Job Interviews Put Job-Seekers at a Disadvantage

We've all been there-some of us more often than others. You've submitted a resume and gotten The Call. How exciting! They want you to come in for an interview. Sometimes they don't want to call it that; they invite you in "for a little chat". It's an interview, but you've already gotten an important piece of information from your potential employer: he is dishonest. He is playing a game in which you, from the outset have agreed that things will not be called as they truly are, but as the interviewer wants them to be called. Never trust someone who pretends that things aren't what they really are-especially when he insists that you pretend too.

Who's Tricking Whom?
The interview process has evolved into a way to protect employers from the people they plan to hire. But, even with their little lists of "trick" questions, every employer in the world has been fooled into hiring an incompetent with a good line of bull. But most often, good employees are tricked into bad jobs by way of the job interview. It's common sense: when you abdicate your power from the beginning, it sets the stage for the other to bully or cheat you. Simply by showing up for a traditional interview says, "Here I am: what can I do to please you?"

The job interview as it currently stands, is a process of subjugation and game-playing: a tedious waste of time for anyone with something good to offer. (Unless, of course, you work in Drew Carey's office-and there are certainly some of them around!)

Other Reasons You May Be Invited to Interview
Let's return to the idea of the perfect world. In this world, the job interview would not exist in its current model. All the power is on the side of the employer. He knows what he's looking for, but he may or may not tell you, thinking that the best way to determine your fitness for the job is to trick you into betraying your weaknesses. He may even know before the interview is scheduled that you're not the candidate he wants, but he has to interview a quota, or interview an equal number of men and women, or interview someone over 40 to show that he's not discriminating based on age. He may be interviewing with a particular color of skin in mind, or the potential for hiring an employee who will also provide added value by way of staying late, walking the office dog, doing some of the boss's work himself (or herself) or even providing sexual services.

Smart Answers for Dumb Questions
Today's job interview is bound for extinction. With the power all on one side, interviewers are getting away (but not for long!) with asking asinine questions like, "Why are you the best person for this position?" Who can answer that question without feeling foolish? The only right answer is, "How the hell should I know? You're the one who asked me here-you tell me!"

Asking stupid questions shows the candidate that the interviewer lacks the creativity or interest to think of ones that might be more pertinent to the position. But your answers show your tolerance for mindless management, which is what some employers are looking for.

Be Smart, But Not Too Smart
Which points up another problem with interviews. If the candidate happens to be smarter than the interviewer (or better educated, or better dressed) , the interviewer may not recommend the hire. "That guy could take my job!" he thinks, alarmed at the prospect of losing such a great gig. The best bosses hire the smartest people they can find and then let them make a lot of decisions and do most of the work-while the boss plays golf. He or she appears when there's a need, provides timely support-and stays out of the way the rest of the time. But most bosses aren't good bosses; they're insecure. They micromanage; place limits, exert unnecessary control. They kill innovation and manage by terrorism. The idea that their employees are more competent, skilled, brighter, more creative or inventive than they are-it horrifies them. (You can read more about bad bosses and how to cope with them by reading Robert Sutton's great workplace critique, "The No Asshole Rule: Building a Civilized Workplace and Surviving One That Isn't."

Another example of stupidity in the interviewing process occurs when the interviewer asks the candidate, "How do you deal with stress? Because oh, boy; this can sure be a stressful job!"

Candidates sigh and mentally shrug, having heard this question at every interview, from grocery store to law firm. "I'm great with stress," they lie gamely, feeling stomach acid flooding into the colon. "I thrive under pressure," eyelids twitching like fledgling birds in the nest. For some reason, you're supposed to want to be stressed out at work.

Stress Does Not Have to Be Part of the Job: So, Why Is It?

But let's consider this: by stressing how stressful the job is, the prospective employer is admitting to a serious management problem. Bragging about it, in fact! Candidates shouldn't be talking about how great they are with stress; they should be asking pertinent (and impertinent) questions about how the company is run. "Why is this job stressful?" we should ask. "Is it because people work too many hours, or are there unreasonable demands to meet? Are you short-staffed on a regular basis? Is the company under fire and filing for bankruptcy anytime soon? Is it because the boss is a jerk? Are the co-workers competitive-backstabbing? Isn't the pay adequate to support me? Do you find your job here stressful?"

All these questions deserve forthright answers.If you find an interviewer who will answer them, you may have found the Perfect Workplace.

A Stressful Workplace is Leadership's Problem

Most of the time, even difficult working conditions can be mediated by good leadership. If you feel that your boss is on your side and cares about what happens to you; if you're paid fairly and on time; if your co-workers are a nice bunch of people and everybody's trying to do a good job, stress isn't much of a consideration. So by saying a job is stressful, the prospective employer is saying "Not only are we mismanaging our people here; we only want to hire people who will allow us to continue mismanaging them."

Stress accounts for most illnesses, addictions, family problems, absences and the fact that so many people hate their jobs. And that's sad, because most work isn't intrinsically stressful; leaders make it so by being jerks, by making unreasonable or unfair demands, abusing their power or otherwise failing to support their employees.

Work doesn't need to be stressful. Anyone who tells you it should be, is a liar or a fool. (Or both.)

"We Want a Multi-Tasker"
Everybody knows that multi-tasking is a great way to do more than one thing badly (read one of the many articles backing up this claim in Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance (Vol. 27, No. 4). Multi-tasking unless the tasks are closely related, is distracting, time-consuming and open to error.

When employers tell you they want a multi-tasker, what they're saying is, "We want a slave. We want someone who will do two or more jobs, so we don't have to hire more people."

Are You a Self-Starter?
An insulting and idiotic question designed to bring a thinking person to nausea. "No--I have to be whipped hourly and reminded to do my job, and then I will be found napping under my desk--unless you personally watch me every minute."

Work Can Change, If We Make It Change

The major problem with job interviews is that what should be a two-way process only operates in one way. It's the fault of the work-seekers, all of whom have been brainwashed to believe that in order to get a job you should be willing to promise the earth, ask no questions and wear the right shoes. Of course we're taught that from the first job at Dairy Queen to the vast boring slog to a tenured university position. But if we didn't buy into it so thoroughly, we could take back some of the power and change not only the way interviews are conducted, but the entire operation of the workplace. And--isn't it about time?

Demographics Favor the Job-Seeker

78 million Baby Boomers are entering retirement even as we speak--and they're all going to need nurses, gardeners, personal trainers and pharmacists! With more and more people hitting retirement age in the next twenty years, there will be fewer and fewer people to run things on this big green planet. Companies will be needing people to work, and yes, they'd prefer to have slaves. But with lots of work to do and only a few of us to do it, isn't it time that would-be employees start demanding some basic human rights at work? And what better way to start than with the job interview?

A New Interview

So, let's start by throwing out the old interview etiquette, most of which was made in collaboration between Corporate Stooges and Career Counsellors, most of whom couldn't get a decent job anyway, so make their living advising others. For one thing, candidates should be asking questions.

Why did the last person leave this job? Did he or she move up in this corporation, or go to work somewhere else? Why do you think that is?Who would my direct supervisor be? Will that person be available to interview with me if I should progress to the next stage in the interview process? (A common fault of the current system is that the person who interviews you may not be the person you'll actually be working for. You should be able to see and talk to your prospective supervisor before deciding if you want this job.)

Can this company provide references in the form of three employees I can call to talk with?
Is there someone else in the organization who's applied for this job? Will that person be someone I'm working with? Or for? Or over? (It's nice to know if you have any enemies before you start. And why isn't this company hiring from within?)

What's the work environment like? Are people friendly or competitive? How do people advance?

Where does this job lead? What kind of salary does it offer and what sort of perks? How often are there raises or bonuses?

Never Mention Money? That's Insane!

Umm, generally speaking, people go to work because they need to earn money. Otherwise, you could volunteer with the homeless, clean up the oceans or teach kids to read for the sheer pleasure of doing good. Most of us need to make money, so we work. But we're not supposed to ask about salaries...? How ridiculous.

Oh yeah, you should definitely be asking about money. In fact, it would be better to know salary ranges before even sending in a resume. Why oh why do job-seekers have to waste hours of their valuable time filling in forms and begging for interviews without even knowing whether a job pays enough to keep them living indoors? The "etiquette" that says a job-seeker should never ask about pay until the job is offered is another example of how the process supports the company at considerable expense to those who would hope to work for it. An honest employer should state salary ranges in hiring ads, so people who need more money won't have to waste their time.(Are you an honest employer? Are you paying attention to this?)

Change the Game

The interviewing process has too long been treated as evidence of your socialization. You learn the standard replies and give them convincingly, which lets the would-be employer know that you can Play the Game. Only, it isn't a game-it's your life. You didn't make this game, and playing it does not serve your purposes. Revise the game; make some rules that will let you win.

Think about it! Every day, you're supposed to show up and contribute your mind, your awareness, your physical presence to the advancement of a company. What is that company going to do for you? And if it's promising nothing and demanding a lot, why are you still sitting in that chair? Get up and run for your life. Don't worry about burning bridges to places you'll never want to go.

In a perfect world, there would be no job interviews. There would be an objective system; a fair test that determines the best person for the work. There would be a workplace etiquette, enforced by custom and by law, that refuses to allow people to bully, cheat, lie and steal at work. Supervisors would not be rewarded for taking credit for the work of underlings. Competing by way of backstabbing would be considered tacky. People who abuse their power would be discovered and dismissed. When job-seekers take control of the interview process, they'll also be taking steps toward creating a workplace where integrity counts.

And No, I'm Not a Communist

I just hate to see people being taken advantage of. I'd like to help change the workplace so it supports the people who devote their lives to work. That is, after all, most of us. If you feel the same way, send this article to your friends and talk about it. And at your next job interview, consider the possibility of changing the game into something you're willing to play.