If a candidate I did not hire wants to make me uncomfortable, they only need to ask for feedback. (I will revisit this.)
Self-proclaiming job search experts and career coaches commonly advise asking for feedback when you do not get the job you have interviewed for. The thinking—as if all hiring managers assess candidates in the same way—is that you will learn “tips” on improving your interview performance.
Employers own their hiring process, to which job seekers are not entitled transparency to. Nor do employers owe candidates an explanation of how they select candidates. Consequently, job seekers have no idea whether their application or resume has been reviewed and discarded or gone into a black hole.
Even if someone looks at your resume and LinkedIn profile, you will not know why you were not selected for an interview. Likewise, if you were interviewed, you will not know why you did not get the job. There are infinite reasons why you did not get selected, the most probable:
An internal candidate got the job.
There was a candidate who interviewed better than you and was a better fit. (It is possible.).
None of the candidates the employer has interviewed has met their criteria, so they are still looking.
The employer has decided not to fill the job at this time. (This is common, given the talk of a looming recession.)
A candidate networked themselves into being hired. (It is no secret that most highly desirable jobs are filled through referrals.)
So, besides being a regular reader of this column, how do you improve your job search skills, particularly when interviewing, if you don’t ask for feedback? By asking for advice rather than feedback.
As I mentioned, being asked to give feedback makes me uncomfortable. The last thing I want to do is hurt a candidate’s feelings. There is also the possibility that my feedback might be twisted to create a narrative for legal issues. This is the prevailing reason why I, and almost all hiring managers, avoid giving feedback. (“We had numerous applicants…”)
However, when someone asks me for my advice, I become a chatterbox.
Asking for feedback is asking, “How did I do?”
Asking for advice is asking, “What can I do?”
Advice has a very different tone. If you have built a bond with your interviewer, which you should have to some extent, you should feel comfortable asking for advice. Think about the last time someone asked you for advice. I am sure you were flattered.
How does this feel?
“While I’m disappointed I wasn’t selected, thank you for interviewing me and assessing my skills and experience. As you know, I am seeking a senior analyst position with a mid-size IT firm. Do you have any advice for someone with my background searching for such an opportunity?”
Tell me this does not feel very different from asking for feedback, which, to be honest, is essentially asking, “Why did you not hire me?”
Feedback is pointless because, as the name implies, it is backward-looking. Feedback is an “evaluation” of past performance. On the other hand, when you ask someone for advice, they are more likely to think critically and specifically about how you can improve to succeed in the future.
Here are two tips to help you get advice you can use in your job search.
Be specific in the advice you seek.
If you need help in a specific area (e.g., your resume, cover letter, networking, interviewing, LinkedIn profile), specifying where you need help will make the advice you are given relevant. For example, do you need help crafting STAR (Situation, Task, Action, Result) stories to answer behavioural interview questions more compellingly?
“When you ask me to tell you about a time when I handled a challenging situation, I felt my response, the story I told, wasn’t resonating enough. What advice can you give me on improving my response to this question which I’m sure I’ll be asked in future interviews?”
You will receive more specific and actionable advice if you ask people to think about what you feel will help you in the future.
“Can you offer me any advice on improving my presentation skills so I can deliver a more powerful presentation than I did with you and Carminia?” or “What suggestions would you have for making my slides more eye-catching?”
Give a little nudge.
Do not end the conversation if you are given a vague answer like “You did great. However, there was a candidate whose background was a better match,” which is probably true. Probe further.
“In what ways can I improve how I present my background, so my next interviewer will clearly see how my background meets their needs?”
Good advice can transform your job search.
Lastly, your interviewer does not owe you advice or feedback. Be respectful of their hiring decision. They know what they need in their next employee. Insisting on being given advice or feedback—aggressive behaviour—will be remembered should you and your interviewer cross paths down the road, which is more common than you think.
Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned veteran of the corporate landscape, offers “unsweetened” job search advice. You can send Nick your questions to artoffindingwork@gmail.com.
MONTREAL – Travel company Transat AT Inc. reported a loss in its latest quarter compared with a profit a year earlier as its revenue edged lower.
The parent company of Air Transat says it lost $39.9 million or $1.03 per diluted share in its quarter ended July 31.
The result compared with a profit of $57.3 million or $1.49 per diluted share a year earlier.
Revenue in what was the company’s third quarter totalled $736.2 million, down from $746.3 million in the same quarter last year.
On an adjusted basis, Transat says it lost $1.10 per share in its latest quarter compared with an adjusted profit of $1.10 per share a year earlier.
Transat chief executive Annick Guérard says demand for leisure travel remains healthy, as evidenced by higher traffic, but consumers are increasingly price conscious given the current economic uncertainty.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 12, 2024.
Dollarama Inc.’s food aisles may have expanded far beyond sweet treats or piles of gum by the checkout counter in recent years, but its chief executive maintains his company is “not in the grocery business,” even if it’s keeping an eye on the sector.
“It’s just one small part of our store,” Neil Rossy told analysts on a Wednesday call, where he was questioned about the company’s food merchandise and rivals playing in the same space.
“We will keep an eye on all retailers — like all retailers keep an eye on us — to make sure that we’re competitive and we understand what’s out there.”
Over the last decade and as consumers have more recently sought deals, Dollarama’s food merchandise has expanded to include bread and pantry staples like cereal, rice and pasta sold at prices on par or below supermarkets.
However, the competition in the discount segment of the market Dollarama operates in intensified recently when the country’s biggest grocery chain began piloting a new ultra-discount store.
The No Name stores being tested by Loblaw Cos. Ltd. in Windsor, St. Catharines and Brockville, Ont., are billed as 20 per cent cheaper than discount retail competitors including No Frills. The grocery giant is able to offer such cost savings by relying on a smaller store footprint, fewer chilled products and a hearty range of No Name merchandise.
Though Rossy brushed off notions that his company is a supermarket challenger, grocers aren’t off his radar.
“All retailers in Canada are realistic about the fact that everyone is everyone’s competition on any given item or category,” he said.
Rossy declined to reveal how much of the chain’s sales would overlap with Loblaw or the food category, arguing the vast variety of items Dollarama sells is its strength rather than its grocery products alone.
“What makes Dollarama Dollarama is a very wide assortment of different departments that somewhat represent the old five-and-dime local convenience store,” he said.
The breadth of Dollarama’s offerings helped carry the company to a second-quarter profit of $285.9 million, up from $245.8 million in the same quarter last year as its sales rose 7.4 per cent.
The retailer said Wednesday the profit amounted to $1.02 per diluted share for the 13-week period ended July 28, up from 86 cents per diluted share a year earlier.
The period the quarter covers includes the start of summer, when Rossy said the weather was “terrible.”
“The weather got slightly better towards the end of the summer and our sales certainly increased, but not enough to make up for the season’s horrible start,” he said.
Sales totalled $1.56 billion for the quarter, up from $1.46 billion in the same quarter last year.
Comparable store sales, a key metric for retailers, increased 4.7 per cent, while the average transaction was down2.2 per cent and traffic was up seven per cent, RBC analyst Irene Nattel pointed out.
She told investors in a note that the numbers reflect “solid demand as cautious consumers focus on core consumables and everyday essentials.”
Analysts have attributed such behaviour to interest rates that have been slow to drop and high prices of key consumer goods, which are weighing on household budgets.
To cope, many Canadians have spent more time seeking deals, trading down to more affordable brands and forgoing small luxuries they would treat themselves to in better economic times.
“When people feel squeezed, they tend to shy away from discretionary, focus on the basics,” Rossy said. “When people are feeling good about their wallet, they tend to be more lax about the basics and more willing to spend on discretionary.”
The current economic situation has drawn in not just the average Canadian looking to save a buck or two, but also wealthier consumers.
“When the entire economy is feeling slightly squeezed, we get more consumers who might not have to or want to shop at a Dollarama generally or who enjoy shopping at a Dollarama but have the luxury of not having to worry about the price in some other store that they happen to be standing in that has those goods,” Rossy said.
“Well, when times are tougher, they’ll consider the extra five minutes to go to the store next door.”
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 11, 2024.
TORONTO – The U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has ordered TD Bank Group to pay US$28 million for repeatedly sharing inaccurate, negative information about its customers to consumer reporting companies.
The agency says TD has to pay US$7.76 million in total to tens of thousands of victims of its illegal actions, along with a US$20 million civil penalty.
It says TD shared information that contained systemic errors about credit card and bank deposit accounts to consumer reporting companies, which can include credit reports as well as screening reports for tenants and employees and other background checks.
CFPB director Rohit Chopra says in a statement that TD threatened the consumer reports of customers with fraudulent information then “barely lifted a finger to fix it,” and that regulators will need to “focus major attention” on TD Bank to change its course.
TD says in a statement it self-identified these issues and proactively worked to improve its practices, and that it is committed to delivering on its responsibilities to its customers.
The bank also faces scrutiny in the U.S. over its anti-money laundering program where it expects to pay more than US$3 billion in monetary penalties to resolve.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 11, 2024.
