Bypassing HR with resumes
Celeste Blackburn SPHR
248 Posts
I was reading an article today on CNN.com. It is an "ask the expert" sort of angle w/a reader asking why she isn't getting any response from the HR people she is sending her "carefully crafted" resumes to.
The article begins well, explaining that HR is facing a glut of resumes and most HR departments have been scaled back in the past couple of years (so there are less people to deal with more resumes). Then, it gets kind of dicey. The article quotes an expert who tells applicants to bypass HR and send their resumes to "an executive at the company one or two levels above the hiring manager for the position you want" because:
[INDENT]"Resumes travel down the food chain more easily than up . . . If the boss forwards your resume, a hiring manager is likely to give it a more thorough read than the 10 seconds HR may spend on it. . . HR people are usually just trying to match up keywords between your resume and the job description . . and if you only have 12 out of the 15 keywords, you won't make it past that hurdle. Hiring managers, on the other hand, can look at a resume and read between the lines."
[/INDENT]
What do you guys think of this? I think it would be annoying to the HR person, the bypassed hiring manger, and the executive who gets the resume. Sounds like a terrible way to make a first impression.
Here is a link to the article [URL]http://bit.ly/9zljNc[/URL]
The article begins well, explaining that HR is facing a glut of resumes and most HR departments have been scaled back in the past couple of years (so there are less people to deal with more resumes). Then, it gets kind of dicey. The article quotes an expert who tells applicants to bypass HR and send their resumes to "an executive at the company one or two levels above the hiring manager for the position you want" because:
[INDENT]"Resumes travel down the food chain more easily than up . . . If the boss forwards your resume, a hiring manager is likely to give it a more thorough read than the 10 seconds HR may spend on it. . . HR people are usually just trying to match up keywords between your resume and the job description . . and if you only have 12 out of the 15 keywords, you won't make it past that hurdle. Hiring managers, on the other hand, can look at a resume and read between the lines."
[/INDENT]
What do you guys think of this? I think it would be annoying to the HR person, the bypassed hiring manger, and the executive who gets the resume. Sounds like a terrible way to make a first impression.
Here is a link to the article [URL]http://bit.ly/9zljNc[/URL]
Comments
From my experience, however, sending resumes to an "executive one or two levels above the hiring manager" would annoy those executives to no end. It happens every once in a while around here. Just recently we have had one person call our CEO directly to give a reference for someone whose resume we've never received and when we didn't have any positions open, and another person tried to get a copy of someone's resume to the CEO through a member of the CEO's family! Our CEO is very good-natured about stuff like that and just passes it directly to me, but I'm sure it is somewhat annoying to him, it's annoying to me that people would try to get their foot in the door that way, and annoying to any managers that happen to be hiring at the time because the person bypassed them completely.
We posted a job online, got a number of resumes electronically, and are currently interviewing the top people. I sent an email response to those we did not select and let them know they were not the best match and that we would be keeping their resume on file. For the first time, I have had people come back and claim that they couldn't see how they could not be the best match. The first one demanded to know how she could be lacking when she had an MBA. The job posting listed 2 years of experience in a specific area, which she didn't have. I sent her the posting, with that part bolded, and then carefully reiterated that she wasn't the best match.
This morning I have a similar email. She is not demanding an explanation as the first one did, but she basically argued that she didn't see how she wouldn't be the best match. If she had point blank asked for an explanation, I would have sent it to her. In this case, I am wondering if it is better to leave it as is, or go ahead and explain why she wasn't the best match. What do you think?
We've discussed the issue of do you try to explain to applicants why they weren't the best fit for the position. I think its fair to say that normally that is a no-win situation for the HR manager.
However, I will offer feedback when there is something very specific I can say. Recently we interviewed a young lady applying for a job and in her phone conversations with myself and our supervisor the applicant constantly interrupted us.
When she asked why she was not hired I told her that the position she was applying for is a guest service position and her habit of interrupting others was a significant red flag. I felt it was appropriate to say that because that trait will hinder her from future employment.
I had to call one applicant about another matter and leave a voicemail. I took the opportunity to tell her something about her resume that she needed to know (she later sent me a thank you email.) That is really the first time something has been so glaring that I felt I needed to say something, and I am glad I did. You just never know how they will respond.
I have to say we are VERY lucky that so far no one has told us that they were 'called' to work for us. It does make one wonder though. Are they just weird, or so far from the mark that they somehow think you will fall for it?
Paul: you mentioned a thread in an IM...which one?
Being the mister nice guy that I am my response would be "The devil made me deny offering you the job" :angel:
My feeling after all that is simplye 'whew!' I feel we dodged a bullet by not hiring her. I don't have the energy or time for employees who believe they know more about what I want or need in a job then I do. On the other hand, I must admit she is really a go-getter and sometimes that is just what you need.
Does anyone have any chocolate?
The most overly-persistent applicant I've had to deal with was somebody who had worked for us almost ten years before, been fired, and was not eligible for re-hire. They got in the habit of applying for every open position at one of our locations. The supervisor finally told the applicant that they were not eligible for re-hire with the company. So, they contacted me and started asking me [I]why[/I] they were not eligible for re-hire. I wasn't the one who said they weren't, although I understood why the supervisor had originally said it. The supervisor and any other employees who'd worked in that location at the same time as the former employee were all long-gone by the time they contacted me, so all I had to go by was a document that had been filled out at the time the person was fired. I heard from this person a couple of times in probably a two-year period, and somehow I feel like it isn't the last time I'll hear back from them...
Before she was hired.
Did she get the job?
Two weeks ago, I had an applicant postpone (at the last second) an evening second interview. She couldn't come in the next night, because of a 'family committment'. Well, after she came in, we learned the postponement was so she could get her hair colored before the interview. The family committment, she explained, was that she had to go to the scrapbooking store after work so she could get started on the scrapbook she's making for her mother.
Sad to say, she is absolutely shocked we did not find her to be the best candidate.
"Gumption Junction, what's your function?"
Sorry. Years of Schoolhouse Rock, bubbling to the surface.
Paul: You make a good point. It is easy for us to admire what we see as determination and courage from afar. I am sure it is less so close up if the employee got on the plane from lack of common sense rather than courage and determination.
I guess in the end it depends on the employee and the job. No 'One Size Fits All' answer for this one.
Sorry, years of Dr. Seuss.
See Frank and Paul.
See Frank and Paul joke.
See no one laugh.
Sorry, years of public education.
Sorry, years of public education.[/quote]
Understood. But why the extra comma?
You are making fun of [I]my[/I] punctuation? Really?
HA! :ball and chain:
Paul, I know how much you need positive affirmation, so, yes, people laugh at you and Frank all the time.:angel: