Employment gaps shouldn't matter should they?

theoretica

Planet_Switzerland said:

OK, let's say you're a mechanic (I'm not a mechanic). You have the qualifications and years of experience of fixing peoples cars and generally do a decent job of it. You also have an interest in cars.

You interview for many jobs, but keep getting rejected because you haven't fixed enough Mercedes, you haven't done enough exhausts, you don't know what size tires a Ford Fiesta has at the top of your head etc. Whether they are genuine reasons or the real reason isn't something they want to say, what exactly are you supposed to do?

Believe me, going to all these interviews and getting rejected isn't any fun. I go to an interview to get the job.

You will know if this applies to you, but when interviewing I have come across people who think the interviewers will have read and memorised every single detail of the application and been reluctant to repeat anything on it.  So an interview question gets a second best answer as the best was put in the application.  For my employer the application gets you the interview and the interview is considered nearly in isolation when deciding who gets the job, so experience mentioned only in the application can well be passed over. 

donnajunkie

theoretica said:

Planet_Switzerland said:

OK, let's say you're a mechanic (I'm not a mechanic). You have the qualifications and years of experience of fixing peoples cars and generally do a decent job of it. You also have an interest in cars.

You interview for many jobs, but keep getting rejected because you haven't fixed enough Mercedes, you haven't done enough exhausts, you don't know what size tires a Ford Fiesta has at the top of your head etc. Whether they are genuine reasons or the real reason isn't something they want to say, what exactly are you supposed to do?

Believe me, going to all these interviews and getting rejected isn't any fun. I go to an interview to get the job.

You will know if this applies to you, but when interviewing I have come across people who think the interviewers will have read and memorised every single detail of the application and been reluctant to repeat anything on it.  So an interview question gets a second best answer as the best was put in the application.  For my employer the application gets you the interview and the interview is considered nearly in isolation when deciding who gets the job, so experience mentioned only in the application can well be passed over. 

To be fair they often have it right in front of them during the interview. However even though its frustrating you just have to try to repeat or improve on what you put in the application.

AW618

Planet_Switzerland said:

AW618 said:

I don't know what you are supposed to do.  Why on earth assume I would?  What have I said that has given you any indication I claim to know that?
Are you sure you are talking to the right person?  You keep on saying things as though you are contradicting me when they bear no relation whatsoever to any points I have made.  When have I ever said you don't go to an interview to get a job?  I am sure you do.

First of all you said that people who are good at jobs but bad at interviews, or vice versa and the exception. Then you asked me to tell you what my interview feedback was and you'd tell me why I'm not a desirable employee. I would therefore assume you would know where I am going wrong, but instead what I'm hearing is basically that I'll never get a job because nobody will tell me the real reason for rejecting me.

I know you didn't say that I don't go to an interview to get a job, I'm just stating that is the reason.

At the end of the day I know my talents are being wasted and will continue to be wasted until I get a new job. The question is how do I get a new job?

"First of all you said that people who are good at jobs but bad at interviews, or vice versa and the exception. "
I never said that, it is incoherent.
"Then you asked me to tell you what my interview feedback was and you'd tell me why I'm not a desirable employee. "
Again, no.  What I said was "Let's turn it round,  in what way are you "bad at interviews"?  Tell me why and I will try and explain why that makes you a  less desirable employee."  Absolutely nothing to do with feedback.  You say you are bad at interviews; you tell me what you do wrong.
You have already said that you yourself feel you perform badly under pressure at interviews, but never ever feel under pressure except at interviews.  Well, there's your problem, or at least a problem.  They are not to know that. Even if they did, maybe they think their position brings more pressure with it that what you are used to.  Why should they take a risk?  If you can tell me what form your performing badly under pressure actually takes, I can probably give you more detail as to why a company would balk at that, if you like.  I can't tell you how to fix it or how to get a new job, that would entail me knowing something about you.

AW618

I am not interested in any of that, sorry.  You said you are bad at interviews.  How do you  think this manifests itself?  If the answer is "I don't know", then say so.  Are you just assuming it because you are not getting offered a job?
Why are you harping on about the shortcomings of your current company? They are not the ones interviewing you.  I presume you have the sense not to do this at interviews; but you present your current job in a positive light.  If your point is that your current company doesn't let you exercise the skills required for the jobs you are applying for, then you are applying for the wrong jobs.  To be honest that's what it looks like to me, rather than you being bad at interviews, so if you think you are bad at interviews, say why.

AW618

Planet_Switzerland said:

AW618 said:

I am not interested in any of that, sorry.  You said you are bad at interviews.  How do you  think this manifests itself?  If the answer is "I don't know", then say so.  Are you just assuming it because you are not getting offered a job?
Why are you harping on about the shortcomings of your current company? They are not the ones interviewing you.  I presume you have the sense not to do this at interviews; but you present your current job in a positive light.  If your point is that your current company doesn't let you exercise the skills required for the jobs you are applying for, then you are applying for the wrong jobs.  To be honest that's what it looks like to me, rather than you being bad at interviews, so if you think you are bad at interviews, say why.

The answer is I don't know. Yes I am assuming it because I'm not getting offered a job.

I'm harping on about the shortcomings of my current company because yes my talent is being wasted. I do present my current job in a positive light which is a challenge in itself.

If I'm applying for the wrong jobs then what are the right jobs?

How would I know?  It might help if you answer the question I asked - is it the case that you feel your company is not allowing you to get useful experience in the jobs you are applying for?

theoretica

Planet_Switzerland

The answer is I don't know. Yes I am assuming it because I'm not getting offered a job.

Offering a possible thought here - you will know if it feels like it fits you.  When recruiting the company will be looking for a number of different criteria and score candidates against them (either formally, or informally). One or more specific technical abilities, management experience, communication, fitting straight into the company structure... that sort of thing - probably mostly what they ask for in the job advert.  They then need to choose between candidates who are decent at all of these (say they were scored at BBBB on 4 criteria) and candidates who were better at some things than others ( say ABBC).  If in the interview the ABBC candidate persuades them the C doesn't matter and can rapidly be improved then the B candidate gets told it went to someone better at criterion 1.  If candidate ABBC doesn't persuade them the C doesn't really matter (or BBBB candidate pulls some As out of their hat - it isn't just how well one candidate does) then ABBC is told that the job went to someone better in criterion 4.  Yes the interviewers knew this was weaker when they made the interview invitation, but they felt the candidate was worth a chance because of other strengths.

theoretica

Planet_Switzerland said:

theoretica said:

Planet_Switzerland

The answer is I don't know. Yes I am assuming it because I'm not getting offered a job.

Offering a possible thought here - you will know if it feels like it fits you.  When recruiting the company will be looking for a number of different criteria and score candidates against them (either formally, or informally). One or more specific technical abilities, management experience, communication, fitting straight into the company structure... that sort of thing - probably mostly what they ask for in the job advert.  They then need to choose between candidates who are decent at all of these (say they were scored at BBBB on 4 criteria) and candidates who were better at some things than others ( say ABBC).  If in the interview the ABBC candidate persuades them the C doesn't matter and can rapidly be improved then the B candidate gets told it went to someone better at criterion 1.  If candidate ABBC doesn't persuade them the C doesn't really matter (or BBBB candidate pulls some As out of their hat - it isn't just how well one candidate does) then ABBC is told that the job went to someone better in criterion 4.  Yes the interviewers knew this was weaker when they made the interview invitation, but they felt the candidate was worth a chance because of other strengths.

Well the company structure is probably a place where I fall down. I don't want to work for a company with a similar structure to ours, if one even exists, because that's half the problem. How do I persuade someone that I can adapt to what seems like a better structure without slagging my company off?

I would say you need to find a time to address this head on - don't not mention it as though you hope they won't have noticed, because they will have and you can't lower their concerns if you don't at least briefly mention it. But you also don't want to say so much about it that it seems to be a big problem for you.  It's not slagging off your current employer to praise something about the company you are applying to.  Also I think 'structure' will be a shorthand for concern about things which your current job hasn't had you doing, but the new one would.  So you do want to think about your examples that show you can do those things and make sure you include them in the interview. 

AW618

Planet_Switzerland said:

AW618 said:

Planet_Switzerland said:

AW618 said:

I am not interested in any of that, sorry.  You said you are bad at interviews.  How do you  think this manifests itself?  If the answer is "I don't know", then say so.  Are you just assuming it because you are not getting offered a job?
Why are you harping on about the shortcomings of your current company? They are not the ones interviewing you.  I presume you have the sense not to do this at interviews; but you present your current job in a positive light.  If your point is that your current company doesn't let you exercise the skills required for the jobs you are applying for, then you are applying for the wrong jobs.  To be honest that's what it looks like to me, rather than you being bad at interviews, so if you think you are bad at interviews, say why.

The answer is I don't know. Yes I am assuming it because I'm not getting offered a job.

I'm harping on about the shortcomings of my current company because yes my talent is being wasted. I do present my current job in a positive light which is a challenge in itself.

If I'm applying for the wrong jobs then what are the right jobs?

How would I know?  It might help if you answer the question I asked - is it the case that you feel your company is not allowing you to get useful experience in the jobs you are applying for?

Yes, that's something I've felt since day one. 

It's been the equivalent of fixing someones car, but then the customer decides they don't want the car back. I've tried filling in the gaps in my experience over the years the best I can, but then more gaps start appearing. Its like there's some sort of secret knowledge that I need to know, but I don't know what it is.

Does that answer your question?

Yes.  Then I would suggest you start applying for jobs which you are experienced and qualified for.  There is no point going for things that you feel you should have been getting experience for and then telling them at the interview that no, you haven't done any of that.

theoretica

Planet_Switzerland said:

theoretica said:

Planet_Switzerland said:

theoretica said:

Planet_Switzerland

The answer is I don't know. Yes I am assuming it because I'm not getting offered a job.

Offering a possible thought here - you will know if it feels like it fits you.  When recruiting the company will be looking for a number of different criteria and score candidates against them (either formally, or informally). One or more specific technical abilities, management experience, communication, fitting straight into the company structure... that sort of thing - probably mostly what they ask for in the job advert.  They then need to choose between candidates who are decent at all of these (say they were scored at BBBB on 4 criteria) and candidates who were better at some things than others ( say ABBC).  If in the interview the ABBC candidate persuades them the C doesn't matter and can rapidly be improved then the B candidate gets told it went to someone better at criterion 1.  If candidate ABBC doesn't persuade them the C doesn't really matter (or BBBB candidate pulls some As out of their hat - it isn't just how well one candidate does) then ABBC is told that the job went to someone better in criterion 4.  Yes the interviewers knew this was weaker when they made the interview invitation, but they felt the candidate was worth a chance because of other strengths.

Well the company structure is probably a place where I fall down. I don't want to work for a company with a similar structure to ours, if one even exists, because that's half the problem. How do I persuade someone that I can adapt to what seems like a better structure without slagging my company off?

I would say you need to find a time to address this head on - don't not mention it as though you hope they won't have noticed, because they will have and you can't lower their concerns if you don't at least briefly mention it. But you also don't want to say so much about it that it seems to be a big problem for you.  It's not slagging off your current employer to praise something about the company you are applying to.  Also I think 'structure' will be a shorthand for concern about things which your current job hasn't had you doing, but the new one would.  So you do want to think about your examples that show you can do those things and make sure you include them in the interview. 

So if you were a mechanic and all the cars you fixed went straight to the scrapyard, how would you show you're capable of getting a car back on the road?

I know it sounds silly, but that's what my job is the equivalent of and I really don't want to say what I do as it's a specialised job which puts me in danger of being identified.

You don't only need to take examples from your current work.  Have you ever got a car back on the road in previous work or your own or friends at weekends?  What is your awareness of the difference between what you do in your work and what would be done in the new job.

In my current work I make cars look good before they are crushed for film cameras, there are a few techniques and materials I use which would not be appropriate for cosmetic work on a road worthy car as they won't hold up in the long term, but most of the time I am using common industry techniques such as X and Y and the cars I work on are subject to great scrutiny for close up shots... 

AW618

Planet_Switzerland said:

AW618 said:

Planet_Switzerland said:

AW618 said:

Planet_Switzerland said:

AW618 said:

I am not interested in any of that, sorry.  You said you are bad at interviews.  How do you  think this manifests itself?  If the answer is "I don't know", then say so.  Are you just assuming it because you are not getting offered a job?
Why are you harping on about the shortcomings of your current company? They are not the ones interviewing you.  I presume you have the sense not to do this at interviews; but you present your current job in a positive light.  If your point is that your current company doesn't let you exercise the skills required for the jobs you are applying for, then you are applying for the wrong jobs.  To be honest that's what it looks like to me, rather than you being bad at interviews, so if you think you are bad at interviews, say why.

The answer is I don't know. Yes I am assuming it because I'm not getting offered a job.

I'm harping on about the shortcomings of my current company because yes my talent is being wasted. I do present my current job in a positive light which is a challenge in itself.

If I'm applying for the wrong jobs then what are the right jobs?

How would I know?  It might help if you answer the question I asked - is it the case that you feel your company is not allowing you to get useful experience in the jobs you are applying for?

Yes, that's something I've felt since day one. 

It's been the equivalent of fixing someones car, but then the customer decides they don't want the car back. I've tried filling in the gaps in my experience over the years the best I can, but then more gaps start appearing. Its like there's some sort of secret knowledge that I need to know, but I don't know what it is.

Does that answer your question?

Yes.  Then I would suggest you start applying for jobs which you are experienced and qualified for.  There is no point going for things that you feel you should have been getting experience for and then telling them at the interview that no, you haven't done any of that.

Where would I find these jobs? 

It would be like a mechanic looking for a job where all the cars you fix go straight to the scrapyard. Nobody would have such a job because it's pointless.

If I look at the person specification on the last job I applied for, I match each criteria on paper. 

Again, how the bloody hell would I know?  You won't say what you do, and you say it is a specialised field, so I wouldn't know even if you did.
But if, as you seem to be saying, you have a job title of "ferret wrangler" but you are not wrangling any ferrets and are saying so at interview, then it's hardly surprising you are not getting ferret wrangling jobs.  Whatever you are doing, apply for jobs doing that.