I've been writing an AE e-newsletter for a long time that among other things includes info about who's coming and going. One way I can tell who's left my own industry is by reading the association executives job postings every week. Clearly if their job is posted, they're gone (although I am aware of one situation where someone found out she was terminated when saw her job advertised.) And sometimes it even seems clear why they left by the language in the job posting (e.g., if certain features in caps when others aren't like "HIGH MORAL STANDARDS", or if odd sentences appear like "must get along with other staff and support leadership", or even a clear notation like "he now works for (name) association" or "after a retirement".)
Thoughts on what may or may not appeal to AE job applicants:
1. If someone leaves voluntarily, especially for retirement, I think good to include that. Makes it appear it's a place someone wanted to stay;
2. Wouldn't there be more applicants for a position when the salary range is actually noted? If salary is a detail that would be a part of a consideration anyway, why not just include it?
3. What's the deal with the "include salary requirements" - does that mean there is no established salary range, or that it's effort to see if they can get a reduction in a salary from what paid last person, or that want to establish which candidates might be "overpriced" to eliminate from consideration? I just don't see how the applicant sending in "requirements" is good news for the applicant (... is that the point?)
4. It's really clear when a posting is from a "way of life" location because they note positive things about the area too, not just facts from the position description. I'd think if a position is being posted on a site where there's a national audience, that it should try to sell the location too?
5. When resumes requested to be sent to a generic email at the association office does it sort of scream to applicants "there's no chance this is confidential"?
What do you find in postings that's notable?
The salary issues you raise are some of my biggest pet peeves, both from the perspective of working with others at my organization on crafting postings and as an applicant.
From the employer side, if you post the expected range, wildly under- or over-qualified people naturally select themselves out, so you're not wading through tons of inappropriate resumes (or getting really excited about a candidate who's going to turn you down as soon as s/he finds out what you're paying). Why was this argument never persuasive to anyone but me?
And from the applicant side, it just seems like bad manners to ask me how much I'm going to want if you won't tell me what you're thinking of paying. It definitely smacks of "we're trying to lowball you."
Why all the secrecy? It doesn't accomplish anything good.
I agree with elizabeth and the lack of salary information.
And every job posting wants a "Visionary"... like, I have visions? Do they want you to see dead people too?
These inane hiring policies will only change if those of us who are responsible for hiring change them ourselves.
When advertising positions, provide the information you would like to see as an applicant. Tell your colleagues they should do the same.
Post a Comment