How to get a job (or not)

[Birdjaguar]

It is just a Q&A thread about finding jobs.

 

[Kennigit]

Yeah, I know I haven't gone back and read through the vast majority of the thread.

anyways, I guess another general question (applicable to all levels in career progression I suppose--I am entry level):

How long does it *actually* take HR to respond to applications, and/or in people's experience, do HR actually stick to the timelines they say they will?

I've had extremely little interaction with HR, but all of it can probably be characterized as negative. The one job interview I've had [with hiring managers[, the HR running the interviews that day said they'd get responses out within the business week, and at most a week. Understandably, they would try to get out offers quickly. I only got a letter in the mail 1 month afterwards at my permanent mailing address that, as far as I know, only said no offer was made [no surprise, given a month had passed]. No phone call or email, and of course about x6 business days longer than actually exlicitly told.

Recently, after applying to a fairly new job posting at the time (job opened middle of february, I applied a week later), I got a fairly straightforward email asking for more background information requiring a response by the next business day [which was the nexy day; I of course obliged]. Obviously, they must be structured to have a basic prescreen then get more information if desired to forward to hiring managers. But what causes a process to slow down so much that they demand applicants basically respond in a 12 hour window but take weeks or longer to follow up with any information? [ninja edit--this one I'm optimistic to, or at least, it actually makes sense]

Last relevant example I have is a terrible practice but more "expected" in my mind, in that a friend of mine should have an interview for a federal government position that was told in ~november that he'd get an interview "sometime between january and march". Now, I actually know a lot of the federal government stuff of the US has weird archaic rules for being able to announce anything [basically have to wait for something to be 100% funded to offer, and then that funding of course can be taken away instantly], and other factors present.

But all in all, these seem like just terrible HR practices that seem to be present at all levels of positions (my circle of contacts is geared towards entry level, but also just some HR stories from relatives, middle aged adults, etc); is it just typical for HR to basically never actually deliver on what they say ['we'll respond in <1 week' -> respond 1 month later], or vary so much in their time of response to things? [expect information immediately from applicants, but no progress update to applicants for weeks or months at a time]?

 

[Commodore]

Yeah, I know I haven't gone back and read through the vast majority of the thread.

anyways, I guess another general question (applicable to all levels in career progression I suppose--I am entry level):

How long does it *actually* take HR to respond to applications, and/or in people's experience, do HR actually stick to the timelines they say they will?

I've had extremely little interaction with HR, but all of it can probably be characterized as negative. The one job interview I've had [with hiring managers[, the HR running the interviews that day said they'd get responses out within the business week, and at most a week. Understandably, they would try to get out offers quickly. I only got a letter in the mail 1 month afterwards at my permanent mailing address that, as far as I know, only said no offer was made [no surprise, given a month had passed]. No phone call or email, and of course about x6 business days longer than actually exlicitly told.

Recently, after applying to a fairly new job posting at the time (job opened middle of february, I applied a week later), I got a fairly straightforward email asking for more background information requiring a response by the next business day [which was the nexy day; I of course obliged]. Obviously, they must be structured to have a basic prescreen then get more information if desired to forward to hiring managers. But what causes a process to slow down so much that they demand applicants basically respond in a 12 hour window but take weeks or longer to follow up with any information? [ninja edit--this one I'm optimistic to, or at least, it actually makes sense]

Last relevant example I have is a terrible practice but more "expected" in my mind, in that a friend of mine should have an interview for a federal government position that was told in ~november that he'd get an interview "sometime between january and march". Now, I actually know a lot of the federal government stuff of the US has weird archaic rules for being able to announce anything [basically have to wait for something to be 100% funded to offer, and then that funding of course can be taken away instantly], and other factors present.

But all in all, these seem like just terrible HR practices that seem to be present at all levels of positions (my circle of contacts is geared towards entry level, but also just some HR stories from relatives, middle aged adults, etc); is it just typical for HR to basically never actually deliver on what they say ['we'll respond in <1 week' -> respond 1 month later], or vary so much in their time of response to things? [expect information immediately from applicants, but no progress update to applicants for weeks or months at a time]?

Pretty much. HR departments are notorious for not responding when they say they will. I think the reason for this is that they commit themselves to unrealistic timelines. For example I interviewed for this one position and they told me they would get back to me in two days and I didn't hear from them for two weeks. This was a position that around 100 people applied for, so there was no way they were interviewing and then reviewing 100 applicants in two days. Now I don't know why HR commits to such unrealistic timelines when speaking to an applicant, but they would save the applicant and themselves a lot of grief if they would just be honest. I ended up turning that position down because by the time they got back to me I had already accepted my current job because I thought I hadn't heard from them because they decided not to hire me.

 

[downtown]

How long does it *actually* take HR to respond to applications, and/or in people's experience, do HR actually stick to the timelines they say they will?

When I did this, I could personally look over an application in just a few minutes. What I think people fail to understand is that HR is rarely the only department that's in charge of hiring. Typically, they are just a gatekeeper. A good HR team that is properly staffed can decide what to do with an application within just a few days, at most, when they first get it...but that usually means just deciding if they're going to trash it, or give a first round interview.

If the hiring process involves multiple interviews, it probably involves getting stakeholders from different departments involved, and THAT usually is what takes forever. Remember, hiring people is one of the chief priorities of an HR department, so they're typically more keen to move quickly on that. It ISN'T the top priority of a sales department, or accounting department, or whatever, so getting those guys on the same page, getting those guys to review applications, schedule interviews, etc...can take a long time.

One of the single most frustrating things for a recruiter, be you a 3rd party or a corporate recruiter, is getting your client to action on your candidates. If your hiring process is taking forever, chances are, the bottleneck isn't actually with HR.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

@Kennigit,

Don't expect anything reasonable from the Federal Government at the moment. In addition to their own rules on hiring, the constant upheaval in DC has made hiring that much more chaotic. This even trickles down to companies that do business with the federal government -

I interviewed for an internship with a rocket companies that does contract work with NASA and they told me that during the government shut down, all of their interns were laid off without back pay. This meant the interns essentially moved out to VA from wherever they lived and had to pay bills on a second aparmtment and living expenses and only worked for something like 5 weeks out of a planned 12 week internship.

 

[Zelig]

Pretty much. HR departments are notorious for not responding when they say they will. I think the reason for this is that they commit themselves to unrealistic timelines. For example I interviewed for this one position and they told me they would get back to me in two days and I didn't hear from them for two weeks. This was a position that around 100 people applied for, so there was no way they were interviewing and then reviewing 100 applicants in two days. Now I don't know why HR commits to such unrealistic timelines when speaking to an applicant, but they would save the applicant and themselves a lot of grief if they would just be honest. I ended up turning that position down because by the time they got back to me I had already accepted my current job because I thought I hadn't heard from them because they decided not to hire me.

Nobody is interviewing 100 people if 100 people applied. If I've got 100 people to deal with I'm probably spending 15 minutes to pick out a dozen or less, then phone screening those in ten minutes or less each to pick out three or four to interview.

 

[Kyriakos]

After an interview today i pretty much was accepted for some work in a local library (answer will come in a day or two). In fact they offered that i organise some informal seminar for philosophy, or philosophy and links to literature. It is voluntary work but i was very happy to be offered this cause it interests me a lot

Some kind of 2 hour/week meeting/seminar with a small group of interested people, and discussion of material in the library and the themes mentioned.

 

[GenMarshall]

I've been debating about this for a while. Should I add in my Linkedin link to my resume?

 

[illram]

I would say no.

 

[Birdjaguar]

I've been debating about this for a while. Should I add in my Linkedin link to my resume?

I would also say no unless your material there is outstanding. The more (different) information you provide from what is standard, the more opportunity you provide an employer to reject you. You need to stay focused on you and the value you an bring to the company that meets their current needs. It is rare that a company will hire someone for a future opportunity there. They want someone who will fulfill a current need.

There can be exceptions. One of my former employees was looking for work in Austin and a company told her to give them her Linkedin link as part of the application process. She tidied her page up and asked me add a recommendation to her page before she sent it. She had a very strong resume so Linkedin was just icing on it all.

 

[Kennigit]

I wish I could work in HR so that I could tell definitively tell people we'll get back to them by a certain date (Monday, March 17, 2014) then don't actually do that.

 

[ywhtptgtfo]

I wish I could work in HR so that I could tell definitively tell people we'll get back to them by a certain date (Monday, March 17, 2014) then don't actually do that.

You can do evil things as an HR officer, but would you want that to be your life's work?

 

[Kennigit]

evidently you make self imposed deadlines and then not follow said deadlines. seems like a pretty sweet gig to me

/bitter

 

[ywhtptgtfo]

evidently you make self imposed deadlines and then not follow said deadlines. seems like a pretty sweet gig to me

/bitter

And would you like doing it 9/5 for years?

 

[IglooDame]

I've been debating about this for a while. Should I add in my Linkedin link to my resume?

Agreed, no. Though they'll likely look it up anyway.

 

[nc-1701]

Time for me to start applying for jobs and I honestly don't know where to start. I'm graduating in August with a Masters degree in mathematics. I was supposed to be here for a Phd, but I'm miserable and thus hoping I'll be happier in the job market.

I have an undergrad in mathematics from a minor public Liberal Arts type school with a good (~3.8 GPA), and am (hopefully) about to get a Masters in mathematics from a large state school with a pretty mediocre GPA. Job wise I've had several tutoring jobs and I've been a TA, up to being the instructor of record for a Pre-calculus class, but never had a industry type job.
Most of my coursework is in pure mathematics, so it's difficult for me to claim any directly marketable skills. The only applied type of coursework I have is a few classes in Probability and a class in Cryptography. I can't program anything beyond very basic 'for loops' etc.
My skills are basically that I'm demonstrably fairly intelligent and can deal with technical work. The only other thing I have going for me is that I have no debt and am happy to try basically anything other than grad school, so I'll happily move anywhere and can afford to take low guaranteed pay (as long as it gets me more opportunities further on in stock options, or advancement opportunities, etc.)


Given all this I'm not even sure what type of jobs to look for or who would be interested in hiring me. I'm probably not quite competitive as a financial quant right now, but I'll give that a shot anyway. Beyond that I'm not sure what to look for, or who would be interested in me. Or even what I should focus my resume on, my only ob experience is teaching related which is not something I want to do at all...


Any advice?

 

[Zelig]

Make friends in companies who are more concerned about hiring smart people rather than checking off HR boxes, get them to hire you.

I went from a math degree to stats/software work for clinical research, to software work for a web startup, to analysis/software work for a large conglomerate. My previous experience has generally been negligibly relevant to the actual work I do.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Either an actuary (depending on how much calculus you've taken) or go to the NSA?

 

[Mise]

Look for "analyst" jobs of any variety. That's what I did when I graduated with a Physics degree but with no interest in doing it academically.

 

[Hygro]

Anyone with a math degree and a bit of hustle is in the clear. Seriously, I can't think of a degree with a stronger hustle-potential than math. If I had a math degree I'd have already cashed in AND out.