Two jobs, one offer: but how do I get a job?

Jim, a salesman asks: I received a good offer for a company (job A) I interviewed with 6 weeks ago, but I have a 2nd interview with a company (job B) I'd really want to work for next week. Any advice on how to handle this situation? It seems foolish to turn down A, when I don't have job B yet, but B is a job I'd love with a great company. The two companies are unrelated and located far apart. Can I tactfully ask job A for more time to consider their offer while waiting on B? I got the offer from job A today, and they want to know soon. HELP!

In answer:
Congratulations Jim: well done!

Your PRIMARY objective is to preserve the offer you already have, so you need to diplomatically negotiate for more time with job A. Most organizations expect you to take a few days to consider an offer, and there's likely something that could be better in the package/contract so find a point to haggle over a bit: never accept the 1st offer because it's usually not their best - just a rule in negotiation.

I suggest that you call company B and explain your situation. Explain that you're not trying to pressure them, but you need to know how quickly they will be able to make a decision if you wait and interview with them. Stress that you're very interested in their position. ... You need to be pretty diplomatic. Don't make them feel that you're trying to pressure them to make a decision before they're ready to.

Then, call company A. Tell them that you're very appreciative of their offer and remain very interested in the position but that - as you explained at the interview - you have been interviewing for other positions. Tell them that you owe it to yourself and your family to see how it plays out, and that you'll let them know but need a one week extension over the date the offer letter states.

It's not unusual for employers to be told this by candidates. While it's possible, it's unlikely that they will have a second candidate waiting in the wings that they'll extend an offer to if you turn them down. Also, if they really want you, then they'll be a little patient, in the hopes that you'll eventually accept their position. ... There's a slight risk that they could tell you they have to know right away or the offer is withdrawn, but if they go that route, then that tells you something about the kind of people they are, doesn't it?

Good Luck!

What is the best answer when responding to salary requirements for a job?

Barbara asks: This is really puzzling to me as I know what I am worth, I know my work ethic and I know what I need to survive. It is a bit uncomfortable when applying for a position and they request salary requirement. I always put a large enough range stating I am willing to discuss the salary as it is negotiable yet, nothing happens. When asked during the interview what my present salary is, I don't like to say as I am asking more, $5-$10K more than I am making. I took close to $5K less at the job I am at now because I needed a job. Any suggestions on what to do?

In answer:
I just talked a very good friend through this one, so happy to help!

First step - set a minimum on a budget you know you can live off of. Don't apply for jobs where the package is less than that.

Secondly, you will be asked your currently salary at some point - so be honest with the recruiter, and at the point where the employer is considering a job offer ONLY IF THEY ASK! To no one else and no sooner. If your requirements are greater than your current salary, say why you are moving and why your requirements are greater.

Each job is worth X to each employer/market, and that salary range and some package details should be included in the advert - if it is not, ask the question before any form of formalised interview. Where you get a bland answer, don't go any further with the application - to make sure it meets your minimum. Also, undertake some research into similar jobs with different employers - get a feel for what the market price is, and hence know that:

(a) what your minimum is achievable
(b) what the employer is offering is reasonable - ie you are not under paid

In the interview, when asked the question, now simply say: "Well, it is above the minimum I require for my life style, and the stated range seems reasonable but low when compared to the market. I am looking for a whole package, and that from what has been stated to me seems that we can reach an agreement." And then stop! If they ask what the numbers are, just repeat their own advert or as stated in telephone call numbers back to them, and again says "...and that from what has been stated to me seems that we can reach an agreement." If they press again, say "Look, I think we can reach an agreement if the level is as stated, but I would have to review the whole offer that includes salary as part of a package in a written contract form before I could make a final decision."

This way you don't state a number, but are saying that you like them, and if they like you and make you an offer in their stated range, you would highly consider it. In others words, for the sake of saying a number you don't exclude yourself from an offer letter, and show willing but not soft.

This strategy allows for the inevitable "job description creep" in interview of "Oh, we didn't realise you had that skill, so may be we could use that/deploy it" which means you end up doing a bigger job for less pay. It could also mean you play one part of the package later against another - OK, not as much base but better OTE; a better car; more healthcare, etc.

Only you know what's the right salary and package for you, but there are good ways around getting job offers and possibly employed without falling into the pit of stating a number.

Good Luck!
.............................................
Ian,

You are an angel! I thank you so much for going through all you did to help me secure a good response. Please extend my sincere thanks to your friend, I appreciate all your help.

Regards,

Barbara

The Group Interview - Multiple Interviewers, One Candiate, One Room

Sabine asks: I'm wondering why some employers choose to do group interviews with candidates instead of 1-1's. Is it a matter of efficiency or is there another impetus for conducting an interview in this format? I recently had one where I sat with 3 interviewers at the same time, I wasn't expecting it - it didn't turn out be a problem for me but I could see how it could be a really intimidating experience. So just wondering if anyone had thoughts about why a company might be inclined to go this way - and what advice would you have for candidates walking into this situation.

In answer:
This type of interview is performed to exert pressure on the candidate, to put them into a situation that they were unlikely to anticipate and see how they perform. It also allows more than one pair of eyes to see a candidates capabilities - difficult for one interviewer to achieve wholly.

Essentially it's an old lawyer trick, the ol' wall of flesh. It's designed to intimidate or test the applicant's ability to deal with interviewer responses from different perspectives. It's a good technique to test the composure of an applicant, especially if they are going to have to work with a range of people crossing business, technical and management lines.

Employers like it because it breaks down the scripted response process that many candidates try to get to work from. It lets employers see the real person: flustered? frozen? relaxed? It implies the last person they want to employ is a candidate who cannot comprehend change and isn't able to think on their feet.

Most commonly employed in academic settings, they are also employed commercially when a post holder will report to a large number of stakeholders who will want to see how you fit into the department/team and what you bring with you. They also don't want to have to ask the same set of common questions over and over again, so it saves time for the interviewers and the candidate. With different interviewers involved in the interview process it is easier to ascertain the validity of the skills, team work attitude, competences, knowledge, experience and attitude of a prospective job applicant to fulfil satisfactorily the professional profile required for the open job position.

The panel is made up of three or more briefed/agendaised interviewers: A handles behavioral issues, B handles technical issues and C resolves the differences between the two and gives the deciding vote or opinion. Candidates should always recognize the chairperson or senior of the team and address him/her as the interviewer. Rest should not be ignored, but answered well. Ignoring the chairperson / senior person guarantees rejection.

My advice when faced with this is to remember that only one interviewer will be questioning you at one time, so direct your response to that person and ignore everyone else in the room. (If you get more than one interviewer asking you questions at the same time then that tells you something about the organisation.) Also, take your time to judge the character of each interviewer: what areas concern them in their questions?

Good Luck!

Why are candidates asked to "list main weaknesses"?

Jane asks: Why are candidates asked to "list main weaknesses"? The question itself is intimidating, instantly puts people on the defensive, and encourages people to lie. Has anybody ever revealed a serious weakness in response to the "weaknesses" question, that was hidden throughout the rest of the interview? It seems that asking people "What are you most proud of" gets more or less the same info - what people struggle with most is usually their weakness - but keeps the tone positive.

In answer:
The question is not meant to be intimidating or place the candidate on the offensive. The question is to assess how honest or self-aware the candidate is of their weeknesses or improvement needs. When asked this most people try to be genuine and it is the type of question that can make you think. Whatever the answer you will gain insight into how the person thinks and that can only be helpful in the assessment process.

Firstly, it allows the interviewer to discover additional weaknesses either in the weakness itself or in the way the weakness is conveyed to the interviewer. So it is not just the weakness itself that is an issue, but how this is conveyed: ie - is it done professionally or reframed appropriately, etc.? This can help the interviews understand who socially aware and groomed a candidate is. Second, it also give the interviewer some insight into how the candidate thinks about his/her weaknesses. What do they consider a weakness? Why do they consider it a weakness?

The candidate who responds "none" is not being honest with the interviewer or themselves. The way most people will answer this question is to turn it into a positive, for example "I'm a perfectionist, I need to review all the details and ensure what I am presenting is the best". This is a way to put a positive twist (which most interviewers are aware of), a good interviewer will dig deeper to determine if this gets in the way of doing their job.

How do I align myself with a recruiter or firm to best market my skills?

Milton asks: How do I align myself with a recruiter or firm to best market my skills? As the casualty of the economic downturn in the technology sector, I have found myself on the job market. I'm actually excited at the prospect of changing fields, and want to continue using my strengths as a talent developer, coach and strategist for organizational design. There appear to be a lot of recruiters in my market, and it is a daunting task to know where to begin. Are there any thoughts, advice or real-life experiences that anyone can share to help me find clarity?

In answer:
You need a strategy which encapsulates the ability to be found. Now that's not hard, but the question is - do you know what you want to do next (in terms of skills development or extension), and do you know what the market needs?

Start with talking to a few friends who have recently (in the past 12months ideally), found new jobs, and ask how they did it? More often than not, employees are now being found more directly by employers over indirectly via recruiters; but employers now use third party vetting services (ie - fixed fee recruiters who check applicants out), so the process has not really changed just shifted. Your friends should be able to recommend both employers, resume and job finding sites, and reliable recruiters they trust - and those are your three routes to being found and hence employed.

A good recruiter, who focuses on your sector (that's always rule one) should:
- be honest about you, your skills and ambitions
- say where they think you could be best employed: which might not fit with your view, but at least hear them out - they get paid to do this daily
- be honest about the opportunities they have on their books that fit your skills: the norm is to say "Yes, we have a job that will exactly suit you" but the honest one's will be honest and give it as it is
- be able to tell you how much their company and they individually will gte paid: avoid any who take a fee from the employer up front of more than 20%
- re write your CV/Resume
- be communicative in terms of progress of opportunity
- be wanting and able to meet you at least once during the process!

And finally through the whole process, you should once they place you be able to keep in contact and know when you are looking for your next post be able to go back to a professional.

If you work with a recruiter alongside doing your own direct tactical applications to employers, be sure to keep that activity focused in the same market area (ie - IT/electronics), and be communicative. Try not to register with more than one recruiter, and NEVER go direct to the employers they tell you they know and will put you forward on - you'll lose the job, is the outcome!

Good recruiters know the market, can asses you and will work with you to get a job; and its not all their effort and you just sit back, work with them. A good recruiter should be able to get you placed better, quicker if the job is done right.

Good Luck!

Do I need a degree?

Zulkifly asks: Peoples without a university degree is less successful compare to those who has it?

In answer:
Success is a measure of achievement against a goal - much like the equally literally abused use, particularly in vehicle and product advertising, of the word "quality:" its conformance to specification NOT and an implied betterness.

Hence, no - either can successfully succeed against their own defined goal: it just depends on what the goal is.

If you mean by success monetary income, then that is a defined goal - and each can be equally rich, as can be seen from the Forbes or in-country measurements like the Sunday Times Rich List.

However, here's a thought........ To read the rest of this post, please visit Degree Education

If you need an interview winning solution, sign-up for our Professional CV service

What qualifies someone as a life coach?

Alon asks: What qualifies someone as a life coach? I have been seeing a lot of "Life Coach" job titles all over the net. What makes someone a qualified as a life coach? Sounds like a serious undertaking, and I can't help but think most people just aren't qualified…

In answer:
I will state from the beginning Alon, that I share your scepticism.

Why? Because if you look back 40 years, where were the Life Coaches? There were mentors, at both a business and a personal level if required, but there were no Life Coaches.

Why was this? I think if you look back 40 years ago, communities were closer and tighter, and any problems were spotted and dealt with at an earlier stage. Such support which Life Coaches now charge for was hence often either in-built within the family or given freely as part of life of living within a community infrastructure. As these close families and communities have broken down, and as individuals have seen quicker results gained from employing highly qualified and experienced professional mentors; the gap in the market has been created for the Life Coach, who often employs new quicker results theories that often encompass NLP.

So am I dismissing Life Coaches? No, but I think personally there are still many options open to someone who wants to improve their life, and engaging a Life Coach could make sense after exhausting these first. Personally these would include: speaking to friends or family, or socially connected members of your community like church elders, etc. Life Coaches often say that it is to your advantage to speak to a third party, but there aren't many things I would exclude from talking to my close friends about first above a paid hand for hire.

Certification is also a present concern. There are clear routes for both qualified business coaches, who find the cache of using the word coach over consultant means they can charge more; and there certificates and stages to becoming a qualified career coach. In both cases I would say the best practitioners are nominally (a) older and (b) experienced in the role in which they practice. Many of the best career coaches are former HR managers, we ourselves use a company run by an ex-accountant for our clients who require career transition coaching, which I would say is useful and money well spent for up to a quarter of our CV or recruitment clients.

But I have not yet seen a nationally recognised qualification for a Life Coach, and I think that that lack of regulation and the possibility of charging someone $10,000+ a year is dragging the nominal delivery of any such services by those who could produce a great result downwards to the detriment of all. Personally, I see far too many sub-25 year olds waving a fresh NLP certificate around for the good of the market - quite what they have experienced in life and how capable they were of communicating it or spotting wider issues would be my concern.

I have some friends who are Life Coaches, and they share the doubt of where their market is presently going: average fee's are now below $500 for 10 sessions, and I am not sure how the practitioner is supposed to live on that, or the quality of delivery to the client.

I would hence say: if you are thinking about employing a Life Coach, try talking to friends, members of your family or community first; but if you do decide to employ one at least get a few references by speaking to their previous clients first - you then might be able to spot a good one.

Good Luck!