US
Our Take: Avoiding the 'Overqualified' Trap
May 8 2009
The longer this recession goes on, the more transitioning professionals will stumble into the "overqualified" pit.
Too much of a good thing is wonderful, said Mae West. But that's not how hiring managers see it. Relevant work experience, advanced degrees and credentials - while prerequisites for many finance jobs - can disqualify as well as qualify. If a candidate previously held a role at a higher level than the one she's seeking, or her education or certifications exceed a position's stated requirements, she's unlikely to pass the initial software-driven screen most employers apply before even looking at an incoming résumé.
Moreover, many employers blithely use the word "overqualified" as a barely concealed synonym for "too old." That's the evident meaning when a hiring manager or HR person says an opening is "too junior for you," when you know it pays four times what you made in your last job. (This happened to me a few times.)
It's Not About Pay
Contrary to widespread opinion, pay is rarely a significant factor in these decisions. Although age and credentials may correlate loosely with a candidate's compensation requirement, employers usually are more concerned about culture and fit. Their greatest risk in hiring an older, better credentialed or more experienced person than required is the team's harmony might be disrupted. That's why employers routinely reject overqualified applicants whose compensation need is well within (or even below) a position's budgeted range.
Recognizing how lethal the "overqualified" label can be, Washington Post personal finance columnist Michelle Singletary recently dubbed it "a scarlet letter on (a) résumé." In an April column headlined "Landing a Job When Your Résumé's Too Good for It," she offers four tips for avoiding "the 'O' word."
Two are well taken. First, "simplify" (dumb down) your résumé. "If you have an advanced degree such as a master's, don't list it" if the position doesn't call for it, Singletary advises. And, "watch your attitude." If a hiring manager suspects you see the role as beneath you and will bolt once conditions improve, you're dead.
Being Procrustes
Amy, a professional colleague and long-time friend, takes this further. Forget about what you were, she advises. Re-set your expectations to the here and now, and throw away any assumptions based on titles or pay levels you achieved before your previous job ended.
If you make history your baseline, you'll come off as feeling entitled - perhaps the most toxic label in today's job market. And if you're older than 40, you've no choice but to start from scratch anyway, because you no longer meet an inflexible criterion for new hires to your former roles: the age ceiling.
So instead of presenting your proudest achievements, focus like a laser on what your target employer is looking for. Think like Procrustes: shrink your qualifications to match or only marginally surpass the required level for the opening you seek.
Singletary's other two tips are less useful, in my opinion. She advises beating the manager to the punch by raising the "O" word first and by explaining forthrightly you're willing to work for much less than before. In my view, a candidate who mentions either compensation or a possible weakness - even in order to dispel it - before the interviewer does will come off as defensive.
'Won't You Be Bored?'
Here's another interview pitfall that touches on overqualification. A hiring manager may ask in a skeptical tone, "Will this position challenge you?" or the inverse, "Won't you be bored?" That question could mean a number of different things:
- Are you too ambitious, too much of a go-getter, to be satisfied with any potential career path within our company that starts from this role and this department?
- Are you pursuing this job as a stopgap in troubled times, just to have a paycheck and something to put at the top of your résumé? Will you be looking to flee as soon as something better comes along?
- Are you a team player who will happily contribute to your group by performing any legitimate task that's asked of you? Or, will you resent having to roll up your sleeves and do things you didn't expect or that seem beneath your credentials?
If you are sufficiently tuned in to the situation, you will be able to discern and respond to the interviewer's real concern.
This is an area I am struggling with. I work with internationally trained new Canadians that have been underemployed and are seeking work that they did prior to coming to Canada. I will share this article with them, the "entitled" attitude is food for thought - many are stuck because of history and this article might gently remind them to remain open to possibilities.
Sophie Giamos-Zarlenga 09 May 2009
RECOMMEND Recommended 1 time | Alert Moderator