RSS Feed
Unchangeable Factors in the Job Search
February 2006
Early in the year, many people start thinking about changing jobs. There is something about this time that makes people wonder if it is time to move on. Obviously there are two sides to this equation. Whenever an employer decides to hire a new attorney, somewhere in the back of his or her mind is a picture of the perfect employee. The job description usually tells you this. It is usually a compendium of all of the characteristics of the ideal candidate. Sometimes job descriptions are developed as an antidote to a gap in the previous jobholder’s background, and sometimes that are developed as a stopgap measure for all of the holes that this ideal lawyer would fill in the office’s practice. Sometimes the job description is written by one person, and sometimes it is written by a committee. Your question is this: How can I make myself the ideal candidate and what do I do about those things about myself that I know are less than ideal in the employer’s mind, or simply factors that I cannot change?
Lack of Experience
Finding your first professional job after law school is certainly the most difficult job to land. Many if not most law students complete law school without an employer commitment. This isn’t surprising. The most frequent employers of new graduates nationwide are law firms with fewer than 20 attorneys, and hiring someone without a law license may not be cost effective. State governments are in a severe budget crisis, and are probably only filling vacancies, not adding new positions. And, in times of expansion to meet a new practice need, an employer will want to hire someone with a license and experience. This puts the new graduate in a bind. (You need experience – well hire me and I’ll get some!) Most job descriptions ask for some kind of experience, and it is often fruitless to apply for positions when you don’t meet the hiring criteria. If the employer wants multiple state licenses or three years of experience beyond graduation, it’s not something you can finesse. Sometimes the employer isn’t able to find the ideal candidate, but if you fail to address the employer’s needs and requested background you can be sure that you will not make the first cut. The difficult fact is that many positions aren’t posted and are filled by word of mouth. Your classmates from one or two years ago are often a good source of information about possible openings. Attorneys for whom you clerked in law school can be helpful even if you are no longer working with them. Even volunteer experience while you are searching for your first position tells a prospective employer that you are committed to a job in the law. Putting yourself in places where lawyers gather (the courthouse for one) as well as bar association functions, and informing as many people as possible that you are looking does help.
Too Much Experience or a Change in Practice area
Some candidates have the opposite problem. You may find yourself in a situation where you would like to find another position, but everything that you see advertised is for someone with 2-4 years experience. You have ten or more years. What can you do? An employer seeing your resume in response to a posted vacancy will immediately wonder why you are applying, and being risk avoidant will often see your application as ‘outside’ their acceptable range. This is where a very well crafted cover letter can help explain your circumstances and interest, or better yet, a call from a referral source can help create a more welcome response to your expressed interest. You must remember that the person screening applications is guided by his or her personal experiences, expectations and biases. If the person reading your resume has had a straight trajectory to their career, they may not understand someone wanting to take a position requiring less experience than they have had or a desire to change practice areas. If this person has been a hard driving attorney seeking to move to the next level at all times, they may not understand that you may want to back off the intensity of your career to balance work with other demands. The reader of your application may also not be aware of the various increases or decreases in demand for your practice expertise. (Think of the ebb and flow of bankruptcy work dependent upon economic conditions.)
One of the most frequent reasons for an automatic rejection from a candidate with “too much” experience is the employer’s concern about salary expectations. Once again the employer may not know that as a second income you may not need as great a salary as someone else might with your level of experience, or that you would be willing to take a pay cut in exchange for a ramp up on a new practice area. Saying something in your letter indicating that you understand that the salary will probably fit the job requirements (without giving a dollar amount) lets the employer know you are sensitive to budgetary concerns.
Age, Gender, Race, National Origin, Disability, Sexual Orientation
In this day and age, it is hard to believe that people find themselves shut out of job options because of any of the factors listed above. But the fact remains that even if it is subtle, job candidates often feel that they are not considered because of one of these factors. There are several questions that you should ask yourself. First, would you like to work in an organization that would not want to hire you because of your ‘Factors”? Secondly, how do you want to present yourself to employers in relation to these unchangeable aspects of your makeup? Every employer carries bias into the candidate search. The bias may simply be the picture in their heads that exists regarding the ideal candidate, or as complex as the person’s own life experience, and ideas about candidates in the job market, or their personal perspective on what it means to be male/female, older/younger, Caucasian/African American/Hispanic/Asian, foreign born, disabled, or gay/straight. There is only one part of this equation that you control, and that is your side.
For many years when I was working with law students, I observed that women completing law school over the age of 40 seemed to have difficulty accessing their first job out of law school. This is not a scientific study or a generality, but rather something that I simply observed in a number of cases. It is also not a statement regarding their long-term career prospects or success rates, both of which I observed to be excellent over time. What was most interesting was how different candidates responded to this phenomenon. Those who ranted about this obvious slight had more difficulty accessing opportunities than those who simply shrugged at the bias of some employers, shook off the rejection, and moved on with a positive face turned in the direction of the next available opportunity. It was the toll that this rejection process took that was perhaps the most damaging part of the hiring process. I am not for a moment endorsing the various biases that can exist in the hiring process, I am simply saying that there is only one side of the hiring process for which a candidate can be responsible, and that is how we react to this rejection or bias and the impact that it has on our subsequent attempts to find work. If your anger about unfairness in the hiring process is eating you up, you will probably take that attitude with you to your next job interview. It won’t help, and it may unfairly cause you to paint all employers with the same brush as the last one.
Looking the Part
Each of us comes to an interview creating a visual image. Studies indicate that a significant part of the first impression that we give is based upon not what we say, but how we appear. If the employer has something in his or her mind about what the ideal candidate looks like, then we either fit that picture or we deviate from it in some way. Once again, it isn’t likely that we know what that picture is, but we can create the most positive picture of who we are as possible. Years ago, when law was practiced almost solely by males, the dress code was a dark suit, white shirt, tie, dark shoes and socks. Much has changed since then, and the advent of “casual attire” has become something of a minefield for professionals trying to fit into an environment. When interviewing for a job it is critical to revert to the most traditional picture of a lawyer. At an interview you must pass the appearance test and then insure that those people interviewing you focus on what you are saying rather than how you look.
I am amazed at how frequently job candidates come to interviews too informally dressed, or not at their most well groomed. This is a no-brainer. No matter if you are short or tall, slender or not, young or older, you can dress the part of a person committed to success and someone the employer would be proud to have represent their interests. If you’re not sure if you project this image, look around you at those you believe do present themselves well, or ask a trusted friend who will be totally honest with you.
Richard Bolles, the author of the best selling career book, “What Color is Your Parachute” wrote a small book with Dale Susan Brown called “Job-Hunting for the So Called Handicapped” which outlines ways that people with disabilities can more effectively look for a job. But the real moral of the book is that we are all disabled in some way and to that extent the book is a great resource for anyone looking for a job.
The better we know ourselves, and the more effectively we deal with our potential shortcomings and what strengths we bring to the table when placed against the imaginary “ideal candidate” the greater the likelihood that we will be successful in the job search. And get the year off to a great start.
About the Author
Wendy L. Werner is the owner and principal of Werner Associates, a legal consulting and career coaching organization.