It has come to my attention, while perusing my first dozen or so posts, that perhaps my blog has taken an overly cynical and negative tone. This was by no means my intention when I set out to document my thoughts on the graduate job market. While it is certainly demoralising to make so little tangible progress in my search for meaningful employment, I will in future endeavour not to let this frustration colour my writing. I certainly do not want anyone to feel sorry for me, there are many other graduates in far more testing circumstances than my own. And so, I feel I must write this short and positive assessment of my current situation.
When I look at the facts I am in a healthy position. I am living at home and so face no costs such as rent and bills, giving me a more than adequate disposable income. I also know deep down that I have good qualifications that will eventually land me a graduate job. In addition, as much as I may sometimes complain, I do enjoy my work and it is gaining me a degree of useful experience in managing a small team and dealing with the general public. Anyone who knows me will also realise that I have for a long time been a little bit of a theme park enthusiast (the shame!) and so operating a £12million rollercoaster is significantly better than stacking shelves! It bears absolutely no relevance to what I want to do in future but we can't have it all. In some very tough economic times you must take what you can get.
I'm generally of the opinion that if I'm still struggling to find a graduate job by the end of the year, I'll likely leave the country on an elaborate travel adventure to some far flung and exotic corner of the globe. With time, the economic climate will improve and jobs will be more plentiful. Moreover, by then I would hope to have attained a little more relevant experience. Incidentally, if anyone reading has managed to combine travelling with gaining something meaningful and relevant to put on your CV I'd very much like to hear your suggestions.
To summarise this post: in future I'll be ditching the cynicism and reigning in the sarcasm. I may be frustrated but I'm also happy: I have a job, a home, a lovely girlfriend, lots of mates and decent prospects for the future. I have no excuse to be a miserable sod. What is more, I'm off to Barcelona on Thursday to enjoy some 28 degree sunshine and more than a little sangria!
I shall return next week when I intend to discuss the complicated art of CV writing. Until then, thanks for reading and keep commenting.
Sunday, 17 June 2012
Wednesday, 13 June 2012
Work Experience
As every day of job searching passes by, it becomes an ever greater frustration that I didn't spend more of my time at university accumulating that all important 'experience', rather than focusing the majority of my attention on my academic work. I simply didn't have the dedication to take up the unpaid summer placements and internships that seem so highly valued by employers. Instead, I spent my summers gallivanting around Europe with my friends. Fun but not exactly much of a CV filler.
Today it seems students must be prepared to dedicate those long summer months to personal improvement rather than rest and relaxation (don't they know its tough working 30 weeks of the year!). However, while those like myself lack the motivation, many more simply can't devote 12 weeks to working and living for nothing. For employers, summer student placements are a great trick; they gain an eager and intelligent workforce with no addition to their overheads. What is more they can claim they are acting entirely selflessly, helping future graduates gain valuable experience! But enough of my cynicism for now, the point of this little diatribe is that, in short, I did not take the time to pursue these opportunities. I lack relevant experience.
My first taste of unpaid employment came in Year 10 when I sallied forth from my High School to find a placement for a week: I lazily opted to spend time at my local primary school, which was enjoyable but bore little relation to my future career plans. Skip forward to my graduation in July 2010 and this remained the only workplace experience I could draw on, bar a few months working in a local restaurant.
It was time to organise something more significant: using a couple of local contacts I managed to arrange some time working in several departments of Staffordshire County Council. I got off to an inauspicious start after being asked to review a policy brochure, which I diligently did finding a number of minor linguistic criticisms, only to discover my supervisor for the morning had written it. Not the greatest way to endear yourself! But from that point onwards, the experience was useful and interesting. I was not made to feel like a tea boy (an often heard complaint of interns) and gained a good overview of local government. However, the placement, by the standards of employers, was not long enough. I've seen many supposed 'graduate' job adverts demand upwards of one year's experience in a relevant field; this seems unfair.
And so I reach the stage I am at today, having two degrees but very little 'real world' experience. It is not feasible for me to work and live for nothing so I must attempt to balance my minimum wage job with finding regular doses of more relevant (but unpaid) positions. This is easier said than done: while businesses are often prepared to take on someone for a week or two, or employ an intern for 12 weeks, it is more difficult to arrange one or two days per week over an indefinite period, which is ideally what I require. Given my personal interests, I have written to a number of local(ish) MPs of my particular political persuasion enquiring about any opportunities, but this is a very competitive field.
Work experience is the panacea that will cure my ills as a graduate job seeker. Nevertheless, who knew it could be this tricky to give away my services for nothing! If you're reading this and happen to have any work experience success/horror stories I'd love to hear them. Thanks for reading and keep commenting...
Today it seems students must be prepared to dedicate those long summer months to personal improvement rather than rest and relaxation (don't they know its tough working 30 weeks of the year!). However, while those like myself lack the motivation, many more simply can't devote 12 weeks to working and living for nothing. For employers, summer student placements are a great trick; they gain an eager and intelligent workforce with no addition to their overheads. What is more they can claim they are acting entirely selflessly, helping future graduates gain valuable experience! But enough of my cynicism for now, the point of this little diatribe is that, in short, I did not take the time to pursue these opportunities. I lack relevant experience.
My first taste of unpaid employment came in Year 10 when I sallied forth from my High School to find a placement for a week: I lazily opted to spend time at my local primary school, which was enjoyable but bore little relation to my future career plans. Skip forward to my graduation in July 2010 and this remained the only workplace experience I could draw on, bar a few months working in a local restaurant.
It was time to organise something more significant: using a couple of local contacts I managed to arrange some time working in several departments of Staffordshire County Council. I got off to an inauspicious start after being asked to review a policy brochure, which I diligently did finding a number of minor linguistic criticisms, only to discover my supervisor for the morning had written it. Not the greatest way to endear yourself! But from that point onwards, the experience was useful and interesting. I was not made to feel like a tea boy (an often heard complaint of interns) and gained a good overview of local government. However, the placement, by the standards of employers, was not long enough. I've seen many supposed 'graduate' job adverts demand upwards of one year's experience in a relevant field; this seems unfair.
And so I reach the stage I am at today, having two degrees but very little 'real world' experience. It is not feasible for me to work and live for nothing so I must attempt to balance my minimum wage job with finding regular doses of more relevant (but unpaid) positions. This is easier said than done: while businesses are often prepared to take on someone for a week or two, or employ an intern for 12 weeks, it is more difficult to arrange one or two days per week over an indefinite period, which is ideally what I require. Given my personal interests, I have written to a number of local(ish) MPs of my particular political persuasion enquiring about any opportunities, but this is a very competitive field.
Work experience is the panacea that will cure my ills as a graduate job seeker. Nevertheless, who knew it could be this tricky to give away my services for nothing! If you're reading this and happen to have any work experience success/horror stories I'd love to hear them. Thanks for reading and keep commenting...
Sunday, 3 June 2012
(In)Competence
Its been almost a fortnight since my last instalment and in case any of you were wondering, I remain in search of graduate employment. However, despite my silence on the blogosphere, I have at least some positive news having had a telephone interview for the graduate scheme of an unnamed (cough) entertainments company. This being only the first stage in a long and arduous selection process, I'm not hugely optimistic of a positive outcome but at least they haven't thrown my application in the dustbin just yet...
The telephone interview took a very specific format and has prompted me to discuss a particular aspect of the graduate recruitment process: competene based questioning. With many large companies outsourcing the early stages of their selection process to recruitment consultants, the questions posed in initial telephone interviews are often vague and unspecific. They ask not about a candidate's suitability for a specific role, but instead ask for examples of certain key competencies, from leadership and teamwork to creativity and lateral thinking.
While I feel I am perfectly capable of demonstrating the majority of these faculties in given situations, I am frankly terrible at thinking of impressive and original examples, especially when prompted on the spot. No matter how many of these competencies I attempt to identify in advance and try to prepare for, I am invariably stumped by one or two I have neglected. In my case, this usually results in me bumbling my way through a fallacious and long-winded story loosely based on a distant past experience. In a recent unsuccessful interview, I created a largely fictitious (but very dramatic) tale of a teammate breaking an ankle on my gold Duke of Edinburgh's expedition as an example of my exceptional teamwork skills! Otherwise, I invariably resort to generic, unspecific and thoroughly unimpressive examples from my academic career which seem to go down like a lead balloon. Employers want substance it seems.
There is very little to stop candidates from simply making up examples of particular competencies. I have an old friend (who I hope is reading) that shamelessly added a charity climb of Kilimanjaro to his CV! It seems highly unlikely that any employer would take the time and effort to identify the veracity of a candidate's claims. So what are employers actually testing? This kind of questioning is just another meaningless way of filtering out a few more candidates, specifically those that lack the creativity or sheer gumption of others.
It is particularly frustrating to pass an initial screening process only to fall at the first significant hurdle, before you are given an opportunity to talk about the job or even company for which you have applied to work. It's just another one of the many hoops that graduates must jump through to land that first job. While lying is likely to land you in hot water further down the line, we've all been tempted to use a little creative licence to bolster our chances. For many of us, the reality of our day to day existence isn't quite enough to spark the interest of an employer searching for that 'unique' and 'special' candidate. Selling yourself is the name of the game and unfortunately it is a shameless and cynical process.
If any of those reading would like to share some of the tales you've told at interview that demonstrate what a talented person you are then I'd love to hear them.
Thanks once again for reading and don't forget to comment below...
The telephone interview took a very specific format and has prompted me to discuss a particular aspect of the graduate recruitment process: competene based questioning. With many large companies outsourcing the early stages of their selection process to recruitment consultants, the questions posed in initial telephone interviews are often vague and unspecific. They ask not about a candidate's suitability for a specific role, but instead ask for examples of certain key competencies, from leadership and teamwork to creativity and lateral thinking.
While I feel I am perfectly capable of demonstrating the majority of these faculties in given situations, I am frankly terrible at thinking of impressive and original examples, especially when prompted on the spot. No matter how many of these competencies I attempt to identify in advance and try to prepare for, I am invariably stumped by one or two I have neglected. In my case, this usually results in me bumbling my way through a fallacious and long-winded story loosely based on a distant past experience. In a recent unsuccessful interview, I created a largely fictitious (but very dramatic) tale of a teammate breaking an ankle on my gold Duke of Edinburgh's expedition as an example of my exceptional teamwork skills! Otherwise, I invariably resort to generic, unspecific and thoroughly unimpressive examples from my academic career which seem to go down like a lead balloon. Employers want substance it seems.
There is very little to stop candidates from simply making up examples of particular competencies. I have an old friend (who I hope is reading) that shamelessly added a charity climb of Kilimanjaro to his CV! It seems highly unlikely that any employer would take the time and effort to identify the veracity of a candidate's claims. So what are employers actually testing? This kind of questioning is just another meaningless way of filtering out a few more candidates, specifically those that lack the creativity or sheer gumption of others.
It is particularly frustrating to pass an initial screening process only to fall at the first significant hurdle, before you are given an opportunity to talk about the job or even company for which you have applied to work. It's just another one of the many hoops that graduates must jump through to land that first job. While lying is likely to land you in hot water further down the line, we've all been tempted to use a little creative licence to bolster our chances. For many of us, the reality of our day to day existence isn't quite enough to spark the interest of an employer searching for that 'unique' and 'special' candidate. Selling yourself is the name of the game and unfortunately it is a shameless and cynical process.
If any of those reading would like to share some of the tales you've told at interview that demonstrate what a talented person you are then I'd love to hear them.
Thanks once again for reading and don't forget to comment below...
Sunday, 20 May 2012
A Fresh Perspective
It's time for the next instalment of acrimonious grumbling on the state of the graduate job market. I've decided to take a different approach with this week's post, responding to the excellent feedback provided by a former schoolmate of mine, Damien Jordan. He provides a useful and alternative approach to the nature of graduate employment. From within the comfortable bubble of university or facing the grim reality of repeated rejections, it is easy to lose sight of the issues facing employers in tough economic times. Below is Damien's response to 'Wasted Potential' (13th May 2012) verbatim:
"In a lot of ways I agree with what you're saying. I know that it is hard for many graduates to find positions within reputable companies and that investment in graduate development is minimal at best, but i do think think that graduates need to except a few things as well.
Luckily for me I never had a problem finding a job; admittedly i didn't work very hard at uni, didn't have any relevant experience and ended up getting a 2:2 in business from Durham University, which is basically worthless as no employer outside of the North East is really aware of Durham's reputation. But i managed to find a graduate role in Manchester selling commercial property within 1 month of me leaving. In my interview my employer stated that my university degree meant nothing and that they were more interested in the fact that I had managed to blag myself flights to Iceland on a charity jail break.
I think when it comes to graduate roles competition is greater than ever, you now have a pool of at least three years worth of graduates competing for a decreased amount of job roles in a dire economic climate. Graduates need to understand that businesses are looking at the bottom line and reinvestment is a big thing when many companies are struggling to cover their current overheads.
I also think many graduates set their hopes too high and need to be a bit more realistic in their aspirations, just because you get a 1st doesn't mean you will work in Canary Wharf.
Also when you say there are many talented graduates, what is this talent based on? I would describe talent as a proven ability; 95% of graduates have no proven ability in anything but studying which in the wider world is a pretty useless skill. I appreciate that it demonstrates a capacity to learn but given time anyone can learn anything especially with money as a motivator. Some of the most successful people in my office have a shocking academic background.
I feel that the role of university has now changed it shouldn't be looked at as a way to increase your average earnings by 15k a year. Instead, I feel university offers a place for people to study something they are interested in and develop as individuals in a social sense. The lessons I learnt at Uni have certainly helped me in my current job roles but none of these lessons were learnt in lectures.
Employers value skills such as the ability to sell, confidence, professionalism and drive. I don't feel university fosters any of these skills. I really think now that before someone goes to university they need to ask themselves what the realistic outcome is, unless you go to Cambridge or Oxford there are no guarantees regarding work. In most cases any role you get as a graduate could have been achieved through starting in work after GCSEs, 5 years of relevant experience will always trump 5 years of non-related education and that's just the way it is."
Damien raises some very good points. I am in complete agreement that graduates need to accept a few home truths in an undoubtedly torrid economic climate; the world certainly doesn't owe us a living. Moreover, I agree that university teaches us far more than what we learn in our lectures and seminars. In terms of personal development, I feel I am a completely different person to the spotty faced fresher that arrived at Sussex almost five years ago now (that makes me feel a little old...).
However, I do not think the role of university has necessarily changed. They have always been institutions that foster knowledge, learning and facilitate the pursuit of individual interests. What has changed is the attitudes of big business and the government to the role of higher education: there is a demand from certain sectors for universities to produce the finished corporate article. Employers seem to demand graduates with skills that university does not foster while failing to recognise attributes that it does; this article from May 2011 summarises the nature of the issue well. For example, the CBI has emphasised skills such as 'business and customer awareness' or 'the application of information technology', skills which my history degree has done little to foster. In contrast, 'communication', 'self-management' and 'problem solving' are intrinsic to the role of a good historian, yet are apparently lacking in today's cohort of graduates in the eyes of employers.
Moreover, I do believe a successful academic performance at university is indicative of more than simply the capacity to learn. It takes drive, dedication and professionalism to achieve the best results. Unfortunately, there is an overriding perception in popular culture of students as drunkards, layabouts and freeloaders. That's not to say I didn't spend a good amount of my student days drinking, sleeping and scrimping but I also worked hard. It's frustrating to hear these kind of accusations levelled at me in my local pub by middle aged alcoholics over their copies of the Daily Mail.
In short, I know that when I do manage to land a graduate job I'll be utilising skills I learnt at university, both socially and academically.
Once again, many thanks to Damien for his excellent response. I encourage you all to keep reading and keep commenting!
"In a lot of ways I agree with what you're saying. I know that it is hard for many graduates to find positions within reputable companies and that investment in graduate development is minimal at best, but i do think think that graduates need to except a few things as well.
Luckily for me I never had a problem finding a job; admittedly i didn't work very hard at uni, didn't have any relevant experience and ended up getting a 2:2 in business from Durham University, which is basically worthless as no employer outside of the North East is really aware of Durham's reputation. But i managed to find a graduate role in Manchester selling commercial property within 1 month of me leaving. In my interview my employer stated that my university degree meant nothing and that they were more interested in the fact that I had managed to blag myself flights to Iceland on a charity jail break.
I think when it comes to graduate roles competition is greater than ever, you now have a pool of at least three years worth of graduates competing for a decreased amount of job roles in a dire economic climate. Graduates need to understand that businesses are looking at the bottom line and reinvestment is a big thing when many companies are struggling to cover their current overheads.
I also think many graduates set their hopes too high and need to be a bit more realistic in their aspirations, just because you get a 1st doesn't mean you will work in Canary Wharf.
Also when you say there are many talented graduates, what is this talent based on? I would describe talent as a proven ability; 95% of graduates have no proven ability in anything but studying which in the wider world is a pretty useless skill. I appreciate that it demonstrates a capacity to learn but given time anyone can learn anything especially with money as a motivator. Some of the most successful people in my office have a shocking academic background.
I feel that the role of university has now changed it shouldn't be looked at as a way to increase your average earnings by 15k a year. Instead, I feel university offers a place for people to study something they are interested in and develop as individuals in a social sense. The lessons I learnt at Uni have certainly helped me in my current job roles but none of these lessons were learnt in lectures.
Employers value skills such as the ability to sell, confidence, professionalism and drive. I don't feel university fosters any of these skills. I really think now that before someone goes to university they need to ask themselves what the realistic outcome is, unless you go to Cambridge or Oxford there are no guarantees regarding work. In most cases any role you get as a graduate could have been achieved through starting in work after GCSEs, 5 years of relevant experience will always trump 5 years of non-related education and that's just the way it is."
Damien raises some very good points. I am in complete agreement that graduates need to accept a few home truths in an undoubtedly torrid economic climate; the world certainly doesn't owe us a living. Moreover, I agree that university teaches us far more than what we learn in our lectures and seminars. In terms of personal development, I feel I am a completely different person to the spotty faced fresher that arrived at Sussex almost five years ago now (that makes me feel a little old...).
However, I do not think the role of university has necessarily changed. They have always been institutions that foster knowledge, learning and facilitate the pursuit of individual interests. What has changed is the attitudes of big business and the government to the role of higher education: there is a demand from certain sectors for universities to produce the finished corporate article. Employers seem to demand graduates with skills that university does not foster while failing to recognise attributes that it does; this article from May 2011 summarises the nature of the issue well. For example, the CBI has emphasised skills such as 'business and customer awareness' or 'the application of information technology', skills which my history degree has done little to foster. In contrast, 'communication', 'self-management' and 'problem solving' are intrinsic to the role of a good historian, yet are apparently lacking in today's cohort of graduates in the eyes of employers.
Moreover, I do believe a successful academic performance at university is indicative of more than simply the capacity to learn. It takes drive, dedication and professionalism to achieve the best results. Unfortunately, there is an overriding perception in popular culture of students as drunkards, layabouts and freeloaders. That's not to say I didn't spend a good amount of my student days drinking, sleeping and scrimping but I also worked hard. It's frustrating to hear these kind of accusations levelled at me in my local pub by middle aged alcoholics over their copies of the Daily Mail.
In short, I know that when I do manage to land a graduate job I'll be utilising skills I learnt at university, both socially and academically.
Once again, many thanks to Damien for his excellent response. I encourage you all to keep reading and keep commenting!
Sunday, 13 May 2012
Wasted Potential
William Hague today suggested we must all 'work harder' to drag the country out of recession, drawing parallels with Norman Tebbit's 'on your bike' message of the eighties, the suggestion being that many today are simply too feckless to do a hard day's graft. This idealised view of a depression era work-ethic is symptomatic of a wider problem associated with the current job market - that recent graduates are privileged, lazy and apparently know little of the so called 'real world'. While the man on the street has long perceived students this way, it seems employers are increasingly adopting a similar view. This brings me neatly on to this week's topic: that of demonstrable experience.
In my search for employment, it's particularly frustrating to see employers demanding two years relevant experience for supposed 'graduate' jobs. This is unfortunately a recent problem. In decades past candidates may have been employed based on their potential; a solid performance at university was indicative of the ability to grow into a job role (or so I am reliably informed!). Today, it seems recruiters are demanding fully fledged professionals immediately after graduation, as is demonstrated by the many demands from big employers to teach 'key business skills' - whatever they may be. It is entirely unreasonable of employers to expect candidates to have amassed a wealth of practical experience alongside their academic studies. Even those I know fortunate enough to have completed internships and summer placements (a significant financial burden for many) are struggling to land that all-important first graduate job.
The demands for 'experience' seem to be a problem for arts graduates in particular, where the transferable skills acquired are sidelined in favour of vocational qualifications. Employers want to minimise their risk rather than gambling on untested candidates. In my opinion, a balance must be struck. There will always be a demand for those with vocational skills, but the transferable skills acquired in more general degrees are equally important. These are graduates that can be shaped and moulded into a whole variety of job roles; it is the responsibility of employers to recognise potential and use it to their own benefit. There is a vast pool of talent out there but businesses seem increasingly unwilling to take a short-term risk for a long-term gain.
Instead, there are many talented graduates working in roles where their skills are either not needed or vastly underused. To take the example of my current minimum wage job, I work in a role that, in all reality, the vast majority of people could do with the right training. Many young, ambitious and talented people are working exceptionally hard in tough times, yet are not being offered the opportunities that will allow them to progress in their careers. In my layman's opinion, it is not 'working harder' that will drag the country out of recession, but investment in potential.
In my search for employment, it's particularly frustrating to see employers demanding two years relevant experience for supposed 'graduate' jobs. This is unfortunately a recent problem. In decades past candidates may have been employed based on their potential; a solid performance at university was indicative of the ability to grow into a job role (or so I am reliably informed!). Today, it seems recruiters are demanding fully fledged professionals immediately after graduation, as is demonstrated by the many demands from big employers to teach 'key business skills' - whatever they may be. It is entirely unreasonable of employers to expect candidates to have amassed a wealth of practical experience alongside their academic studies. Even those I know fortunate enough to have completed internships and summer placements (a significant financial burden for many) are struggling to land that all-important first graduate job.
The demands for 'experience' seem to be a problem for arts graduates in particular, where the transferable skills acquired are sidelined in favour of vocational qualifications. Employers want to minimise their risk rather than gambling on untested candidates. In my opinion, a balance must be struck. There will always be a demand for those with vocational skills, but the transferable skills acquired in more general degrees are equally important. These are graduates that can be shaped and moulded into a whole variety of job roles; it is the responsibility of employers to recognise potential and use it to their own benefit. There is a vast pool of talent out there but businesses seem increasingly unwilling to take a short-term risk for a long-term gain.
Instead, there are many talented graduates working in roles where their skills are either not needed or vastly underused. To take the example of my current minimum wage job, I work in a role that, in all reality, the vast majority of people could do with the right training. Many young, ambitious and talented people are working exceptionally hard in tough times, yet are not being offered the opportunities that will allow them to progress in their careers. In my layman's opinion, it is not 'working harder' that will drag the country out of recession, but investment in potential.
Sunday, 6 May 2012
Job Search 101
My quest to find a graduate job has taken me to many far flung recesses of the world wide web - with so many sites and boards displaying lists of vacancies, it's often difficult to pick out the best opportunities. Many sites offer a huge array of different search options and filters designed to help you pick out the perfect job, however, in reality, the search is never simple.
The first obstacle you must overcome is the bane of many a graduate job seeker - recruitment consultancy. If you can figure out how to remove these jobs from your search then you have taken a significant step. Somehow jobs in recruitment seem to crop up in every sector (despite the recession!) - it seems there is always a ready market for arts graduates to help other arts graduates find jobs recruiting arts graduates. Without wishing to belittle the noble and ancient profession of recruitment consultancy, I can't help but feel that, although financially profitable, it is not a path that provides a great deal of career progression or job satisfaction (if you know otherwise feel free to set me straight). In short, it is not for me.
So, if you are able to remove these jobs from your search, what remains? If you are using some of the better known graduate job boards, for example Milkround, Target or Prospects, then you are most likely left with a selection of highly lucrative but exceptionally competitive graduate schemes. I have tried and failed in applying to a whole host of these - many seem the worst culprits for long winded application forms, banal testing and delayed responses. With hindsight, I don't think I would be suited to a life in big business but that is beside the point. Many statistics are quoted in the national press about 80 candidates responding to every available position and it is perhaps these jobs that they are referring to. An aspiring graduate must broaden their horizons if they wish to shorten their odds.
As Tanya de Grunwald and her excellent Graduate Fog website have suggested (I suggest you read for a far more thorough dissection of the problems faced by recent graduates), with a little extra effort things can be made easier. Smaller firms often don't have the time or the resources to advertise on the major jobs boards, instead preferring trade magazines and niche websites. By searching out these nooks and corners of the job market you are already displaying your quality as a candidate. Better still, your chances of employment are significantly increased. In addition, these firms often request only a CV and a Cover Letter, a format that is far less time consuming than the short essays demanded by some big companies. This is not to say that you shouldn't tailor an application to an employer, but at least you can be a little more efficient in the use of your time and even re-use certain sections. As a failing job seeker myself, you can take these tips with a pinch of salt, but I hope they may be of some use.
After many months without success, this is the approach on which I am now focusing my efforts. It remains to be seen whether it will deliver a result, but the jobs I am finding now seem a little more appropriate for my skill-set and importantly, more fulfilling.
The first obstacle you must overcome is the bane of many a graduate job seeker - recruitment consultancy. If you can figure out how to remove these jobs from your search then you have taken a significant step. Somehow jobs in recruitment seem to crop up in every sector (despite the recession!) - it seems there is always a ready market for arts graduates to help other arts graduates find jobs recruiting arts graduates. Without wishing to belittle the noble and ancient profession of recruitment consultancy, I can't help but feel that, although financially profitable, it is not a path that provides a great deal of career progression or job satisfaction (if you know otherwise feel free to set me straight). In short, it is not for me.
So, if you are able to remove these jobs from your search, what remains? If you are using some of the better known graduate job boards, for example Milkround, Target or Prospects, then you are most likely left with a selection of highly lucrative but exceptionally competitive graduate schemes. I have tried and failed in applying to a whole host of these - many seem the worst culprits for long winded application forms, banal testing and delayed responses. With hindsight, I don't think I would be suited to a life in big business but that is beside the point. Many statistics are quoted in the national press about 80 candidates responding to every available position and it is perhaps these jobs that they are referring to. An aspiring graduate must broaden their horizons if they wish to shorten their odds.
As Tanya de Grunwald and her excellent Graduate Fog website have suggested (I suggest you read for a far more thorough dissection of the problems faced by recent graduates), with a little extra effort things can be made easier. Smaller firms often don't have the time or the resources to advertise on the major jobs boards, instead preferring trade magazines and niche websites. By searching out these nooks and corners of the job market you are already displaying your quality as a candidate. Better still, your chances of employment are significantly increased. In addition, these firms often request only a CV and a Cover Letter, a format that is far less time consuming than the short essays demanded by some big companies. This is not to say that you shouldn't tailor an application to an employer, but at least you can be a little more efficient in the use of your time and even re-use certain sections. As a failing job seeker myself, you can take these tips with a pinch of salt, but I hope they may be of some use.
After many months without success, this is the approach on which I am now focusing my efforts. It remains to be seen whether it will deliver a result, but the jobs I am finding now seem a little more appropriate for my skill-set and importantly, more fulfilling.
Saturday, 28 April 2012
Testing Testing
I assumed that after 17 years in full time education I'd had my fair share of tests, exams and assessments. It all began back in Year 2 with SATs - I can't remember them in the slightest but I'm going to assume I passed. Fast forward a decade and there were GCSEs and A-Levels, which at the time felt like they were the be all and end all. They were not; as with many things in life, it soon became apparent that they were merely stepping stones towards a far more diffuse aim, that of beginning that elusive thing known as 'a career'. After a further four years at university and the accordant exams, essays and dissertations, I was thoroughly tested out; but at least I had numerous certificates to prove my academic credentials and (I hoped) my intelligence.
Needless to say, when it comes to applying for graduate jobs this is not enough. During applications I have been subjected to a variety of tests and assessments, all of which are designed as a convenient method of unearthing the perfect candidate. Putting the practicalities of filtering through hundreds of applicants aside, it is more than a little frustrating to have my 17 years of education dismissed on the basis of a 15 minute online test. In my opinion, there are many different forms of intelligence, not all of which are tailored to answering logic puzzles or verbal reasoning questions. It is a means of selection that ensures successful candidates come from a very particular mould with a very generic skill set. This may be what businesses and other recruiters want, but I know they are dismissing very talented people on what appears to be an arbitrary basis; there is no room to prove creativity or demonstrate any strength of character. It seems like a lazy method of recruitment.
These tests take a variety of forms, some of which have come as a shock after four years studying humanities. Firstly, the verbal reasoning test: these questions comprise a short paragraph followed by a series of statements which the candidate must state as 'true', 'false' or 'cannot tell' based on the information given. Its not that these tests are phenomenally difficult (they perhaps suit my skills as a historian), but the time limits are tight - you must work quickly if you are to assess the text and answer 40 statements in 15 minutes. Secondly, there is the numeracy test which, having given up Maths after GCSE, certainly has proved challenging. In some spectacularly poor time management, on my first attempt at this type of assessment, I managed to answer 10 out of 20 questions in the allocated time - of the questions answered I managed to get 9 correct but this was largely irrelevant considering how long it was taking me to work through each conundrum. It seems I need to brush up on my skills.
Finally, we come to my most detested of all the tests used by employers, psychometric analysis. Tests where there is no right or wrong answer, merely scenarios designed to find out what kind of person you are - whether you are an introvert or an extrovert, to discover your work ethic, your attitudes and your weaknesses. I can only presume that recruiters associate particular traits with particular roles - again this seems arbitrary and unfair. Give me an interview and you would discover what type of person I am within five minutes.
I may be able to give you a detailed analysis of Rousseau's 'Social Contract' or Montesquieu's 'Spirit of the Laws'; ask me about the popular reaction to the French Revolution in Britain and I will talk to you for an hour - but none of this matters in the real world. Because I am not an extrovert and because I prefer to work independently, this is translated by some to mean 'boring' and not a 'team player'. I am no expert on psychology but I fear the likes of Jung and Freud would be turning in their graves if they saw the way their theories were manipulated and erroneously applied by some employers...
Needless to say, when it comes to applying for graduate jobs this is not enough. During applications I have been subjected to a variety of tests and assessments, all of which are designed as a convenient method of unearthing the perfect candidate. Putting the practicalities of filtering through hundreds of applicants aside, it is more than a little frustrating to have my 17 years of education dismissed on the basis of a 15 minute online test. In my opinion, there are many different forms of intelligence, not all of which are tailored to answering logic puzzles or verbal reasoning questions. It is a means of selection that ensures successful candidates come from a very particular mould with a very generic skill set. This may be what businesses and other recruiters want, but I know they are dismissing very talented people on what appears to be an arbitrary basis; there is no room to prove creativity or demonstrate any strength of character. It seems like a lazy method of recruitment.
These tests take a variety of forms, some of which have come as a shock after four years studying humanities. Firstly, the verbal reasoning test: these questions comprise a short paragraph followed by a series of statements which the candidate must state as 'true', 'false' or 'cannot tell' based on the information given. Its not that these tests are phenomenally difficult (they perhaps suit my skills as a historian), but the time limits are tight - you must work quickly if you are to assess the text and answer 40 statements in 15 minutes. Secondly, there is the numeracy test which, having given up Maths after GCSE, certainly has proved challenging. In some spectacularly poor time management, on my first attempt at this type of assessment, I managed to answer 10 out of 20 questions in the allocated time - of the questions answered I managed to get 9 correct but this was largely irrelevant considering how long it was taking me to work through each conundrum. It seems I need to brush up on my skills.
Finally, we come to my most detested of all the tests used by employers, psychometric analysis. Tests where there is no right or wrong answer, merely scenarios designed to find out what kind of person you are - whether you are an introvert or an extrovert, to discover your work ethic, your attitudes and your weaknesses. I can only presume that recruiters associate particular traits with particular roles - again this seems arbitrary and unfair. Give me an interview and you would discover what type of person I am within five minutes.
I may be able to give you a detailed analysis of Rousseau's 'Social Contract' or Montesquieu's 'Spirit of the Laws'; ask me about the popular reaction to the French Revolution in Britain and I will talk to you for an hour - but none of this matters in the real world. Because I am not an extrovert and because I prefer to work independently, this is translated by some to mean 'boring' and not a 'team player'. I am no expert on psychology but I fear the likes of Jung and Freud would be turning in their graves if they saw the way their theories were manipulated and erroneously applied by some employers...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)