing them for lying on their resume or LinkedIn profile, or until someone is sued for “false advertising” on their profile. But here’s a crazy idea: Don’t lie!

Dream Your Dream Job

I am certain I have written about this previously but, with 290 LinkedIn articles, I hope you will forgive me for not being able to find it and pardon me for repeating myself.

Many years ago a man had a unique problem. He owned a meeting venue. His best client was a woman who regularly filled his largest room, some 250 seats. This was a weekly lecture. It began at 11 AM and was scheduled to finish at Noon, but her audience, all women, stayed an extra 15-20 minutes to speak with her. It was just what any speaker would want and exactly what the owner wanted. Until…

One day a man came to him and said he wanted to rent his largest room on the same day that the previously mentioned woman was scheduled to speak. The man wanted to begin precisely at Noon. The owner explained to him that the room would be utilized until Noon and they agreed that his presentation would begin at 12:15.

Now the owner had to figure out a way to clear the room by Noon so he could have the rows of chairs straightened and the room cleaned, if necessary. If I remember correctly, he came to me for a solution and I asked a friend, more qualified than I, to join me. (He may have called my friend who invited me to join them. It was a long time ago so some details are fuzzy.) We went to his facility, saw the room, and then the three of us took a walk outside.

We noticed that across the street was an apartment building with retail stores on the ground floor, including a shoe store catering to women. One of us came up with an idea. We approached the owner of the shoe store and asked him if he would agree to have a 50% off sale, for one hour, on the day in question, starting at Noon and ending at 1:00. We said we would print no more than 250 coupons which we would place on the seats prior to the woman’s lecture.

Since the owner of the meeting facility would pay for the printing, the shoe store owner agreed. When the women entered the room and saw the coupons, that became the topic of discussion. For the first time ever, they started to leave the lecture before the speaker had finished. The room emptied out before Noon. The sale was a complete success. The store owner was thrilled and offered to do it again.

I remember, when the venue owner called to tell me that the gimmick actually worked, my friend and I had a good laugh. We could not understand the fascination women have with shoes. And we could not think of a male equivalent. Ties? Cuff links?

In any event, the connection between women and shoes has always remained in the back of my mind. On occasion, I have asked shoe store owners to explain it to me. Their answers were usually along the lines of “Women” in an exasperated tone of voice. Not at all helpful.

As my regular readers know, I have lately been reading Freud. During his tenth lecture on dreams, “Symbolism in the Dream, ” in Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis, he stated that “the shoe or slipper is a female genital” (emphasis in original). That got me thinking that perhaps women have a subconscious need for shoes. For some reason, this got me thinking about people who want to change careers.

I am sure everyone has heard that in sports the general advice is to think it, visualize it, and then do it. Think about throwing a strike. Picture it sailing over home plate. Then you will throw a strike. Think about hitting an ace in tennis. Picture your swing and impacting the ball. Then you will hit an ace, a ball your opponent cannot return. I advise clients to imagine their upcoming job interview and play it out. Then, in the actual interview, they are usually calm and confident because they have rehearsed different scenarios either with me, a friend, or simply in their heads.

So why not the same with changing careers and literally finding your dream job? Dreams, according to Freud, are expressions of our wishes (“wish fulfillment” to be precise). We dream what we want. (Nightmares are what we fear). And it does not matter if it is a day dream or a sleeping (night) dream, we dream what we want.

When a career counseling client comes to me to discuss changing careers, I always ask about their day dreams. Based purely on personal experience, I know that is a key to what a person truly wants. I had no idea that psychiatry was supporting me and I never bothered (My bad!) to find out. Apparently, I was right. (It’s rare, but it does happen!)

So, since your dreams tell you what you want, if you are thinking about changing careers but don’t know what to do, think about changing careers before you go to sleep and perhaps your subconscious will let you know. Or, if while doing your job you find yourself day dreaming about something else, you may already have your answer. (As for what the items in your dreams mean, that’s above my pay grade! I would not hazard to guess.)

One word of warning: Many times people do not actually want to change careers, they only think they do. They like their colleagues. They like their boss. They like their clients/customers. What they want is a change of responsibilities, something new. In those cases, we work out a written proposal to the employer to expand the person’s duties. Everyone is happy. The boss keeps a loyal employee and the employee keeps working with people they like while making their dream come true.

Pleasant dreams!

How to Eliminate or Explain Your COVID Resume Gap

They are going to ask, so you better have an answer. And it better be a good one because given the choice between someone who worked at anything during the time the government was paying people to stay home, and someone who decided to stay home, it’s the person who did not let their professional ego get in their way and did what they could who will get the job offer.

So how do you explain the COVID resume gap? There are four acceptable justifications for having let the government pay you to not “work,” and they all relate to real “work” you were doing, although (sadly) most people don’t consider it “work.” They should all appear on your resume, listing your responsibilities and accomplishments, so there is no gap! Here they are:

  1. Child care. You had to stay home while your spouse went to work. Nothing wrong with that. Good for you. Or, you are a single parent and had to stay home. More power to you!
  2. Adult care. You had an elderly parent/relative/friend for whom you had to care. Ditto.
  3. Education. You spent the time to further your professional education. You can prove it with certifications in this, that and the other thing. You are now a better employee. Well done!
  4. Death. A loved one died and you had to take care of the estate. My condolences.

All of these should be a source of pride. And when you are proud of something, it will come across in a job interview. What you did was important. Just itemize on your resume what you had to do, your responsibilities, like with any other job. The patience you had to display, the self-control, involved in child or adult care, could be, should be, a ticket to a customer service or trainer position at any forward-thinking company. Education speaks for itself. As for learning probate, it shows, as does being a caregiver, that you learned how to navigate a new (complicated) bureaucracy.

Going back to child care, literally list the skills you taught your children. Instead of watching television, playing video games, or going on the internet, you taught them to be responsible and that (school) work comes first. You taught them discipline. You taught them the value of work. You taught them the importance of keeping to a schedule and a daily regimen. Those are all skills smart employers want in their employees.

And they also want honesty. So if you foolishly just took advantage of the situation and let the government pay you not to work, admit your mistake. Most people can be forgiving. Just say, “I was an idiot. I made a mistake. I know now I should not have done it. I learn from my mistakes which is the only thing I can say in my defense. I don’t make excuses. I never repeat the same mistake twice!”

Depending on the type of professional you were pre-COVID, it just may be enough to convince an employer to give you a try.

Need personal advice? Schedule a free 15-minute career counseling consultation today!

When Building a Team, it’s Not Seats on a Bus it’s Cells of an Organism

Jim Collins, in his classic Good to Great, advises when building a team to first get the right people on the bus, then get the wrong people off the bus and, finally, make sure the right people are sitting in the correct seats. It’s a great visual that even the most inept team builder should be able to understand. And now I propose throwing it away and going back a century, to Sigmund Freud’s 1920 essay, Beyond the Pleasure Principle.

Freud wrote, “One cell helps to preserve the life of the others, and the cell-community can go on living even if single cells have to perish. We have already heard that also conjugation, the temporary mingling of two unicellular entities, has a preservative and rejuvenating effect on both.”

The beauty of Collins’ metaphor is it’s simplicity: When building a team you have to hire the right people for the right job. The problem is, you are not just building a team, you are building a company and a company should be viewed in the Freudian sense of building an organism. An organism is living, breathing and evolving. So too should be your business. A bus is static; it never changes. Not good for your business!

So, instead of thinking that you are filling seats on a bus, perhaps it would be better to think in terms of connecting cells to form an organism that will survive for decades and not decay by rust over decades.

Let’s parse Freud:

One cell helps to preserve the life of the others… When hiring you cannot just think of the hard-skills the person has, their ability to do the job, but also their soft-skills, their ability to help others. Just as one cell helps to preserve the life of others, one employee helps to preserve the careers of others. And by so doing, the company is strengthened and survives. That said,

and the cell-community can go on living even if single cells have to perish. So, if someone has to be fired, resigns or for any reason leaves, the company is strong enough that their loss will not be seriously detrimental to it. Like Freud’s “cell-community,” it will “go on living.”

Many companies rightly take out life insurance policies on their most important employees. If it’s their salesperson who brings in the majority of their business, the policy will give them some breathing room until they find a replacement. But if the person is not a revenue generator, it won’t help all that much. Money can replace money, it cannot replace skills or knowledge. Which brings us to…

We have already heard that also conjugation, the temporary mingling of two unicellular entities, has a preservative and rejuvenating effect on both. So, it all comes down to hiring people who can work together for the common good, which, for present purposes, we can define as preserving and rejuvenating peers. Which means that not only do employees have to work together, they have to be preserved and rejuvenated meaning that the employer has to care for their professional development, keep them motivated and challenged. If not, the organism dies which, in business terms, means selling before you want to, shutting down, or filing for bankruptcy.

So hire to build a living organism, not to fill seats on a bus.

Common Mistakes Speakers Make

For over three years I have been a professional speech writer. I started off using the freelancing site Fiverr, but departed as their rules were simply not worth the bother. (The final straw was when, a month and a half after I had submitted a speech and their system marked the order closed, they informed me that the buyer had reported that I had delivered the speech late. That was incorrect and I proved it with screen shots. They refused to acknowledge that I had submitted the order on time and threatened to dock money from my account. As I had already withdrawn all the money from my Fiverr account, the only thing they could do would have been to remove money from my bank account. I informed them, in no uncertain terms, that if they did that, I would file criminal complaints against them with the authorities. Since the buyer’s claim was ridiculous, and he is a police officer, I demanded that they confirm that he had been notified that his account, which I believe to be the case, had been hacked, and inform me that they had done so. They refused and I closed my account.)

During my time with Fiverr I wrote over well over 200 speeches. Some people asked me to write their speech, providing little direction. Others wanted their speeches edited. Most of those had to be rewritten because of the following errors:

1) Don’t forget your audience. You may have things you would like to tell the world, but the world may not be interested. Too much information can be as bad as too little. I am reminded of two clients: The first, a rape victim, wanted to share details of the attack which no one wants to hear. She wanted, and probably needed, to vent. But that’s why there are mental health professionals. When giving a TED talk about overcoming personal tragedy, you say what the tragedy was, rape, and then how you overcame it.

At the other end of the spectrum was the speech I wrote for a product launch. The speech I was sent to edit merely said what the widget did, what it cost, and how to order it. Hardly what an audience wants to hear. So we added a couple of case studies about how the widget had already helped customers and how, like WD-40, customers discovered surprising ways to use the product that the manufacturer had not realized.

2) Don’t use PowerPoint unless your audience has to see something to understand what you are talking about. Most people don’t remember the slides. I know of presenters who literally spent weeks preparing graphs and flow charts which no human being could possibly follow. The only time I use PowerPoint is if I need to show my audience something, for example, the LinkedIn page where you eliminate the option of showing viewers of your profile similar profiles viewed by people who viewed your profile. After all, they are your competition, so why promote them?

PowerPoint is great if you want to remember what it is that you want to say. In that case, each slide should have no more than six to 10 words. Don’t read them! No one wants to hear your read. Talk about the significance of the words.

Remember, you want your audience to listen to you, not to be distracted by slides with long quotes, funny graphics, or complicated charts with writing so small they cannot be read.

3) If you are no good telling jokes, don’t tell jokes. And if you are speaking to an international audience, don’t use any humor. Humor can be dangerous. What you find funny someone else, even from your own country, may find offensive. So, don’t use humor.

4) Start with a meaningful story. Parables are great! Personal experiences are better. Just make sure to tie the story to the presentation. Thank the people who need to be thanked, then tell the audience what you are going to do and then do it! When you have finished the speech, connect it back to the story. You have to go full circle, so to speak.

5) Finally, end with a call to action. There has to be a point to the speech. You have to want your audience to do something. Tell them what to do. But don’t turn the speech into a commercial for your products or services. That’s it a huge turnoff. You will lose your audience. This is even true for a product launch. It’s a little harder in that case not to make it sound like a commercial but a professional speech writer knows how to do it. If you prove that you are the professional in your sector, the sale will take care of itself.

Follow these five rules and your speeches should be impactful and effective.

Be Afraid. Be Very Afraid!

It’s 4:30 PM on a Friday. (Bad news always comes late afternoon on a Friday or holiday eve!) The Chief Technology Officer’s phone rings. It’s Tony. Tony has had a bad week. On Monday he was informed that someone had filed a harassment complaint against him. His supervisor, who informed him of the development, explained that Federal law and HR policy require him to avoid common work areas. He has to stay in his office. He, the supervisor, hopes to be able to provide details by the end of the week, Monday at the latest. The supervisory calls him at Noon, apologizes and says he will have to hold on until Monday. Tony informs the CTO:

“I just got what I thought was an email from the Acme Company (not a real name!) and, since I was expecting to receive a bid from them, I clicked on the attachment. I have been so stressed out about this harassment businesses that I did not realize that the email was from a .co and not a .com address. I am pretty sure it was a phishing email. I turned off my computer, followed the protocols, and am now calling you.”

Now this could be as innocent and understandable as presented. Or it could have been retaliation for the way the harassment charge was being handled. But Tony, in his defense, would say, “If I wanted to retaliate, after clicking on the link, I would have gone to the Men’s Room, waited until I packed my bag, and then shut off of the computer and never would have reported the incident. That would have given the hackers plenty to time to do whatever they wanted to do and this may not have been discovered for months.” Also a perfectly logical response.

Employees leaving under less than optimal conditions are threats to a company. Even an employee who seems to be leaving under optimal conditions could be a threat. You can never tell. So what’s an employer to do?

Before you fire someone, deny them access to your network. When you punish someone, limit their access to your network to only the areas that they need to do their work (which could be a good policy in any event!). It should be the same policy for someone who announces their resignation.

As has been well recorded, small businesses, subject to a cyber attack, can lose hundreds of thousands of dollars and the majority go out of business within six months. It’s not worth the risk to have a disgruntled, angry, or hurt employee having access to your computer network and corporate data. At a minimum, you must monitor everything your employees do on their computers, especially those who may be holding a grudge along with a mouse. It is not an invasion of their privacy; it’s protecting yours! And, it should go without saying, you have to have security protocols, policies and procedures, in place to protect your computers and network from malicious activity.

And it ain’t much better for job seekers.

You apply for a job on a job board such as Indeed, Zip Recruiter, Monster, or even LinkedIn (assuming, of course, that they have the best possible cybersecurity available) where you announce for all the world to see that you are “Open to Work” or “Looking for New Opportunities.” If you include your email address on the resume you upload to the sites, or on your LinkedIn contact information, everyone knows how to reach you…including the bad guys.

So they, the bad guys, see that you are (a) an accountant, (b) looking for work and (c) they know where you live. So they fake an email from a prominent company in your area. Or, they pretend to be with a recruiting firm. In either case, they compliment you, build up your ego, and attach a job description. You click on the job description and now you are the victim of a cyber attack.

Usually, the goal of a cyber attack is to get data and hold it hostage, or to gain access to a richer target through the computer of, let’s say, a smaller fish in the ocean that is the Internet. Yes, they can steal your money or your identity but, no offense intended, you’re not really worth the bother. But now they know that you are, I shall be diplomatic, unsophisticated enough to click on a link without checking the email address from which it came. And you are none the wiser. Eventually, you get a new job and post it on your LinkedIn profile. So the bad guys figure out your new corporate email, send you a message and, once again, you click on their attachment. Oops!

Or, I may be wrong. They make it a ransomware attack and freeze your computer and hijack all your data, and threaten to send embarrassing emails to all your contacts, including all of the employers to whom you have sent your resume. But, being the nice bad guys that they are, they’ll return everything to you for only $250. You pay. It’s worth it. They do it to a few thousands of people, and they have a very nice pay day.

The good news is that you can avoid all of this. First, remove your resume from all the job sites, along with any indication on LinkedIn that you are looking for a new job, once you have the new job. But, in the meantime, start using something called “Multifactor Authentication” or “2-Factor Authentication.” What that means is that you will receive a text message with a code whenever someone tries to send an email from your account. You can also purchase a security system from your email provider that will protect you if you click on that which should not be clicked! It takes very little time to setup, and doesn’t cost enough to think about.

Bottom line, whether an employer or job seeker, hope for the best but prepare for the worst. And when it comes to a cyber attack, the worst is really bad.

I don’t believe I have ever recommended a service provider before, but if you need help securing your network or email, I recommend contacting Peter Fidlerfor whom I have provided recruiting services in the past, or Bob Michie, with whom I am a member of a New Jersey professional networking group.

Think of Your Job Search as a Game

There are countless definitions of “game theory.” The one thing they all have in common is that they give the reader a headache. So I am going to be bold and propose my own definition: Game theory is a tool to help describe and forecast the result(s) of interactions between people. In other words, you pretend a real situation is just a game which you play to explain what has happened, or to forecast what may happen, by considering possible human interactions. It’s a brain teaser something akin to an Einstein thought experiment.

In university I studied game theory. Our focus, since I was studying International Relations, was primarily on two games: Zero Sum and Prisoner’s Dilemma.

Zero Sum is simple: You win, I lose. There is no in-between. Whatever is to your benefit is to my detriment. For a job search, that would mean I get the job offer (and accept it) and you don’t. Not exactly a mind-boggling insight.

Then there’s Prisoner’s Dilemma. This one is more complicated:

Two people are arrested for a crime. The Police put them in separate rooms. They cannot communicate with each other. Before they did whatever it was that they did, they agreed not to talk if arrested. But now they have a problem:

Whoever talks first and incriminates the other will go free and the other will be sent up the river for a long time. But, if neither talks, neither will be prosecuted. If they both talk, they will get less time in the “Big House,” then if only one talks. So what should they do? According to game theory, their best move would be for both of them to talk. That way, they can minimize their punishment. (If you look up “Prisoner’s Dilemma” you will find subtle differences in the explanations, but the above is pretty close to the consensus.)

Thinking about this, I could not figure out how it could be relevant for conducting a successful job search. I recently had a long chat with a potential career counseling client, and I happened to say, and this is accurate, that “a job search is a numbers game.” After we hung up, the word “game” stuck with me and I thought about game theory. Was there a way, I asked myself, to use game theory to improve one’s chances of getting a job? I did not know. But just because I could not figure it out did not mean someone else hadn’t.

It was then that I discovered Messrs. Bennett and Miles’s book, Your Career Game: How Game Theory Can Help You Achieve Your Professional Goals, which I highly recommend. (The page numbers refer to the eBook edition.) That said, the focus of their book is on having a successful career, not on conducting a successful job search. But, the two are not totally divorced from each other. They are opposite sides of the same coin.

Using game theory to advance your career is relatively easy as you can identify your competitors (basically, your colleagues). The same is not true for a job search. You don’t know your competition. It may be an internal candidate, a friend of someone at the company, or an external candidate like yourself. And then there are the countless decision makers! You just don’t know. And not knowing is what makes the job search “game” so difficult to play.

Bennett and Miles remind us (p. 3) of two important insights: General Eisenhower believed that plans were useless but planning was essential. And Samuel Goldwyn was of the opinion that the harder he worked the luckier he was.

Both comments are relevant to the job search game. First, you have to be able to think on your feet. (As a matter of fact, the authors put “agility” at the top of their list of necessary qualities to have a successful career.) You never know what is going to happen in a job search, especially in an interview. You can’t plan the entire process. (As Field Marshall Moltke famously said, “No plan survives first contact with the enemy.”) So you have to be ready to make the right move at a moment’s notice. (“Agility.”) Unlike, for example, chess, where you know your opponent and what they can do with each piece on the board just not what they will actually do, in a job search you do not know your opponent or what move they will make. There are no certainties in the job search game so you have to be ready for whatever move your opponent makes. What makes this more difficult, except when the “opponent” in an interviewer, is that you actually do not know everything that is happening. In fact, since you only know what you are doing and what you are being told (which may be honest or deception) you really know very little, if anything, of importance. The only good thing is that things become somewhat clearer when you reach the end of the game. Then, you may be able to plan.

Like Mr. Goldwyn said, if you work hard you can get lucky. Researching the company, and, most importantly the interviewers, may give you some insights into how they may act. Perhaps they have written or responded to posts on LinkedIn. Reading their writings you may be able to learn their thought processes. Reading their LinkedIn profiles can give you an idea of how they prioritize and organize their thoughts. Seeing who has most recently been hired by the company may give you an indication of what type of people they want.

In any event, Bennett and Miles are correct when they write (p. 7) that “one individual’s best move is often dependent on the anticipated moves of other players.” The “other players,” in our case, are the interviewers, decision makers (hiring managers, supervisors, owners) and, other candidates. Because you are dependent on them, you must know as much about them as possible.

One other point the authors make which is very valuable for a successful job search, is that “Making predictable moves in a multiplayer game is rarely a winning game strategy” (p.8). You have to be able to set yourself apart from the competition. The “unpredictable” move that I recommend is asking surprising questions. For example, as I have previously written, perhaps the best question you can ask an interviewer is, “If I get this job, how will I be able to make your life easier?”

To be perfectly honest, the reason I liked that question was because I saw it as the focus of the subsequent thank-you letter that my career counseling clients send to interviewers. But, within the context of game theory, there is a much more important reason for asking the question.

One way to “win” a “multi-player” game, like a job search, is to form partnerships. By asking the question, you imply that if they hire you, you will be working on their behalf, helping them to achieve their goals. (This is an exceptionally good strategy in the case of an older candidate being interviewed by someone who is worried the boss will decide to replace them with the candidate!)

Thinking of a job search as a game will help you focus on the bad and the good. The “bad” comes first because there are more bad aspects to the game than there are good: There are no set rules, you do not know everything about the players (or even who all the players are) and you know nothing about the competition. But the “good” is that you can prepare to differentiate yourself from the competition (even though you really don’t know what they may do) by having great questions to ask and knowing how to answer the questions you will be asked in a unique way.

Bottom line: Thinking about a job search as a multi-player game, and strategizing accordingly, could be the key to getting a job offer. Literally sitting down, closing your eyes, and picturing your job search as a board game, may help you to think in new ways. Simplifying a complex situation may, in the end, be what game theory is all about and the key to your getting that job offer!

When Hiring, Job Searching and Communicating You Need a Soft Landing

The following is based on a presentation I made to the PRO-G Networking Group in Parsippany, New Jersey.

PILOTS ARE NOT THE ONLY ONES WHO NEED A SOFT LANDING!

Hiring, job search, and communications all share one thing in common: If you mess up it could cost you dearly. A bad hire can be destructive to a company. A bad interview can be devastating to a job candidate. And amateurish communications, whether verbal or in writing, can be damaging to the communicator. So how can you increase the odds of success – a soft landing – and decrease the odds of embarrassment – an ugly crash? Let’s consider each separately.

Hiring

If you are using a recruiter, in-house or external, and they tell you they have never made a mistake, they are either new to the business or lying through their teeth. We all make mistakes. It’s called being human. The key is to know how to minimize those errors and increase the odds that the candidate, if hired, will remain on the job for a long time.

The first thing is to conduct a reference check. You want to speak to the reference. They may say the right thing but their tone of voice may send a contradictory message, and that’s the message that’s important! Letters of reference are worthless. They could be forged. Or, they could have been handed to the person simply to get them to vacate the premises. And, for the record, LinkedIn references are meaningless. The candidate has complete control over their profile and can reject any reference they do not like. Moreover, and this has happened to me, many people offer to write positive references in exchange for receiving one. And if that does not convince you, one person told me that he had the most references of anyone on LinkedIn. So I printed out the first page of references, told him to send me the phone numbers of the first ten, that I would choose three, notify him in advance before I called them and…I never heard from him again!

You want to conduct a reference check because the most important thing for a successful hire is to make certain the person will be a good fit with your corporate culture. You can only find that out by talking with people who have worked with them in the past. More on culture in a moment.

The opposite side of the reference check coin is the background check. Some people believe that a background check should be conducted on all hires. I don’t argue the point. Just make sure (and I believe the law requires it) that you inform them of the results so they can dispute anything negative. (I had one candidate whose background check came back stating that there was an outstanding bench warrant against him for a crime he had committed when he was four-years-old! The court officer had made a mistake when recording the Social Security number…!) In any event, a background check should be conducted for any hire who will come into contact with money, financial data, or any confidential information.

The way that I provide my clients with a soft landing, the only way I know, is to offer a six-month guarantee that if for any reason a placement does not work out, I will find a replacement at no charge. If the recruiter does not offer a guarantee, or a short one, weeks not months, that tells you everything you need to know about them.

The reason my guarantee is so long is because I believe in my process. Which brings me back to culture. Culture is not free lunches, being able to take a vacation whenever you want, or showing up for work at your pleasure. Those are all fads. True, they speak to a certain mentality, but not culture. For me, and I am stealing from Tolstoy, culture is how you think. If you will, it is your decision making processes. And the most important part of that process is providing a safe environment where employees can disagree with their supervisors and the boss without fear of retaliation. If a person wants to hire someone who will agree with them all the time, I advise saving money and simply buying a mirror.

The way the employer reaches decisions informs their culture. The same is true for candidates which brings me to my next topic: Career Counseling or, for present purposes, the Hiring Process. (Job seekers should note that the following is from the employer’s perspective which is important as it never hurts to think like an employer when you are looking for employment!)

The Hiring Process

Ask for a cover letter. If all you receive is a form letter, move on to the next candidate. If they could not be bothered writing a unique letter for you, don’t waste your time with them. If they forget to send a cover letter, you know they can’t follow simple instructions. If they can’t follow simple instructions, they won’t be able to follow the complicated instructions involved in the job for which they applied, so, again, move on to the next candidate. And if they do send a cover letter, and they can’t write a proper business letter, you don’t want them.

Obviously, ask for a resume. But before you read the resume, look at it. It will tell you everything you need to know about how the applicant organizes their thoughts and how they prioritize. How they market themselves will be the best indication of how they will market you. Everyone is involved with marketing and selling. If they cannot market and sell themselves to your satisfaction, move on.

Also, check to see if they understand the latest technology, Applicant Tracking Systems. Many companies simply scan resumes into their data base without a human seeing them. The bad systems, and you always have to assume the worse, have difficulty “reading” anything in headers or footers, printing on a colored background (black background/white font), and get confused by hyperlinks (for example, for email addresses and LinkedIn profiles). It should not disqualify a candidate, just raise something to be pursued in the actual interview.

In the interview, although this should have been done by the recruiter, confirm that they are qualified for the job. Then ask what I call personality questions.

The first “question” is not a question but an opportunity: Tell us about yourself. If all they do is summarize their resume, then they do not recognize and do not know how to take advantage of a golden opportunity. So why would you want them?

Next, ask them what is the accomplishment of which they are most proud. Then, ask them why they did what they did. How did they reach the decision to do things one way and not another? What you are really doing is checking to see if they can handle criticism, are open to other options, are willing to learn, and if they can think on their feet. Now you will know if they are a cultural fit. Their decision making process must complement yours. Period.

Since you are hiring a complete person, and not just a salesperson, marketer, controller, CIO, or whatever, ask them about what they are curious. You may learn a lot from their answer. Also, ask them for examples of how they have dealt with adversity. The advantage will be to the older, more experienced, candidates, but it’s an important thing to know even for someone with limited experience.

During the interview, pay attention to their body language. Can they read the room? Do they know when they are doing well? Are they animated? Do they appear to be truly interested in the position? Sadly, because of all the Zoom conversations we have all been having, this is a lost art. But non-verbal communication is still important.

My two favorite questions are: How did you prepare for this interview? and What do you know about us (the interviewers) and the company? The answers will tell you everything you need to know about what they do to prepare for a meeting and how accurate are those preparations. If they can’t do it for a job interview, they can’t do it for a meeting with a client or a prospective client.

It’s all about presentation, which brings me to my third focus: professional communications.

Professional Writing Services

The first thing about communicating, whether in writing or verbally, is to know your audience. Your presentation must be relevant. With a written document, it is best to get right to the point. The fact is, people don’t like to read. And if the document is too long, that may indicate that the author can’t prioritize.

On the other hand, if you are making a speech, it is best to start with a story. Just make certain that at the end you connect your conclusions with the story. In any event, tell the audience what you are going to do and then do it. Don’t turn a speech into a commercial.

I can remember (being conned into) attending a presentation where the presenter said he was going to tell us how to double our sales within 30 days. He spoke in generalities and then, at the end, he told us that if we signed up for his services on the spot, he would only charge us $999.99 and he would provide us with the specifics to reach the goal! To the best of my recollection, everyone walked out disgruntled, to say the least.

That said, you do want to end your speech with a call to action. Tell the audience what they should do to justify the time they spent listening to you. Which reminds me, always keep in mind if you are writing to be read or writing to be heard. There is a huge difference.

If you follow this advice, I am confident that you will have a soft landing with your hiring, job search and communications processes.

The One Thing That May Get You the Job Offer

Curiosity may have killed the cat, but it might get you the job offer.

Years ago I attended a lecture at New York University by a former college president. She was having a really bad day. The first thing she said was that women were more philanthropic then men because of biology. (The consensus among the men was that the buffet was impressive so, even though there was probably more nonsense to come, it would be worth the wait. It was!)

The third thing she said (and that’s not a mistake on my part; the second thing will come next), was that human beings are the only animals that show empathy, sympathy for others, and care about family. Every hand went up. There were stories about pets – dogs, cats, even birds. Instead of admitting she was wrong and had to rethink her hypothesis, she dug herself in deeper. (Rule Number One: When you find yourself in a whole, stop digging!) She said that individual stories reflected the prejudices of the pet owners. They saw what they wanted to see. (That did not go over well…) Then someone mentioned elephants and noted he did not have a pet elephant at home. Neither did the woman who spoke about horses. But it was to no avail. Then I remembered I had a copy of National Geographic with me and had read an article on birds sacrificing for the family unit. I raised my hand, stood up and, without being called upon, I said I thought that two short paragraphs from the article would end the discussion. The speaker let me read and then said she wanted to move on. (We, the men, now joined by the women, wanted to move on to the buffet!)

But it was the second thing she said which stayed with me. The speaker informed us that what separates humans from other animals was that we human beings are the only creatures on the planet who are curious. I found that an ironic statement because she obviously was not curious enough to check her facts. (No one responded because of what came next!)

This was the first, and only, time I can remember no one having a question for a speaker at the end of their presentation and everyone standing up and heading for the food as the moderator thanked the speaker. So why did her “curiosity” statement stick with me?

Back then, when I was at NYU, I was a fundraiser. The topic of the presentation was supposed to be “Women and Philanthropy,” an extremely important topic at the time as it was estimated that trillions of dollars were going to be bequeathed to women in the coming years. I, if you will, was curious and wanted some insight into how to approach elderly women, widows, to ask for donations without sounding like a fool, or worse. Needless to say, from that perspective, it was a wasted evening.

But the issue of curiosity always interested me. Why is it that we humans have always looked to the heavens and asked questions about those flickering lights in the sky? Why do we want to know why the sky is blue? Why do we want to know why men have nipples? Why… You get the idea. (And for the record, why do dogs literally stick their noses where they do not belong?) The answer is curiosity.

Perhaps the best question an interviewer can ask a job candidate is, What are you curious about? And if they don’t ask the question, perhaps the best thing a candidate can do, when given the opportunity to tell the interviewer(s) about themselves, is to say, This is what makes me curious.

It does not have to have anything to do with the actual job. In fact, it might be better if it were totally divorced from the job as that will show that the candidate is a “complete” person. I, for example, am curious about how one molecule can be in two places at the same time in the realm of quantum mechanics. I am also curious about why otherwise intelligent people would become engaged without signing a prenuptial agreement.

Of course saying that you are curious about something is not enough. You also have to prove that you have tried to find the answer. For example, the two explanations for my molecular problem that I kind of, sort of, understand, is that it has something to do with gravity or it is a question of timing, when the molecule is observed. But I readily admit I am not intelligent enough to be able to explain either explanation or to know which, if either, is correct. But that’s perfectly alright. Admitting ignorance is a strength, not a weakness, and should help, not harm, a candidate in a job interview. The important thing is the search for the answer.

So my advice, for what it is worth, is to tell potential employers what makes you think. What grabs your attention. What makes you curious. And they may make you a job offer!

Oh, and as for the pre-nup question, it seems the reason is simply the person declining the pre-nup is focused on having a successful divorce, not marriage. (That one I could not Google; I had to ask!)