Ask HN: Has anyone here gotten a good job via the traditional hiring system?
6 comments
I've found excellent jobs via the "Career" section of a company's website, via recruiters off LinkedIn, and via a combination of job post online combined with finding the recruiters information at the company and contacting them directly to apply.
My approach was very successful. Less than two months after graduating with my BS in Economics I landed a excellent paid internship ($40,000/yr) in Credit Risk Analysis at a large regional bank. Three months later I was promoted to Credit Risk Analyst and given a raise to $51,000/yr + all the nice bank benefits.
So yes, it can be done. My approach included a healthy dose of determination, precision targeting of applications to recruiters and hiring managers, personalization of my application package to the job post, and being a well-prepared candidate who presents well. Apply for jobs you're actually interested, address what they're looking for in your cover-letter and resume, as much as possible get your application materials to hiring managers or recruiters directly, always dress and behave with class (wear a tailored suit to your interviews, shower, shave, and put your best foot forward), and never give up.
The problem is that most people adopt some of the worst job-hunting techniques imaginable. They write one resume and one cover-letter and then just send the combination out to every job they can think of. They bombard "Career" websites with derivative forgettable applications that may not have any apparent relation to the position advertised. Then should they get an interview, they may or may not show up, and may or may not put the time into presenting themselves in the best possible light. In short: many job seekers these days are super lazy (to put it very bluntly). They act entitled to a good job with a minimum of effort.
When I was interviewing I couldn't believe the other candidates I saw out there. They'd show up in ill-fitting ratty jeans, a wrinkled tie, with a three-week overgrowth of facial hair and grumpy demeanor. Just seeing them in the waiting area I thought there's no way I'd ever hire any of those people no matter what they had on their resume.
And sometimes interviewees wouldn't even show for their scheduled interview. When I worked at the bank, one candidate for a very high-paying position didn't bother to call and didn't bother to show the first time she scheduled an interview. Then she had the gall to call later, offer no reason for her no-show/no-call previously and reschedule another interview...which she also didn't show up for. Unbelievable.
In other words, if you are truly a "professional" and convey it in every way in your job hunt, you will find a "good job" one way or another--traditional hiring system or not. I hope this helps!
My approach was very successful. Less than two months after graduating with my BS in Economics I landed a excellent paid internship ($40,000/yr) in Credit Risk Analysis at a large regional bank. Three months later I was promoted to Credit Risk Analyst and given a raise to $51,000/yr + all the nice bank benefits.
So yes, it can be done. My approach included a healthy dose of determination, precision targeting of applications to recruiters and hiring managers, personalization of my application package to the job post, and being a well-prepared candidate who presents well. Apply for jobs you're actually interested, address what they're looking for in your cover-letter and resume, as much as possible get your application materials to hiring managers or recruiters directly, always dress and behave with class (wear a tailored suit to your interviews, shower, shave, and put your best foot forward), and never give up.
The problem is that most people adopt some of the worst job-hunting techniques imaginable. They write one resume and one cover-letter and then just send the combination out to every job they can think of. They bombard "Career" websites with derivative forgettable applications that may not have any apparent relation to the position advertised. Then should they get an interview, they may or may not show up, and may or may not put the time into presenting themselves in the best possible light. In short: many job seekers these days are super lazy (to put it very bluntly). They act entitled to a good job with a minimum of effort.
When I was interviewing I couldn't believe the other candidates I saw out there. They'd show up in ill-fitting ratty jeans, a wrinkled tie, with a three-week overgrowth of facial hair and grumpy demeanor. Just seeing them in the waiting area I thought there's no way I'd ever hire any of those people no matter what they had on their resume.
And sometimes interviewees wouldn't even show for their scheduled interview. When I worked at the bank, one candidate for a very high-paying position didn't bother to call and didn't bother to show the first time she scheduled an interview. Then she had the gall to call later, offer no reason for her no-show/no-call previously and reschedule another interview...which she also didn't show up for. Unbelievable.
In other words, if you are truly a "professional" and convey it in every way in your job hunt, you will find a "good job" one way or another--traditional hiring system or not. I hope this helps!
It keeps the unqualified from swamping HR. That and they are good for minimal skill/experience jobs to dredge in the most number of applicants. It is for high risk hiring where the job is not cared about as much so if the employee is a bad apple, it isn't of high impact to the company.
I've never once found a decent job off of anything other than a personal referral or internal posting. This is for finding skilled individuals who already have industry experience and reputation. It isn't supporting the "Good ol' Boys" so much as a way to gauge potential employees based on those around them. Who you know is a reflection of your value because good people are valued by those around them.
Head hunting on the other hand... that's an entirely different animal. That one depends on the quality of the headhunter more than anything else.
I've never once found a decent job off of anything other than a personal referral or internal posting. This is for finding skilled individuals who already have industry experience and reputation. It isn't supporting the "Good ol' Boys" so much as a way to gauge potential employees based on those around them. Who you know is a reflection of your value because good people are valued by those around them.
Head hunting on the other hand... that's an entirely different animal. That one depends on the quality of the headhunter more than anything else.
I am currently working at a top consulting firm from LinkedIn pointing me towards the company "Jobs" portal for a position.
The best thing to do is properly convey your skills in a manner that is attractive to your target career. I wanted to work in technology integration consulting, so I did research on what is desired in those positions, looked back into my history, and made sure to highlight those skills in my resume.
The best advice I ever received in getting a good job was:
"Make getting a job your job. Wake up, take a shower, put on a suit, and sit down from 9-5 until you get a job."
The best thing to do is properly convey your skills in a manner that is attractive to your target career. I wanted to work in technology integration consulting, so I did research on what is desired in those positions, looked back into my history, and made sure to highlight those skills in my resume.
The best advice I ever received in getting a good job was:
"Make getting a job your job. Wake up, take a shower, put on a suit, and sit down from 9-5 until you get a job."
Doesn't really work for the majority of job seekers. Basically here is where technology has gone to the point of hindering job search. Computers dont hire people. People hire people. Making easy to send a resume to a recruiter just overwhelms the recruiter and doesn't help you get ahead.
This blog makes some good points - And yes, using your network will be infinitely more effective than job searching at CL, jobs pages, etc...
http://blog.bluechipexec.com/
This blog makes some good points - And yes, using your network will be infinitely more effective than job searching at CL, jobs pages, etc...
http://blog.bluechipexec.com/
I haven't gotten job offers yet, but I got 3 on site job interviews at 3 big companies using the traditional hiring system.
However, I don't think it's unfair if you make use of your professional network. I'm pretty sure you spend a lot of time building strong professionals relationships at they have to pay off some way or another, so don't feel bad if you get an interview if one of your acquaintances help you to get your resumé noticed.
However, I don't think it's unfair if you make use of your professional network. I'm pretty sure you spend a lot of time building strong professionals relationships at they have to pay off some way or another, so don't feel bad if you get an interview if one of your acquaintances help you to get your resumé noticed.
It worked for me once (in 2006). I applied for a full time position at a major (Fortune 500) company directly through their jobs section of the website and it worked. I got a call from their corporate recruiter few days later. However, this job was for a very specific skillset that I had on my Resume and was probably a great match for them.
Personally, as one data point, I've never found a good job by this system. To be fair, I've been offered jobs but the jobs offered have been less than stellar. Often times, I'm told I'm highly unqualified by the staffing firm except for the most basic of jobs.
I'm curious, has anyone here found a good job via the traditional hiring system? If not, does anyone have a clue why so much resources is spent on this system? What does this system actually accomplish?
Asking jobs from acquaintances I've met throughout my life feels like supporting the "Good ol' Boys" and could be unfair to others who might be better than me but so far it's the one that worked best for me :(