Your views on job-hunting

[Creepy-]

What are your views on the process of job-hunting?

What parts do you like, dislike, or abhor?

I'll start:

Putting together my resume was a bit of a chore, but eventually I came up with three different ones tailored for different types of positions. That way I can just pick one to send to whatever prospective employer [often tailoring it a little more to match the job description as closely as possible].

Cover letters aren't bad; I have a few different "skeleton" letters I've written, then I pick one and tailor it before sending it w the resume. It's time-consuming but kind of satisfying to make them as tailored as possible to get the attention of the person who will be reading it.

Rejection letters aren't a big deal to me; I just toss them away and forget about it.

Interviews are the good part, mostly because you feel like now there's a real chance at landing the job....

[ragnar]

What parts do you like, dislike, or abhor?

I hate every aspect of it.

[FDG]

I really dislike it, but fortunately so far I've almost always been asked for positions, and the only one I applied for I have been hired. So, I suppose that even if I dislike it I have some of what it takes. I know how to groom, how to create a good curriculum, bla bla, but I find it tedious and improductive. I especially hate business suits, if I were ever to wear one every day, I would quickly opt for suicide.

[Expat]

I have no difficulty with writing resumes, cover letters, etc.

I deeply dislike the whole process of job interviews, etc., especially those in companies with very large and structured HR departments with their own views of the hiring process (including MBTI and similar tests - my original reason for getting into MBTI). If I'm ever asked again in a hiring process to participate in an idiotic role-playing exercise, I will feel tempted to just leave.

For my most recent jobs, in the last 9 years, I was approached by headhunters; but often that happened while I was already applying for jobs elsewhere. I lost count of how many interviews I've been to; and I dislike the whole thing.

[Wynch]

I hate every aspect of it.

Yup. Though I prefer the interview over all other parts of it simply because I have the opportunity to actually sell myself.

[Creepy-]

I have no difficulty with writing resumes, cover letters, etc.

I deeply dislike the whole process of job interviews, etc., especially those in companies with very large and structured HR departments with their own views of the hiring process (including MBTI and similar tests - my original reason for getting into MBTI). If I'm ever asked again in a hiring process to participate in an idiotic role-playing exercise, I will feel tempted to just leave.

Role-playing exercises? That does sound stupid... what kinds of things did they make you do? Act out handling disputes?

I haven't been asked to take any MBTI tests either [having been to only a few interviews in my life], but I would think people bs on them... don't they?

[Expat]

Role-playing exercises? That sounds stupid... what kinds of things did they make you do? Act out handling disputes?

That was in Mars, the chocolate manufacturer. Essentially they assembled together people that were applying for different positions. The role-playing exercise was this: each person received a written description of a fictitious employee. Then you had to pretend that you are a board of directors, and had to make the case for "your employee" getting a bonus. The catch was that there was only a limited amount of money.

I haven't been asked to take any MBTI tests either [having been to only a few interviews in my life], but I would think people bs on them... don't they?

I suppose they think the tests are so cleverly made as to see through attempts at bs. *shrugs*

[marooned]

I really don't like any of it. Interviews are nightmares to me. And I don't like putting together resumes and cover letters, because I know that every employer will have some idea of "the right way" to do it and it can feel like picking a needle from a haystack on which way that is. Cover letters are extremely awkward to me. Anyway it's a tedious, time-consuming, hellish process for the most part.

Anyway, from my pov, interviewing is about being fake for half an hour, and I just can't stand it, that one is required to act a certain way. Because I want to be genuine and I can't seem to reconcile how you're "supposed to act" with being genuine. And oddly the only interviews I've gotten through and was hired from were the ones where I was being genuine because the person interviewing me set a genuine tone where I could just be myself, or where the interview just feels like meeting someone and gaining information. I remember my second job in high school, the person interviewing hardly asked me to say anything at all but led me around everywhere showing me things, and then I would ask questions when they came up and listen to what she had to say about things.

Also the questions they ask in interviews are these questions where I just have this feeling of not knowing how to answer them exactly (as though they are fluff questions), and being torn between that and the impressions of how I think they want them answered. But when I took a brief interviewing class, it was interesting how they translated those questions into "what they really mean" and "what they are really looking for" thereby paving a way to answer them all without saying anything personal, which to me actually creates a pathway to being genuine in a non-genuine environment, by treating it as a more technical exercise.

Professional attire is also something that really stresses me out.

[Creepy-]

I really don't like any of it. Interviews are nightmares to me. And I don't like putting together resumes and cover letters, because I know that every employer will have some idea of "the right way" to do it and it can feel like picking a needle from a haystack on which way that is. Cover letters are extremely awkward to me. Anyway it's a tedious, time-consuming, hellish process for the most part.

Anyway, from my pov, interviewing is about being fake for half an hour, and I just can't stand it, that one is required to act a certain way. Because I want to be genuine and I can't seem to reconcile how you're "supposed to act" with being genuine. And oddly the only interviews I've gotten through and was hired from were the ones where I was being genuine because the person interviewing me set a genuine tone where I could just be myself, or where the interview just feels like meeting someone and gaining information.

Interesting. I don't think going to interviews means being fake. It might mean putting your most professional self forward, but that should still be a reflection of the real you. And you got the jobs at the places where you were being genuine, so that's a good sign that realness is rewarded, right? The part in bold is what interviews feel like to me: meeting someone new and gathering information. After all, you're evaluating them while they're evaluating you; it goes both ways.

Also the questions they ask in interviews are these questions where I just have this feeling of not knowing how to answer them exactly (as though they are fluff questions), and being torn between that and the impressions of how I think they want them answered. But when I took a brief interviewing class, it was interesting how they translated those questions into "what they really mean" and "what they are really looking for" thereby paving a way to answer them all without saying anything personal, which to me actually creates a pathway to being genuine in a non-genuine environment, by treating it as a more technical exercise.

That's interesting too. I've never taken an interviewing class [didn't know they existed!] but I interviewed/evaluated applicants where I used to work, and I always avoided asking those innane questions... I think it's much better when the interview is more like a getting to know you conversation, rather than a q & a session full of lame or trick questions [lol a friend of mine once had to answer the question, "If you were a crayon, what color would you be?"]. That said, I don't really mind too much when they ask me those questions; I usually know what they're getting at, I think.

[Mea]

hate interviews.

[The Exception]

I hate every aspect of it.

I'm with you! I hate the whole process of self-promotion. It just seems unnatural to me. Having an PoLR makes it all the worse. However, if I don't self-promote, I don't stand a chance of landing a decent job, so I have to push myself to do it.

I must be doing good on the resume and cover letter aspect because I get alot of interviews. However, the interviews I've had have rarely led to job offers. I know I don't think well on my feet. Therefore I'll spend alot of time before the interview reading up on the company and thinking about how I want to respond to possible questions that may arise. While I successfully anticipate many of the questions, there are always one or two that are totally unexpected and I feel unconfident in my response. Usually these are the questions such as, what would you do in X type of scenario- one that I would have never have thought to prepare for.

I have alot of enthusiasm for the positions I apply for but because of my type, I keep most of it to myself, so I probably come across as being more indifferent to the position even though I know I really want it badly. I should probably show some more outward enthusiasm but I always worry about looking insincere.

Third, I don't always make the best eye contact. I'm working on it. When I have requested feedback on interviews for jobs that I did not get, this has come up a few times. I don't think its the real reason why I didn't get a job but it certainly hasn't helped.

I think extraverts, and especially those with strong have a much easier time with interviews.

I sometimes feel its deeply unfair that some people who walk into interviews always seem to get the job and do next to nothing to prepare for it. They aren't all that smart, they aren't very hard working, and they're not even all that nice but they get the job because they can charm the socks off of the interviewer.

Meanwhile, other very smart, nice, and hardworking people who happen to interview poorly have to worry about paying off their rent and being able to afford health insurance.

Okay, I'll get off my soapbox now.

[strrrng]

Interesting. I don't think going to interviews means being fake. It might mean putting your most professional self forward, but that should still be a reflection of the real you.

But to what degree can it be? -- especially if the real "you" is far deviating from that which is expected on a professional level. Plus, you have to take into account what constitutes professional (and it probably varies slightly, depending on the job). So, you have a standard [professional] and a variable [self], where the difference in the standard could mean the genuine expression of the self! (i.e. if who you are meshes well with whatever professional etiquette established in a job). Or, with more amorphous individuals, you have -failed interviews- because they feel restricted or annoyed by the professional decorum, and can't mold themselves to it.

A reflection of whah?

And you got the jobs at the places where you were being genuine, so that's a good sign that realness is rewarded, right?

It means she got lucky that her genuine self was appreciated in a few, specific places. That doesn't mean those people appreciate genuineness -- they could have thought she was professional!


I don't really like this stuff, personally. I'm not too good with a shitload of technical information, and dislike how drawn out the process is. Luckily, I just got this part-time job as a freelance writer for fitness/martial arts (they call it "examiner") through this website.

[marooned]

Interesting. I don't think going to interviews means being fake. It might mean putting your most professional self forward, but that should still be a reflection of the real you. And you got the jobs at the places where you were being genuine, so that's a good sign that realness is rewarded, right? The part in bold is what interviews feel like to me: meeting someone new and gathering information. After all, you're evaluating them while they're evaluating you; it goes both ways.

That's interesting too. I've never taken an interviewing class [didn't know they existed!] but I interviewed/evaluated applicants where I used to work, and I always avoided asking those innane questions... I think it's much better when the interview is more like a getting to know you conversation, rather than a q & a session full of lame or trick questions [lol a friend of mine once had to answer the question, "If you were a crayon, what color would you be?"]. That said, I don't really mind too much when they ask me those questions; I usually know what they're getting at, I think.

I don't really know how to explain it. It's this feeling when you walk into the interview that everything is a presentation. The person taking to you is a presentation, and it seems to (from my pov) set everything to be required to fall into this style of presentation. So then, in the moment, I seem to end up "going along with it" because I don't know how to change it or how to "cut through the crap" (as I see it) so that things are "real" again (as I see it). If I don't feel this around me; no presentation, everyone is just being as they are, then I am just how I am. But when I feel that everyone else is wearing different faces this seems to lead to this feeling of imposition that now I am "supposed to" also wear a face, particularly the face that reacts correctly to their faces, and this is all too complicated. And so, I seem to end up defaulting to the weak face/presentations I have cultivated from previous similar experiences, which have nothing to do with who I am really, but more with trying to get through the "face wearing" exercise, which I don't seem to succeed in doing... So that is an important point: that I should just be how I am naturally anyway. But that would reveal that I don't wear the proper faces, which I like to hide, and pretend I can wear them and then get out of having to later. It really does speak to internal confusions between social expectations of presentation and self-presentation. And when others seem to be wearing different presentations that match the way you "should" be presenting yourself then I can't see through to who they actually are and don't feel able to communicate with them as a real person because I don't feel that they are real people. And afterwards I'll just feel psychically drained, and then need to be alone for hours where I don't feel I have to act in any way at all. Questions like "which color of crayon are you?" and the sort of tone I can imagine that presented in just feels stifling because my natural response to that kind of question would probably be along the lines of a weird look and a sort of "um... ?" (which isn't a "good", "positive", "enthusiastic" attitude/response)

This isn't to say I don't have different ways of presenting myself, because I do, it's more that I don't understand how to get through interview situations where I can't see the other person because they're obscuring things (from my pov).

[The Exception]

What do they VI as?

[iAnnAu]

I really like Loki's posts in this thread. I get caught up on how I'm supposed to act, and it becomes a Catch-22 because the more I think about it, the more steps removed I feel from the "real" me even if I end up doing what I would have done anyway. Job interviews seem to create this mental tail-chasing in me to an extreme degree.

The worst part about it is that I'd rather just get to work. Why don't they just sit me down and let me show them how quickly I can pick up the specifics - not to mention just how fast and accurately I do the work? And I guess one reason is the whole "how the applicant will fit in" issue. But I just want a decent job; I'm not asking to buy into some ideology - especially a corporate one. I can show loyalty to an employer if I think they deserve it, so why can't both parties let each of their performances speak for themselves?

I'm in a quandary right now with my current employer, and I'm sorely tempted to get the fuck out. And yet, even though ...

(long, long, offtopic rant about my job redacted)

... I just don't want to pound the pavement right now, because I hate quite so much the whole way my society makes me sell myself to prospective employers. Going to interviews drains my energy more than going for a four-mile run does.

[marooned]

I get caught up on how I'm supposed to act, and it becomes a Catch-22 because the more I think about it, the more steps removed I feel from the "real" me even if I end up doing what I would have done anyway. Job interviews seem to create this mental tail-chasing in me to an extreme degree.

The worst part about it is that I'd rather just get to work. Why don't they just sit me down and let me show them how quickly I can pick up the specifics - not to mention just how fast and accurately I do the work? And I guess one reason is the whole "how the applicant will fit in" issue. But I just want a decent job; I'm not asking to buy into some ideology - especially a corporate one. I can show loyalty to an employer if I think they deserve it, so why can't both parties let each of their performances speak for themselves?

This is similar to how I feel about it, especially the Catch 22 part.

---

I mean I do agree with what BnD was saying regarding corporate ideologies: that if one doesn't agree with the philosophy/ideology then it's probably not going to go very well. I guess I seem to not like the entire idea of pushing a corporate ideology in general, where each person who works there it transformed into the appropriate corporate clone, their own individuality sapped for the duration of their time there. Some masterful people can keep their identity intact while simultaneously looking like a standard issue "Office Max employee" or whatever. But usually, and places like Office Max are a good example, when I go into those places, I often feel that all the employees have somehow been sterilized. They might as well be androids because they all act similarly. This kind of thing, I think only furthers the tendency of people to refer to people working at these places as the place itself: e.g. "I went to Office Max and asked if they had X and they were extremely unhelpful" or going into a store and asking "do you guys have X?". It's treating each employee as though s/he *is* the coorporation itself, as though it is one big collective, and they are there to be mascots, or figureheads, or to push the corporate "message". I do fundamentally disagree with this entire idea, and personally I would rather go into a store and encounter bitchy "customer service" people because then at least everything's 'normal' again and people are simply being as they are. Anyway, I can feel the same feeling walking into TJ-Max or something as I can walking into an interview... there's this imposed "something" that I feel I desperately want to get away from.

I do understand though that the "good fit" thing is probably important, although it sort of makes me cringe when people say things like "are you a team player?!" or "we're looking forward to you being part of our team!" because once again it's sapping at people's individuality where the identification with the "team" becomes more important than who they actually are (and this feels unreal to me). That said, obviously it would be foolish to hire someone that you can just tell is not going to get along with everyone to the extent that it will compromise both their performance and that of others. And obviously someone doing hiring isn't going to want to hire someone who they don't think they'll be able to tolerate working with.

I'm rather loyal at my current job, but I'm loyal to people, not to an organization. Although I also do not fundamentally disagree with what the "organization" is doing and naturally am interested furthering "its" aims (as I don't disagree with those aims, and I care about where it is going). But no one ever tried to get me to act a certain way here, or to treat me as though I am not a person but this place instead, or demand that I express or present myself in some way that is unnatural to me because that's how everyone "should" be presenting themselves in their view. And then I can just ignore the entire matter of my presentation at work and focus on my work and on my genuine thoughts and moods, which I what I much prefer. And actually if people are required to act "fake" then how is that really respecting their rights as a human being?

Anyway, I'm writing about this primarily because it's a mental snag.