« Breaking: OJ Simpson Sentenced to 15 Years | Main | The Wizbang Effect »

What Color Is Your Accessory

The career book, 'What Color is Your Parachute', has been a mainstay for job-seekers and career changers for literally decades. Richard Nelson Bolles has enjoyed a certain niche dominance, as even modern gurus of the field consider this book a "bible" for job-hunting. And like the religious Bible, there are many people who seem to react strongly against even a balanced criticism of the book, so that a person would have to be just a bit reckless and curmudgeonly to speak against it.

Enter the curmudgeon.

Now, even I have to admit that the book has some value, especially since Bolles updates references and resources every year. Of course, that also means he can sell a brand new edition every year, so there's a money side to it, as well. There are many good things about the book, especially for very young people entering the work-world for the first time, or those who are facing major life changes. My problems come from a number of detailed spots in the book, where Bolles simply ignores what seems obvious to me, and in some places suggests what seem to me either impractical ideas or bad advice. That is the reason for today's article.

I picked up this book for two reasons - first, my wife hates her job and really wants to make a change for the better. She works as a bank teller, and after thinking the matter through we both agree that bank tellers are universally underpaid and mistreated as employees. Working as a teller means few raises for small amounts, no chance at a career position, and little job security despite years of service. Bank tellers are very similar to call centers in their business practices. This is not to pick on her specific bank; we have learned these conditions pervade throughout the banking industry. But changing careers is difficult, the more so when you are beyond 40 years of age, so I am trying to help find resources to aid in that search for her. Also, as I am about to claim my MBA this spring, I will also be looking around to see what is available. In my case, I like the company I work for, so I may well be moving only in position with the same employer, but you do should always know your options. So, all tools serve some good. And after looking through Mr. Bolles' book again (I think almost every American has read 'Parachute' at least three times in their life by the time they are 45 or more), I see many of the same things I have always liked and disliked about the book. The book serves many good purposes and offers useful tools, but there are four points where I am in sharp disagreement with Mr. Bolles:

- continued -

1. The book does not offer any guidance to people who have to work to pay the bills, but are searching for better employment - This one bothers me because it's obvious that Mr. Bolles knows such people are out there; early on in the book he mentions that people may have to work at a job they do not like while searching for the one that they really want. But that's all he says on the matter. And that is a big failure, from my perspective. While there are people who have been laid-off and people just getting out of school, there are millions of folks who realize their job is a lousy one, and they need to make a change. If I am not picky, I can get a job today, so the question is not about whether I can find work, but what I would be doing, and for how much, and with what future prospects. I think this is one of those places where Mr. Bolles shows just how long it has been since he really had to find a job, because he completely ignores the question of how you can search for a career while working at a bad job. This, even though he notes that the job-searcher should plan to spend at least nineteen weeks in that search, a time frame which will exhaust the savings of anyone I know, making it necessary to keep or take on one of those lousy jobs.

2. The book discusses how to negotiate salary, but makes some assumptions which do not fit my experience, and I find them far more likely to frustrate job-seekers than to assist them - This is an area where I would like feedback from the reader. In my experience, despite a number of summer, temporary, full-time and career positions, I have never yet had a job offered to me where the salary was in fact negotiable. In my present company, for example, when we decide we want to hire someone, we make a written offer for a specific amount, and it's strictly a yes/no decision; if the candidate does not accept the offer as presented, there is no deal. I have a friend who was recently offered a position with a company, but before accepting the position she asked whether the salary mentioned in the offer might be negotiable; the offer was immediately withdrawn. I expect there are some companies which will negotiate a salary range within reason, but I believe that Mr. Bolles is unrealistic in his assumption that this is the normal condition, especially in a time of recession, where the business has far more leverage than the job seeker. I would like to hear from readers, as to how often you have been able to negotiate your salary, especially during an economic downturn.

3. A major premise of the book, is that the job-seeker can collect specific detailed information about companies by asking folks who work there - This is another area where my experience is exactly the opposite from what Mr. Bolles claims. To be expected to provide confidential information from where we work, is an insult for most people, who understand that being part of a company means protecting its confidential information. My direct reports do not discuss how much they make with each other, yet Bolles thinks they would tell a relative stranger? Mr. Bolles is not correct. And that restraint on discussion only becomes stronger when discussing hiring and positions. Frankly, only someone with the authority to hire a person really knows whether an opportunity exists at all, much less what is desired in that role.

4. One of the strongest points emphasized by Mr. Bolles, is the use of contacts, which he describes as pretty much everyone you have ever met or come into contact with in the course of your life. Mr. Bolles makes a brash set of assumptions regarding the way your 'contacts' will be able or willing to assist you in finding work - What Bolles is leaving out, is that there are very good reasons why we do not harass our friends and relative strangers about something that is of little concern to them. There is a certain courtesy in respecting the boundaries of a relationship. It's the reason we get a little annoyed when a friend falls for the hype and tries to sell Amway or some similar garbage; people do not appreciate being treated as a conduit merely to help someone else get what they want. Yes, if you know someone well enough that you can ask them for a favor, and if they happen to be willing and able to fulfill it (something you should consider well ahead of asking), then you may make the request, but only when done courteously. So, you have contacts who can help you in your job search, but they are people to be respected and whose person demands honorable conduct. Mr. Bolles is exactly wrong to imply, let alone state as he does that you should badger people you barely know about information they may not have or if they do, they may not feel is public property. It fails simple tests of common courtesy and propriety, it disrespects moral boundaries, and in a practical sense it will tag you as a social mooch if you start harassing everyone you know for access to job openings. It makes you look desperate and in the long-term is more likely to harm your prospects than help. I would recommend that the job-seeker be far more selective in whom he/she approaches, and far more courteous in doing so. At the very least, it shows respect for people that you know you will want to meet again.

Finally, I respect Mr. Bolle's skill as a writer and salesman (never forget that he wants you to spend money on his book), and as a teacher of certain skills that may be useful in a job search. But I consider my own experience as a manager and a person who has hired, trained, promoted, counseled, praised, disciplined, fired, recommended, and otherwise had significant direct influence with hundreds of employees in my career, and I find it appropriate here to speak to the needs and desires of the hiring manager - many managers do not like hiring people, and so anything that looks like a problem will mean rejection of the application. Unless you are applying for a sales position, the last thing you want to look like is a salesman - no manager ever believes the applicant is as good as he claims. At best, he finds no reason not to hire you and gives you a chance because you were better than the rest, but don't get cocky about that. I have seen managers hire people on the definition of 'best' that in various times has meant the best dressed, the first person to include a cover letter with their resume, the person who uses up the least time in the interview, the person who went to the same school at the manager, the person who happens to fill an understaffed demographic, the first person who does not exaggerate his resume, the person who asks the best questions, the person who manages not to ask stupid questions, the person who already works at the company and wants to switch departments ... you get the idea. Finding a good position is never easy nomatterwhat, and there are many good tools you should find and use, but never forget that just as no job is really perfect, neither is any tool complete in itself.


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Comments (6)

DJ:I think you are... (Below threshold)


I think you are probably correct regarding salary negotiations. That may well work above a certain level but most corporations have pay schedules and such and won't budge on them. If they offered a higher rate to a male prospect (regardless of qualification) and did not make precisely the same offer to a female, I would imagine that they would lose a EEOC suit.

I just applied for a position and listed my salary as "negotiable". It was one of the first things that was addressed by the interviewer who wanted a firm top out on that number. Interestingly, they accepted my number rather than argue it down. They play lousy poker and I should know - I'm pretty lousy myself.

We'll see what happens at the second interview.

DJ,I'll disagree on ... (Below threshold)

I'll disagree on #2. The job I currently hold and the 2 before it all involved salary negotiation. They offered A, I pushed for C, we settled on B. In the most recent case, 2002, I had been a consultant there for 5 years and I knew exactly what they paid for me. We both knew that I would be cheaper for them even after they paid my benes at the negotiated salary. And we cut out my pimp, which made me happy :)
I've found the bigger the company, the more likely you can negotiate.

For #4... some disagreement. Crass pursuit of jobs from friends and family should be out of bounds. Networking, on the other hand, is great. Get to know people, and get them to know you as a competent person in your field. I still get calls from people I worked with or met through friends years ago asking if I or someone they met through me is available for projects or full time work. Like you said with point #1 this approach is not for someone that needs a job ASAP to survive or lacks the patience to let the seeds grow.

As to #2, when I applied fo... (Below threshold)

As to #2, when I applied for my current job (12 yrs ago) I stated a limit I would not accept any less than... something along the lines of "I will not darken your door for less than 40k". I knew I had a skill set they needed as I helped the interviewer rewrite the technical interview questions during the first phone call. They came back with an offer of $39,995. Needless to say, for 5 bucks, I let them win and took the position.

Things have changed a lot since then.

I have interviewed many applicants in the intervening years and must agree with pvd. We are given no leeway and all salary negotiations are done by HR, we are not allowed to even talk about money. We (the techies) decide if the applicant can do the job, HR decides if we can afford to hire them. HR has a budget and target salaries that they will not budge from.

If you have provable, rare and highly sought after skills, those can justify a higher offer, otherwise the company is just begging to get sued.

If you ain't worth it, you won't get it.

I haven't read the book, bu... (Below threshold)

I haven't read the book, but I would say that well-established contacts are the best way to get reliable information about the landscape of opportunities. But I do agree with no harassing your friends.

"(I think almost every Amer... (Below threshold)

"(I think almost every American has read 'Parachute' at least three times in their life by the time they are 45 or more), "

You're not serious are you?

I think salaries become mor... (Below threshold)

I think salaries become more negotiable the higher you go on the corporate ladder. As your skill set becomes more unique, you gain more leverage and ability to differentiate yourself from the other candidates.

That said, most jobs I've had have had a salary range attached, and while I've generally gotten them to push their offer to the top of the range, only one company exceeded a range once in order to give me more. It's much easier to get an extra week or two of vacation or other benefits, something else you should consider negotiating.

Also, not to rain on your parade, but I hope you discussed with your bosses how getting an MBA would affect your role at work. I've seen a ton of people get their degree and show up to work expecting to be rewarded with an instant promotion and raise, only to be surprised that nothing changed (other than a new pile of tuition debt).

Best of luck to both you and your wife!






Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links


Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login

Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy