A long game and subtle leverage mean the U.S. is increasingly unlikely to “win” this dispute.
Burnout is the disease of the 21st century, and it’s a epidemic among doctors. Now, new research shows that physicians want to feel valued and respected by their leaders.
It’s disappointing when you don’t get a job that you want. You can sit there and wonder why–or you can be proactive and find out. Candidates are generally passed over for one of three main reasons, says Tom Gimbel, founder and CEO of The LaSalle Network, a staffing, recruiting, and culture firm.
“Either you didn’t have what they want, you didn’t effectively communicate your skill set, or you just didn’t click with them on a social level,” he says. “Knowing the reason can help you in your job search.”
How to ask
Once you find out a company has chosen someone else, reach out to the recruiter, says Gimbel. “Say, ‘I appreciate the fact that I didn’t get job, and I understand another candidate was better than me for the role. However, I want to improve and do better in interviews and target the right companies. Can you share with me what the management team thought I was lacking or where the interview came up short?’”
Before you contact the recruiter, it’s important to be clear about what you hope to accomplish, says David Lewis, president and CEO of OperationsInc, a human resources outsourcing and consulting firm. “There usually is a mismatch between what you hope to learn and what they will truly share.”
Lewis suggests framing the ask this way: “As a fellow professional, I am always looking to use each experience as a learning one, so I can reflect on the decisions I made, consume the feedback offered, and determine how to adjust, adapt, and improve. To that end, I would sincerely welcome any feedback you would be willing to pass along about my performance during the interview process.”
You can also include questions that are unique to your experience, adds Kathleen Pai, vice president of human resources at Ultimate Software. “If you gave a presentation or submitted a writing sample, ask what would have made it stronger, or what key points they felt were missing,” she says. “Also, ask what core competencies or skills would have helped your application, as obtaining those skills can help ensure you earn the next desired job.”
Be sure you make the ask via email, says Michele Mavi, director of internal recruiting, training, and content for Atrium Staffing. “Do not call,” she says. “The email can be sent to the internal recruiter who scheduled the interviews and identified and worked with the candidate, as well as to the hiring manager. They should not, however, be emailed together or sent the identical email.”
Personalize the correspondence depending on the level of rapport developed during the interview process, says Mavi. “The tone you use in each email you send should match the tone you established with these individuals when you spoke to or interviewed with them,” she says. “You shouldn’t write them a novel; no follow-up should be lengthy.”
What to expect
Once you send your email, the amount of feedback you can get depends on the situation. If you’re working with a third-party recruiter, it depends on his or her workload, says Gimbel. “Third-party recruiters are more inclined to get the information, but they may or may not have it,” he says. “Asking shows initiative and a desire to learn and grow, and it can differentiate you from other candidates in the future.”
If you interviewed with a corporate recruiter, he or she may not have the bandwidth to respond, says Gimbel. “The good ones do,” he says.
Only about 1 in 10 will give you an honest answer, estimates Lewis. “The ugly truth is that hiring managers and HR appreciate the opportunity to not respond; to not have to be accountable to answering questions of this nature,” he says.
That’s because giving feedback can be uncomfortable for many hiring managers, says Mavi. “Sometimes the differences between candidates lie in the intangibles, which can also be hard to articulate,” she says.
Most responses will generally fall into the category of ‘The candidate we hired just had a bit more experience in critical areas for the role,’ and won’t be actionable feedback for the candidate to take advantage of, says Mavi. “Anything personality- and attitude-related would most likely not be conveyed at all,” she says. “Often, a bad attitude or speaking negatively about previous employers are huge red flags to employers. Sadly, a candidate may not realize they are transmitting such a negative impression, but no one wants to offer that type of feedback.”
What to do with the information
If you get good feedback, don’t try to dispute it and don’t try to persuade the hiring manager to reconsider his or her decision, says Gimbel. “Your goal should be purely information gathering in a way that’s unassuming, nonaggressive, and nonconfrontational so you can learn and grow. Don’t be defensive.”
Take what you learn and put it into action going forward, targeting companies or roles that are a better fit, or correcting mistakes, such as sending thank-you cards in the future.
If you’re smart about following up, you can end up with invaluable information to help your job search moving forward, says Pai. “Strengthening your relationship with the hiring manager [will pay off] if other opportunities open up down the line,” she says.
Over dinner at a tech conference, a woman once told me that for many years, she couldn’t get herself to exercise regularly. Even though she was a successful marketer and yoga studio owner who valued her health, she wasn’t able to stick to…
In the United States today, the top richest 400 Americans own more wealth than the bottom 60%. That is about 150 million people. We haven’t seen this type of wealth concentration since the 1920s, right before the Great Depression.
For most…
As HBO’s Game of Thrones approaches the end of its eight-season run on Sunday, viewers are eager to find out if one of the show’s more ruthless characters will emerge victorious.
But while devious maneuvering and betrayal are effective in the fantasy world of Westeros, they don’t work quite as well in the real world. Instead, research by Szu-chi Huang, an associate professor of marketing at Stanford Graduate School of Business, suggests that cutthroat competitors who resort to sabotaging perceived rivals instead may end up undermining their own chance of achieving important goals.
Within companies, competition “is something that needs to be carefully structured and managed,” Huang says. “It does increase engagement, which is good.” But it can also have destructive effects, especially if workers transform attainment of individual goals into a quest to prove that they’re better than the man or woman at the next desk, she says. Additionally, according to Huang, our fixation upon winning can spawn faulty beliefs that lead to inaccurate predictions of outcomes.
Those revelations are contained in two papers by Huang and collaborators, scheduled for publication later this year in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
Huang says the new research was inspired by an earlier paper that she and colleagues published in the Journal of Consumer Research in 2015. That study found that Weight Watchers participants tended to start out working together and encouraging one another. But as they got closer to their goals, they began to distance themselves from their peers and even stopped coming to meetings. While one possible explanation was that as subjects lost weight, they felt that they didn’t need the social support to continue, Huang was intrigued by an alternative possibility.
Losing sight of the original goal
“We wondered if it was because they started to feel the pressure of competition,” she explains. “People may start to think, ‘I know I can lose weight, but it’s really about me losing more weight than the others or looking better or being healthier than them.’”
Related: Watch the trailer for Game of Thrones series finale behind-the-scenes doc
To test the behavioral effect of such imagined “pseudo competition,” Huang teamed with Stephanie C. Lin, a former marketing PhD student at Stanford GSB who is now an assistant professor at Singapore Management University, and Ying Zhang, a professor at Peking University. They devised experiments in which subjects took verbal creativity tests and played various games, with a goal of earning Amazon gift cards. A key element of the experiment was that participants were told that everyone who achieved a certain score would receive a gift card. The subjects also were paired with partners and given a chance to make moves that would affect their partners’ scores.
What the researchers found was startling. As subjects got closer to achieving their individual goals, they had a greater tendency to do things to sabotage their partner–and to slack off when they thought they had the upper hand. Additionally, they tended to pick games in which they expected to do better than the partner, even if those choices resulted in a lower score for themselves, too.
“As people get closer to a goal, they may shift their focus,” Huang explains. “They end up focusing on their distance between them and their partners rather than their own distance to the goal.”
According to Huang, that sort of approach makes sense in a real competition, “where what determines winning is your relative position against another person. You can both suck, but if you get one point better than the other person, you still win.” In contrast, people who create pseudo-competitions are acting illogically, because there’s no real prize in coming in first, and the imaginary zero-sum game only distracts them from achieving individual goals that are valuable and beneficial.
A focus on winning biases predictions
In a second paper, conducted by Huang, Daniella Kupor, who received her PhD from Stanford GSB in 2016 and is now an assistant professor at Boston University, and Melanie Brucks, a graduating PhD candidate at Stanford GSB who will join Columbia Business School as an assistant professor this fall, subjects who were asked to predict the outcomes of various contests tended to assume that their competitors’ intent to win would come true.
“When observers predict another individual’s outcome in a competition, they systematically overestimate the probability that the person will win,” Kupor explains. “This misprediction stems from a previously undocumented lay belief–the belief that other people generally achieve their intentions–which biases the observer’s forecast.”
Huang says that we tend to believe that competitors will be victorious because our expectations are rooted in perceptions shaped by cultural mythmaking that focuses upon winners. “When we watch contests, we frequently watch someone win,” she says. “The coverage of an Olympic event focuses on the winner, not the 99% who tried but lost. The media tends to feature success stories–the people who want to win and then do actually end up winning. That’s one potential reason why we have this belief that’s inaccurate. In reality, there are more people who intend to win but don’t succeed.”
Design better in-house contests
The two papers show the potential risks that internal competitions pose for companies, Huang says. An organization that relies upon individual goals or performance benchmarks to evaluate employees, for example, needs to be careful to design competitions and structure comparisons that thwart the efforts of some workers to sabotage their colleagues. Otherwise, saboteurs may bring down everyone’s numbers, including their own.
“A company could try to restructure the comparison by matching employees who are at different phases of their careers instead of the same phase, for instance, through a mentorship system,” Huang says. “Or they could highlight the differences and uniqueness in each employee’s background, task, and project, and thus make the comparison less meaningful. All these things can help to reduce unnecessary competitive behaviors and the desire to sabotage.”
Similarly, she says, the tendency to equate intent with future victory can lead people to make poor choices in everything from investments to elections. When we assume a political candidate will win, we may reduce our support; overestimating a person’s chance to win can also lead to erroneous investment and betting decisions. Huang urges that more research is needed to find ways to mitigate such errant beliefs.
This article was originally published on Stanford Business and is republished here with permission.
“The Trump administration is trying to exact political retribution on our state,” said a spokesman for California Governor Gavin Newsom.
Do you want the corner office someday? Dan and Alison answer your questions with the help of Mike Troiano, a venture capitalist and former executive. They talk through what to do when you’re falling off the executive track, you’re moving up…
The full impact of quantum computing is probably a decade away, but the next five years offer an unprecedented opportunity to get first mover advantage and build an IP portfolio.
The two first teamed up to create the Times Up Legal Defense Fund in 2018
