Job application etiquette - Page 2

Undertoad · 12-17-2006, 10:58 PM

I was pursued by a headhunter, figured out which company she was working for, applied directly via their website... only to get a call a week later from the very same headhunter, who explained that she was basically their HR department at this point and was handling all the contacts from the website.

monster · 12-17-2006, 11:16 PM

Ya coulda stopped and said hi, Beestie! I'm easy to spot -I have purple, red and blue hair. And a loud semi-brit/aussie/foreign accent. Nobody screams at their kids in public quite like a Brit

I guess employment agencies don't work like real estate agencies then? I wouldn't have a clue, I am so far out of the job market thing. And happy about it.

12-18-2006, 05:28 AM

In addition to the aforementioned convenience of outsourcing its recruiting function to an agency, an employer may prefer to be anonymous for other reasons:

The employer may be planning to terminate the person currently filling the job position; but, doesn't yet want the employee to find out about it, through job advertisements for his/her position, until it has procured a replacement.

The employer may not want its employees to know that it's recruiting from outside rather than promoting from within.

The employer may have a bad reputation (e.g. high employee turnover) and want to hook prospective employees with its offer before the working environment is disclosed.

*If your overall impression is that the employer prefers to remain anonymous at this stage, honor the employer's intentions. Keep direct contact with the employer as an option should you not get past the agency screening. Directly contacting the employer and/or naming them in your correspondence may open up a can of worms that the employer hoped to avoid by opting for anonymity. Use the identifying information to research the prospective employer.

yesman065 · 12-18-2006, 08:12 AM

Most companies don't list their name because they don't want to field a zillion phone calls during their initial screening phase. The last thing you should do (IMO) is just show up. Mentioning that you know who they are and how you could benefit them specifically would/should be to your advantage. It shows your serious and that you did your research = a big + for you.
My SO was recently looking and applied to companies that she thought would be great to work for even though they didn't post openings. She eventually landed several interview and scored a really nice position with one of them.

kerosene · 12-18-2006, 08:45 PM

I was going through this application/interview process for several months before finally landing a permanent job. I found the confidential job listing concept kind of funny, but frustrating in most cases. After talking to dozens of recruiters from all different agencies about countless "jobs" (most were not full time or direct with their client) I determined that recruiters do this for one or more of the following reasons:

1. The recruiter is trying to fill the position at a large company who uses the service of many agencies. If they revealed the name of the company right off, nothing would stop competing agencies from advertising the same "lead" (position) and stealing their contract unless the client company has made an exclusive agreement with one agency. This scenario seemed somewhat common in my experience.

The most frustrating aspect of this scenario for me was the fact that I didn't know to whom I was applying for the position and if more than one recruiter submits the same candidate's information, the client will not consider them (I actually have my doubts about the truth in that, but I have been told this by several recruiters. It could be a bold face lie, for the purpose of limiting the recruiter's competition.) If it were true, I wouldn't necessarily know whether or not I was being "double-submitted" and could be applying for the same job 6 times instead of applying for 6 different similar positions.

2. Sometimes the client company requests that they remain confidential in job postings, I suspect because they don't want job searchers approaching them directly. If the job is a contract position, it is likely that the company cannot (for budget or internally political reasons) create a direct-hire requisition, so they play the work-around game and hire contractors that serve a limited term in the position.

3. If a recruiter is posting the position it could be confidential for the purposes of attracting the highest number of possible candidates. If the company name is listed, they run the risk of deterring qualified candidates from the position due to any personal negative feelings about their client before the recruiter even has a chance to see the candidate's credentials. If the recruiter sees something he/she likes, and finds out the candidate will absolutely "not" work for ABC Corp. the recruiter can then either sell the position with other benefits of working in the position or match the candidate with any other opportunities that may be available.

You may be able to tell that I suspect this is a contract or contract-to-hire situation. It may not be, but that is just my suspicion. I would not worry about the confidentiality on your part...it was obviously in plain text in the description, so if it was a recruiter mistake, they can filter out anything that would get from you to the client to save their own ass. If it is a client, well, then you are going to find out who they are sooner than later, anyway. I think it shows that you don't let anything get past you to actually mention the name. Think "detail oriented." Usually, by the time the recruiter calls, you can have a list of questions which should include "Who is the client?"

SteveDallas · 12-18-2006, 09:55 PM

If it is a contract position, they're rather misrepresenting it. I believe this is from the company itself and not a recruiter, but I could be wrong.

I have also heard that some companies want to see if they attract any applications from current employees, thereby learning who is on the job market.

Ironically, the more I read the job description the more I'm inclined not to apply. (What looked like an internal IT position at first glance looks more like a sales kind of thing dealing with customers.)

kerosene · 12-18-2006, 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteveDallas

Ironically, the more I read the job description the more I'm inclined not to apply. (What looked like an internal IT position at first glance looks more like a sales kind of thing dealing with customers.)

That explains it.

Undertoad · 12-18-2006, 10:53 PM

Scam?

Google the company name and see if they are on the first page of results.

lookout123 · 12-19-2006, 01:06 AM

as a former headhunter i'd say that their recruiting dept was just sloppy. there are many reasons for a company to list positions confidentially the most common being that it is a really popular company and people will send applications regardless of the position causing the recruiter to have to weed out a lot of crap and possibly miss someone who is in fact qualified for the position. A close second is that the job to be filled is currently held by someone else who just might come across the ad and then behave in an undesireable manner.

Go ahead and put together a proper letter using their company name. it shows that you took the time to read the whole listing. it shows that you are able to pick out the important details. it shows that you are one of the VERY VERY VERY few individuals who still has the initiative to put together an appropriate letter. most folks just send crappy looking resumes and can't figure out why they don't get more calls.

wolf · 12-19-2006, 01:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undertoad

What you do is ignore it, but use the information to your advantage. Look up their details and figure out what their needs are.

Seconded.

SteveDallas · 12-19-2006, 10:18 AM

This is all such good advice I'm tempted to apply for the job just so I can take it!

Anyway, I'm not going to do it. It's chief technology officer for a telecom company. At first glance it looked like an internal running the IT shop kind of thing. But as I look over it, it also involves dealing with major customers to make sure they're buying the right stuff, and I'm not sure a) I want to be in sales, even peripherally and b) if it even makes sense to have these functions rolled together.

The kicker, I think, is that they specifically ask for experience in the telecom industry, so this one isn't worth my while.

View Poll Results: Should I mention the name of the company?
No, just ignore it in your letter	7	46.67%
Yes, you might as well	8	53.33%
Voters: 15. You may not vote on this poll

12-17-2006, 11:16 PM	#17
monster I hear them call the tide Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Perpetual Chaos Posts: 30,852	Ya coulda stopped and said hi, Beestie! I'm easy to spot -I have purple, red and blue hair. And a loud semi-brit/aussie/foreign accent. Nobody screams at their kids in public quite like a Brit I guess employment agencies don't work like real estate agencies then? I wouldn't have a clue, I am so far out of the job market thing. And happy about it. __________________ The most difficult thing is the decision to act, the rest is merely tenacity Amelia Earhart

12-19-2006, 01:06 AM	#24
lookout123 changed his status to single Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Right behind you. No, the other side. Posts: 10,308	as a former headhunter i'd say that their recruiting dept was just sloppy. there are many reasons for a company to list positions confidentially the most common being that it is a really popular company and people will send applications regardless of the position causing the recruiter to have to weed out a lot of crap and possibly miss someone who is in fact qualified for the position. A close second is that the job to be filled is currently held by someone else who just might come across the ad and then behave in an undesireable manner. Go ahead and put together a proper letter using their company name. it shows that you took the time to read the whole listing. it shows that you are able to pick out the important details. it shows that you are one of the VERY VERY VERY few individuals who still has the initiative to put together an appropriate letter. most folks just send crappy looking resumes and can't figure out why they don't get more calls. __________________ Getting knocked down is no sin, it's not getting back up that's the sin

12-17-2006, 10:58 PM	#16
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	I was pursued by a headhunter, figured out which company she was working for, applied directly via their website... only to get a call a week later from the very same headhunter, who explained that she was basically their HR department at this point and was handling all the contacts from the website.

12-18-2006, 05:28 AM	#18
NoBoxes Guest Posts: n/a	In addition to the aforementioned convenience of outsourcing its recruiting function to an agency, an employer may prefer to be anonymous for other reasons: The employer may be planning to terminate the person currently filling the job position; but, doesn't yet want the employee to find out about it, through job advertisements for his/her position, until it has procured a replacement. The employer may not want its employees to know that it's recruiting from outside rather than promoting from within. The employer may have a bad reputation (e.g. high employee turnover) and want to hook prospective employees with its offer before the working environment is disclosed. *If your overall impression is that the employer prefers to remain anonymous at this stage, honor the employer's intentions. Keep direct contact with the employer as an option should you not get past the agency screening. Directly contacting the employer and/or naming them in your correspondence may open up a can of worms that the employer hoped to avoid by opting for anonymity. Use the identifying information to research the prospective employer.

12-18-2006, 08:12 AM	#19
yesman065 Banned - Self Imposed Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 1,847	Most companies don't list their name because they don't want to field a zillion phone calls during their initial screening phase. The last thing you should do (IMO) is just show up. Mentioning that you know who they are and how you could benefit them specifically would/should be to your advantage. It shows your serious and that you did your research = a big + for you. My SO was recently looking and applied to companies that she thought would be great to work for even though they didn't post openings. She eventually landed several interview and scored a really nice position with one of them.

12-18-2006, 08:45 PM	#20
kerosene Touring the facilities Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: The plains of Colorado Posts: 3,476	I was going through this application/interview process for several months before finally landing a permanent job. I found the confidential job listing concept kind of funny, but frustrating in most cases. After talking to dozens of recruiters from all different agencies about countless "jobs" (most were not full time or direct with their client) I determined that recruiters do this for one or more of the following reasons: 1. The recruiter is trying to fill the position at a large company who uses the service of many agencies. If they revealed the name of the company right off, nothing would stop competing agencies from advertising the same "lead" (position) and stealing their contract unless the client company has made an exclusive agreement with one agency. This scenario seemed somewhat common in my experience. The most frustrating aspect of this scenario for me was the fact that I didn't know to whom I was applying for the position and if more than one recruiter submits the same candidate's information, the client will not consider them (I actually have my doubts about the truth in that, but I have been told this by several recruiters. It could be a bold face lie, for the purpose of limiting the recruiter's competition.) If it were true, I wouldn't necessarily know whether or not I was being "double-submitted" and could be applying for the same job 6 times instead of applying for 6 different similar positions. 2. Sometimes the client company requests that they remain confidential in job postings, I suspect because they don't want job searchers approaching them directly. If the job is a contract position, it is likely that the company cannot (for budget or internally political reasons) create a direct-hire requisition, so they play the work-around game and hire contractors that serve a limited term in the position. 3. If a recruiter is posting the position it could be confidential for the purposes of attracting the highest number of possible candidates. If the company name is listed, they run the risk of deterring qualified candidates from the position due to any personal negative feelings about their client before the recruiter even has a chance to see the candidate's credentials. If the recruiter sees something he/she likes, and finds out the candidate will absolutely "not" work for ABC Corp. the recruiter can then either sell the position with other benefits of working in the position or match the candidate with any other opportunities that may be available. You may be able to tell that I suspect this is a contract or contract-to-hire situation. It may not be, but that is just my suspicion. I would not worry about the confidentiality on your part...it was obviously in plain text in the description, so if it was a recruiter mistake, they can filter out anything that would get from you to the client to save their own ass. If it is a client, well, then you are going to find out who they are sooner than later, anyway. I think it shows that you don't let anything get past you to actually mention the name. Think "detail oriented." Usually, by the time the recruiter calls, you can have a list of questions which should include "Who is the client?"

12-18-2006, 09:55 PM	#21
SteveDallas Your Bartender Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Philly Burbs, PA Posts: 7,651	If it is a contract position, they're rather misrepresenting it. I believe this is from the company itself and not a recruiter, but I could be wrong. I have also heard that some companies want to see if they attract any applications from current employees, thereby learning who is on the job market. Ironically, the more I read the job description the more I'm inclined not to apply. (What looked like an internal IT position at first glance looks more like a sales kind of thing dealing with customers.)

12-18-2006, 10:53 PM	#23
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	Scam? Google the company name and see if they are on the first page of results.

12-19-2006, 10:18 AM	#26
SteveDallas Your Bartender Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Philly Burbs, PA Posts: 7,651	This is all such good advice I'm tempted to apply for the job just so I can take it! Anyway, I'm not going to do it. It's chief technology officer for a telecom company. At first glance it looked like an internal running the IT shop kind of thing. But as I look over it, it also involves dealing with major customers to make sure they're buying the right stuff, and I'm not sure a) I want to be in sales, even peripherally and b) if it even makes sense to have these functions rolled together. The kicker, I think, is that they specifically ask for experience in the telecom industry, so this one isn't worth my while.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)