Smoking and Sloppiness

We all know the job market is tough - lots of competition for any decent position, tricky and mind-bending interview questions, lack of reliable feedback during the process, hiring managers unwilling to make the call on the offer - you get the idea. In addition to the clear and obvious barriers and hurdles to that job seekers have to overcome, there can often be another set of hidden, and much less obvious things that might result in a candidate getting eliminated from contention for the job.

These are the kinds of attributes we generally like to classify as 'fit', which is kind of a made up construct to collect all those traits or background elements that we can't really quantify or easily justify in our screening process, but we know what they are when we see, hear, smell them. 'Fit' could come to mean just about anything depending on the organization, position, or whim of the hiring manager. Did the candidate graduate from Auburn and the boss bleeds Alabama Crimson? Maybe the candidate spent the last few years at a company known for its freewheeling and anything goes culture, and your shop thinks cutting loose is casual Friday during the summer. Or maybe a solid candidate just went a little too heavy on the Jean Nate after-bath splash and you couldn't really concentrate on anything they said in the interview.

Or, if you are looking to get hired as an assistant football coach working for the 'Ol Ball Coach Steve Spurrier on the University of South Carolina staff, you might not want to be a smoker. Or fat and sloppy.

Yep, according to a couple of tweets from a Coumbia State newspaper reporter, the 'Ol Ball Coach when asked what he was looking for in potential assistant coaches, Spurrier said he wanted non-smokers, and also had a dislike for 'fat, sloppy guys.'  Here are the tweets from the press conference:

Not great if you happen to be a good coach that is a smoker who is also fat and sloppy.  It is kind of tough to take a lot of offense with Spurrier's point of view, many companies are now starting to penalize smoking employees with health insurance surcharges, and some are refusing to hire smokers at all.

The 'fat and sloppy' part of the opinion is perhaps less defensible. But like smoking, and at least in Spurrier's opinion, being 'fat and sloppy' suggests something about a candidate, that they won't be a good public face for the team, that they might be undisciplined, or they might not been seen to 'project' some kind of image that Spurrier envisions for the team. Truth is, it is hard to know what exactly is in Spurrier's head, or any hiring manager's for that matter, when they start evaluating, ranking, screening, etc. on these kinds of 'fit' factors.

If you are a job seeker, you already have a lot going against you, mostly things you can't do much about. It might be too late and too expensive to get that Harvard MBA, or score 10 years of 'progressive managerial responsibility' in the EXACT industry you applied to. 

But if you are still smoking you probably can quite. And you might be able to lose a couple of pounds. And tuck in that shirt while you are at it. You never know what you're begin graded on, so you might as well assume it is everything.

First Impressions

I was talking to a friend that works in HR for a fairly large organization about how his group was being temporarily relocated to some makeshift office space (think Trailer Park HR) while the 'proper' HR offices are being remodeled.

As I recalled their HR offices to be fairly normal, a bit non-descript, but certainly not awful, I asked what was the impetus for the remodel, particularly in a time of tight budgets, moderate to zero salary increases, etc.  The answer was, 'Our leadership is concerned about the impression that our offices make to candidates and new employees.  This is their first impression of us as a place to work, and we need to enhance the experience if we want to be an employer of choice.'

While having a welcoming office, with a pleasant and helpful person at reception, and a comfortable place to sit and wait for an interview are all important, and certainly can support the new employee or candidate experience, they are far, far from being where 'first impressions' are forged I think.Flickr - sammo371

So where are 'first impressions' formed today? Here are just some I came up with, I am sure there are many more

Google searches of the company name, or the 'Company Name Jobs' string - For many candidates, and ones that eventually get hired, this is the very first interaction with your company and brand.  Assuming you are not a major consumer brand, or a retail organization that is well known in your local market, Googling the company is Step 1. Have you checked recently to be sure that 'Company Name Sucks' is not on the top of the list for this search?

Corporate Web Site - still relevant, but increasingly less so.  Most folks realize that the corporate web site is basically marketing material, and thus maybe only about 10% of the message really sinks in.  My view is a really amateur looking corporate site could turn a candidate away, but for the most part it probably is not as important as the actual 'job' or 'career' sections of the site.

Corporate Job Site - important, a bad experience here starts the candidate relationship on the wrong foot, a horrible experience will end the relationship right there.  Almost all organizations require applicants to run through an online application process that can vary in unpleasantness from root canal all the way through a day at the spa.  Making the candidate experience better is probably 100 times more important than making the tough call of 'eggshell' or 'off-white' for the paint in the HR lobby.

Official presence on major social networks and company blogs - probably not as important in many industries and segments, but for some a very critical source of content and relationship building. Just like every company had to create a website a few years ago, most every company these days has established some kind of social networking presence.  But the effectiveness and impact of these efforts varies widely, and not all candidates and new employees care, but in time this will definitely increase.

Unofficial presence on major social networks - Think Facebook pages and groups created by employees and community members, or simply Twitter searches mentioning your company or brand name. Candidates and new employees see these.  How important they are is certainly debatable, but how many organizations actually consider the effect on the employer reputation of these activities.

Rating sites - sites like Glassdoor and Vault that contain unvarnished reviews of your company as a place to work from current and former employees.  The veracity of these ratings is certainly subject to debate, but the fact is they are out there, and there is some chance that candidates and new employees are reading them way before they get the opportunity to admire that new Ficus tree in the HR reception area.

What their friends say - This is likely more imporant that all the other individual factors above, but certainly is infliuencesd by them all.  We trust our friends.  We want to find out as much as we can about potential employers.  What our friends say about the company is shaped by all the various encounters they have had with the organization in the areas above, and by direct experience.  You can't control what people will say about your organization as a place to work, but by honest assessment of your efforts (web, social, community, etc.) you can take steps to influence what is said.

A final thought, the last time someone asked you, 'What is it like to work there?' have you ever mentioned the decor of the HR offices?