That’s an eye-opening number if you’re looking for a job.

But a recent CareerBuilder study projected that 77% of currently employed workers are searching for a new job.

Let’s examine CareerBuilder’s projection.

In 2010, CareerBuilder reported that 35% of currently employed workers were searching for a job – their recent projection was 220% of 2010’s figures.

If 77% of currently employed workers are searching for a new job … that means that nearly everyone is searching. In addition, these figures didn’t include unemployment figures of about 6.6% – 7%.

What changed to increase the number of people searching for work?

Let’s start by looking at the job market in 2010. Can you think back and use one word to describe the 2010 employment environment? The word would be layoffs.

In 2010, companies were announcing layoffs. Each week, as many as 5 employers announced layoffs of 1,000 or more. I should know … because I tracked layoffs each week for my “Who’s Firing” weekly series (see http://www.recareered.com/blog/tag/whos-firing/).

All of these mass layoffs were scary to more than just those directly affected. Fear of layoffs also affected workers who wanted to search for a new job. Few would take the risk of a new job, starting with a new employer with no seniority, while layoffs were happening all over.

This caused few employed workers to search for a new job while mass layoffs topped the headlines, from 2008 through 2010.

Layoffs slowed in 2011 … while they weren’t eliminated completely, layoffs slowed enough to restore confidence of those who wanted to look for new jobs. Since hiring has remained slow since 2010, many of those searching for a new job continue to search.

So now there’s a pent-up demand of workers who want to change jobs.

Currently employed workers, who aren’t being paid what they are worth are searching. Employees who haven’t seen a decent raise in years are in the job market. Salaried workers who are being asked to work evenings and weekends to cover the workload of the laid off are sick of being mistreated. Those who have had career advances shut down are looking for new jobs with promotion potential. Workers whose employers have cut back on training are seeking opportunities to learn new skills

Add to that, underemployed and part-time workers hoping to get their careers back on track also compete against you.

These pent-up demands are the 77% who are competing for your next job.

How will you show employers that you’re the best candidate when 77% of currently employed workers (plus 6.5% – 7% unemployed) are competing for your next job?

Source: http://reCareered.com
Author: Phil Rosenberg

I’m proud to have been named a weekly columnist of Personal Branding Blog. I will be republishing my articles from that site here on reCareered. This was my article published Monday, 4/1/13 …

Many job seekers make the mistake of assuming that their resume and LinkedIn profile are the same thing.

… they’re not.

Job seekers who consider their LinkedIn profile to be equivalent to their resume can miss major opportunities to differentiate themselves resulting in lost job opportunities.

You can differentiate yourself much more effectively as a superior candidate than LinkedIn is able to provide.

LinkedIn wants you to think their service can even be your online resume, providing an option to automatically convert your profile into a traditional resume format, using the information of your LinkedIn profile. LinkedIn also allows you to apply for jobs with many employers just by clicking an “apply with your LinkedIn profile” button. Don’t fall into either trap.

Sure these are easy options … but these options result in branding yourself as a commodity,

And there are three reasons that your resume and LinkedIn profile are not the same:

1. Employers and recruiters view each differently: Employers and recruiters view your LinkedIn profile as a way to search for candidates who haven’t applied, but your resume as the primary way to apply for a job. LinkedIn recognizes that a resume is viewed differently – that’s why they offer an option to convert your profile to a resume and an option to attach your resume to your LinkedIn profile.
2. Employers and recruiters use each for different parts of the hiring process: Employers/recruiters use LinkedIn profiles at the beginning of the process, as an introduction and as a passive candidate search mechanism. Human resources departments use LinkedIn as a way to provide social proof to your resume – to help screen out resume lies. Most employers and recruiters expect those who apply to provide a resume in the process – even those that provide an “Apply through LinkedIn” button will ask applicants for a resume.
3. Customization and personalization: You can and should customize your resume for an individual reader – resume customization gives you the ability to brand yourself as the superior candidate. You can’t do the same thing with your LinkedIn profile, because when you change it, everyone sees the changes. You can’t control who sees a specific version of your LinkedIn profile, because everyone sees your changes. It’s difficult for your LinkedIn profile to brand you as a superior candidate, because you can’t individualize it like you can with a resume.

When you use your LinkedIn profile to apply for jobs, it will be easier but it won’t allow you to show that you’re the perfect candidate for that hiring manager, for that company, for that job. Sure, you might create that impression, but it will be through luck – you won’t be able to stack the odds in your favor.

Now that you see your resume and LinkedIn profile aren’t the same thing, how will you decide which one to use?

I’ll cover that in an upcoming article …

Article originally published by Phil Rosenberg on Dan Schwabel’s PersonalBrandingBlog.com at http://www.personalbrandingblog.com/employers-use-your-resume-and-linkedin-profile-differently/ .

Source: http://reCareered.com
Author: Phil Rosenberg

I’m proud to have been named a weekly columnist of Personal Branding Blog. I will be republishing my articles from that site here on reCareered. This was my article published Monday, 3/25/13 …

Your resume is the traditional way job seekers create their personal brand. It’s the first impression that most job seekers make.

But there’s a downside to creating your personal brand through a resume.

Your resume is prescreened between 2-5 times before a hiring manager sees it.

What does that mean to you? It means most times you’ll never have the opportunity to make a first impression with the hiring manager, because even the best resume only gets through prescreening a small percentage of the time.

When you depend on your resume to make your first impression, it usually fails.

Let’s compare this to making your first impression face to face.

Here’s 6 reasons your face to face personal brand is more memorable:

Time Spent: You’ll have more time in front of a hiring manager face to face than they’ll spend on your resume. Since resume readers spend an average of 15 seconds on your resume and you’re likely to have many minutes face to face with a hiring manager, you should be able clearly see where you’ll have more time to make an impact.

Hiring Manager Attention: When you’re face to face, you have a much better chance to gain the hiring manager’s full attention. When scanning your resume, the hiring manager could be interrupted by a call, by email, someone stopping by to talk … literally anything could distract the hiring manager from giving full attention to your resume.

Memory: The hiring manager has a much better chance of remembering you after you’ve met face to face. Your chances of being remembered from your resume are much lower.

Sheer Numbers: The hiring manager sees hundreds of resumes … sometimes hundreds in a single day. That hiring manager will see far fewer candidates face to face, making your personal brand much more memorable when you make it face to face.

Personalization: When you’re face to face with a hiring manager you can directly ask about his/her needs and then respond, personalizing your communication to meet the hiring manager’s needs. A resume is only a one way communication, so you’ll have a tough time personalizing it without understanding the hiring manager’s needs.

And of course, Prescreening: You have much greater odds of being seen by a hiring manager going directly, rather than indirectly using a resume to gain attention. Your resume will first have to get past an automated prescreen through an applicant tracking system, through an HR rep or recruiter and up to 3 additional prescreening steps (for large employers) before you’ll get the chance to make a first impression with a hiring manger.

So what would you rather do?

Risk that your resume won’t get through prescreening and you’ll never have the chance to make a first impression?

Or extend your efforts to make your first impression with the hiring manager?

Article originally published by Phil Rosenberg on Dan Schwabel’s PersonalBrandingBlog.com at http://www.personalbrandingblog.com/face-to-face-personal-branding/ .

Source: http://reCareered.com
Author: Phil Rosenberg

But a CareerBuilder study projected that 77% of currently employed workers are searching for a new job … plus roughly 6% unemployment, equals 80-85% of the US workforce who compete with you for jobs. The numbers haven’t changed much since the study was published.

Let’s examine CareerBuilder’s projection.

In 2010, CareerBuilder reported that 35% of currently employed workers were searching for a job – their recent projection was 220% of their earlier figures.

If 77% of currently employed workers are searching for a new job … that means over 3/4 of currently employed workers are searching. In addition, these figures didn’t include unemployment figures of about 6%.

What changed to increase the number of people searching for work?

Let’s start by looking at the job market in 2010. Can you think back and use one word to describe the 2010 employment environment? The word would be layoffs.

In 2010, companies were announcing layoffs. Each week, as many as 5 employers announced layoffs of 1,000 or more. I should know … because I tracked layoffs each week for my “Who’s Firing” weekly series (see http://www.recareered.com/blog/tag/whos-firing/).

All of these mass layoffs were scary to more than just those directly affected. Fear of layoffs also affected workers who wanted to search for a new job. Few would take the risk of a new job, starting with a new employer with no seniority, while layoffs were happening all over.

This caused few employed workers to search for a new job while mass layoffs topped the headlines, from 2008 through 2010.

So what changed?

Layoffs slowed in 2011 … while they weren’t eliminated completely, layoffs slowed enough to restore confidence of those who wanted to look for new jobs.

Now there’s a huge pent-up demand of workers trying to change jobs, creating huge competition among job seekers today.

So who are all of these people searching for jobs?

Currently employed workers, who aren’t being paid what they are worth are searching. Employees who haven’t seen a decent raise in years are in the job market. Salaried workers who are being asked to work evenings and weekends to cover the workload of the laid off are sick of being mistreated. Those who have had career advances shut down are looking for new jobs with promotion potential. Workers whose employers have cut back on training are seeking opportunities to learn new skills.

These pent-up demands are the 77% of currently employed workers who are competing for your next job, plus the roughly 6% unemployed.

The critical question for you: How will you show employers that you’re the best candidate when you compete against 80-85% of the US workforce?

Source: http://reCareered.com
Author: Phil Rosenberg

Do you realize that how well you understand the hiring process has a big impact on your personal brand … and on your chances of getting hired?

Most job seekers think that understanding the hiring process just means learning the email address to send a resume (or URL to post). That’s really the least important understanding of the hiring process.

By understanding the hiring process, you’ll have the information that puts you ahead of your competitors – when you address what each person in the process is looking for, you look like the best candidate in the pack.

However, if you don’t understand the key information in the hiring process, you’re just guessing. By just guessing, you have a low chance of guessing right … so you’ll miss the opportunity to brand yourself as the best candidate in your written and verbal communications throughout the hiring process.

By not taking the time to truly understand the hiring process, you’ll brand yourself as an average candidate, at best.

Which do you want? To be seen as an average candidate or the superior candidate?

In order to brand yourself as a superior candidate, at a minimum you need to gain these four pieces of information:

1. Understanding all the players: You need to understand who each person in the hiring process is and how they affect the process … including the hiring decision influencers. You’ll get this by talking to people inside of the company. This is one area where you can gain value by talking to HR, because HR can describe the pre-screen stages of the hiring process and the people involved. However, once you’ve been selected for interview, you’ll want to learn about the hiring process from within the department. Only department insiders will understand who’s involved, who the hiring manager will ask to get involved. You’ll want to end up with something that looks like an organization chart, to identify each person in the hiring process.

2. Understanding the decision points: Hiring processes are usually comprised of a number of smaller decisions. It’s important to understand what these decision points are and who influences each one. At a minimum, the decision points look like this (in larger companies they can be much more complicated):

• Which candidates get an interview slot?
• Which candidates get asked back for a 2nd (or 3rd) interview)
• Which candidates are considered finalists?
• Who gets the offer?
• Who gets the offer if the offer is rejected? Who gets 2nd place?

3. Understanding the influence: It’s one thing to identify the players, but some people in the hiring process will have greater impact than others. So you’ll want to learn who’s opinions the hiring manager seeks out … and trusts. At this point, you’re trying to learn and map out the department’s politics to see where the key points of influence are.

4. Understanding the needs: Gain an understanding of what each person in the process needs. Each individual in the hiring process has needs and if you understand what those needs are, you can often give examples of how you can help individuals in the hiring process as well as the hiring manager. Once you understand which people in the hiring process carries the most influence at each decision point, you’ll understand where you’ll want to concentrate most of your efforts to help meet influencer needs. What kinds of needs can you help hiring decision influencers with?

• Help make the influencer’s job easier
• Help make the influencer more effective at their job
• Help the influencer gain visibility, stature and power within the department
• Help the influencer look good

Once you understand the hiring process, you should know which influencers you can help and which ones have the greatest influence over the hiring manager.

Almost all of this information comes from inside the employer, more specifically from inside the hiring manager’s department. It will take some work and preparation in order to gain this inside information.

But once you do, you’ll seem like you’re reading the minds of the people who read your resume and the people you talk to … so you’ll look like the ideal candidate.

Which will you choose?

Article originally published by Phil Rosenberg on Dan Schwabel’s PersonalBrandingBlog.com.

Source: http://reCareered.com
Author: Phil Rosenberg

I’m proud to have been named a weekly columnist of Personal Branding Blog. I will be republishing my articles from that site here on reCareered. This was my article published Monday, 3/4/13 …

Information keeps your personal brand current … and allows you to brand yourself as a superior candidate.

Information is power …

The information you use to shape your communications with employers is critical to your success – or lack of success in landing a job.

But the information that most candidates use is lacking … and inferior information brands you as the wrong candidate for the job.

That’s not what you want, is it?

But ask yourself … are you using any of these common but inferior information sources: public information like Google, employer websites and job descriptions?

Instead, if you want to brand yourself as the right candidate for the job, you’ll want to recognize that the information you use makes a difference.

Here are 4 types of information to brand you as the right candidate for the job

1. Superior Information: Superior information is not public, or it wouldn’t be superior. It’s not on Google, on a company’s website or in a job description, because all candidates have access to these sources. Superior information is private, it’s more difficult to get to, but it’s worth it … because it gives you a huge advantage. You’ll find the best information inside the companies where you want to work.
2. Current Information: Information about last years’ problems won’t help you look like a superior candidate, because employers don’t hire people who can solve last year’s problems … they hire people who can solve current and upcoming problems. Publicly available almost always describe old information (exception: PR disasters). Are you using current information, or does your information sources describe last year’s problems?
3. Uncovers Hiring Manager Needs: So you’ve found superior information…but does that information describe the hiring manager’s needs? The employer’s overall needs may or may not affect an individual hiring manager – all hiring managers aren’t focused on solving the same problem. It takes more than just understanding an employer’s needs…the successful candidate goes deeper to understand the needs of the hiring manager.
4. Reflects Hiring Manager Priorities: Just because a hiring manager has a problem, doesn’t mean that it’s the hiring manager’s priority. That problem may represent a minor problem, with a low payback solution. Or that problem may have high payback, but maybe the solution isn’t in this year’s budget. If you present yourself as an expert at solving a hiring manager’s problems, but problems that are not the hiring manager’s priorities, you’ve branded yourself as a superior candidate…for some other hiring manager. Instead, reflect that you’ve solved the hiring manager’s priority problems to brand yourself as the superior candidate for that hiring manager.

You have a choice …

You can use easy to find public information that is inferior and brands you as the wrong candidate for the job.

Or …

You can brand yourself using information that’s tougher to find because it’s private, but brands you as the right candidate that has solved the priority problems of that exact hiring manager.

Which will you choose?

Article originally published by Phil Rosenberg on Dan Schwabel’s PersonalBrandingBlog.com at http://www.personalbrandingblog.com/information-keeps-your-personal-brand-current/ .

Source: http://reCareered.com
Author: Phil Rosenberg

Could one of your job search problems be that you’re using obsolete information?

How do you think obsolete job search information causes you to brand yourself on your resume and during an interview?

When you use obsolete information in your job research, you focus on keywords, employer issues and employer problems that aren’t problems anymore – because they’ve already been solved.

That’s why the information is obsolete.

When you use obsolete information in your employer background research, you start to think of ways that you can help that employer … based on old information. Basically, you brand yourself as the perfect candidate to solve last year’s problems.

Let’s think a moment. Do you think that many employers are looking to hire an expert at solving problems the hiring manager no longer has?

Of course not.

Instead, hiring managers seek new hires who have already solved similar problems to the priority problems they face right now… even problems expected roughly 6 months in the future.

Using obsolete information makes you the perfect solution for someone else’s problem … rather than the employer’s current problems.

So why do candidates routinely brand themselves as being experts at problems that have already been solved … that are not longer priority issues? Why do candidates brand themselves as obsolete?

It’s not done on purpose – who would brand themselves as obsolete intentionally? Who would use obsolete information if they knew it was obsolete?

The problem is that most of us were taught to use obsolete information in our job search … because a few years ago, when there were shortages of candidates, it was good enough. However, in today’s job market of job shortages, resumes based on obsolete information are no longer adequate. When a hiring manger has an average 1,000 applicants to choose from, all of whom have the ability to customize a resume to reflect the hiring manager’s needs, when you customize your resume using obsolete information, hiring managers expect to find candidates who have solved similar problems to their current priority issues.

… And I’ll bet you’re using obsolete information in your job search and you don’t even realize it.

3 most commonly used sources of obsolete job search information

1. Google: Yep, that’s right. If you’re using Google to find information on a prospective employer, that information is obsolete. How could it be obsolete, you ask … It’s Google. Google’s employer information is obsolete because employers almost never talk about current problems – because they don’t want competitors, customers, the government nor shareholders to know about these problems, until they have been solved. When you see a problem or issue discussed about a company on Google, it’s one of two things:
   • A past problem that’s already been solved: In other words, obsolete.
   • A rare PR disaster: PR disasters sometimes happen, but they’re rare. While employers try to control the information that’s released to the web, occasionally employees mess up and say the wrong thing to the press. Also, Social Media can make a PR nightmare of its own, but unsubstantiated Social Media can also be suspect, unless validated by the employer (which rarely happens). Don’t count on finding PR disasters, but if you happen to stumble across one that just happened, it could be a legitimate hot issue for the employer.

2. Employer Website: Since the employer writes everything on its website, the website presents a very tightly controlled communication … Even more so for public company financials. Don’t believe me? Go look at some … you’ll see descriptions of products/services, names of executives, but look for discussions of operational issues. You’ll see descriptions and stories of past problems that have been solved. Remember, the employer has complete control over its website. If the employer disclosed current problems for competitors, customers, the government, shareholders and you to see, a whole department isn’t doing their job – not just one person, but a whole department has made multiple major screw-ups.
3. Job Description: How can the job description be obsolete, you wonder? Simple – it’s constantly changing … plus, it was probably written months ago (or longer). As problems continue to be solved and new problems arise, even the most basic job descriptions are constantly in flux. As new people join the department and others leave, skills gaps and needs constantly change. Do you think that hiring manager constantly update job descriptions to reflect these changes? Of course not – Hiring managers would be spending their entire day rewriting job descriptions that were only likely to change again soon.

So think about when the job description you’re looking at was likely written. For new positions, job descriptions are typically written before the budget process – because the hiring manager uses the job description to get headcount approval. For most employers, this happens in July-September, in the 3rd quarter for positions that will be hired in the next year. This means that for new positions advertised in January, the job description is at least 3-4 months old … at the end of the year, the job description could be over a year old. Why don’t hiring managers update them? Because hiring managers know they’ll keep changing.

How about for a replacement position? Most replacement position job descriptions are recycled from the last person in the job. Why don’t hiring managers update them? Because hiring managers know they’ll keep changing.

Don’t believe me? Have you ever lost out on an interview (or position) because your resume lacked something that wasn’t even on the job description? It’s maddening, but it happens all the time … because employer problems and needs change, making job descriptions quickly obsolete.

So think about your job search, your resume and the information you’ve used to create/customize your resume.

Are you using information that describes the hiring manager’s current problems and needs?

Or is your information and your personal brand obsolete?

Join my next complimentary Resume Revolution webinar, where I’ll sow you how to find information that keeps your personal brand current.

Article originally published by Phil Rosenberg on Dan Schwabel’s PersonalBrandingBlog.com at http://www.personalbrandingblog.com/obsolete-information-brands-job-seekers-as-obsolete/ .

Source: http://reCareered.com
Author: Phil Rosenberg

I’m proud to have been named a weekly columnist of Personal Branding Blog. I will be republishing my articles from that site here on reCareered. This was my article published Monday, 2/18/13 …

I get asked this question at least once a week –

“What do you think about objective statements?”

What I think isn’t important. What the reader of your resume thinks … that’s what’s critical.

Objective statements became a standard part of traditional resumes when there were candidate shortages. When there were candidate shortages, it was common for a job seeker to have multiple job offers to choose between. Objective statements help employers sell themselves as the preferred workplace to win the candidate.

Objective statements allowed the job seeker to communicate to the employer what he/she wanted from a next career move. Candidates could use objective statements to tell potential employers “this is what I want.”

What changed?

Two major changes rendered objective statements ineffective:

• Job shortages replaced candidate shortages
• Proliferation of Applicant Tracking Systems

Job Shortages

Now that there are job shortages, employers no longer care what you want, until they are ready to make you an offer. Instead, employers care about what you can do for them – what kind of value you can provide to the employer.

Since an objective statement is at the top of your resume, it creates or at least effects your personal brand. When you start off your resume with an objective statement, you brand yourself as interested in your wants, rather than the employer’s needs. Today’s effective resume isn’t about the candidate … it’s about the employer. Simply put, objective statements aren’t about the employer.

Applicant Tracking Systems

Now, nearly every employer uses some sort of Applicant Tracking System to pre-screen and evaluate resumes – whether part of a multi-million dollar enterprise system or just the most basic functions found in Microsoft Office. ATSs have changed how resume readers decide which candidates get interviews vs which candidates get discarded.

The proliferation of ATSs means that almost every reader first sees your resume digitally, on screen. Your resume looks very different when viewed on screen than it does on paper – because only the top half of your resume is seen on screen. Since resume readers make a qualified/non-qualified decision in an average 6 seconds and an interview/non-interview decision in an average 15 seconds, the first impression your resume makes is critical.

What impression does your resume make when the first thing a reader sees is what you want?

Do you think you’d make a stronger first impression by showing the employer why you’re a superior candidate? How about showing the employer what kind of value you can provide to them?

Think about it … if you were the employer, which would you choose? A candidate that starts out by describing what they want? Or would you choose a candidate that started their resume by telling you what they can do to help you?

… and that, my friends, is why objective statements aren’t effective any longer.

Article originally published by Phil Rosenberg on Dan Schwabel’s PersonalBrandingBlog.com at http://www.personalbrandingblog.com/how-objective-statements-affect-your-personal-brand/ .

Source: http://reCareered.com
Author: Phil Rosenberg

What you put on your resume is part of how you brand yourself. But where you place information on your resume can amplify it … or bury it.

You might have all the right information on your resume that brands you as the superior candidate. But if you place that information in the wrong place, your reader won’t notice it when making the decision whether to offer you an interview.

So your personal brand consists of more than the words you choose. Your resume real estate also has a strong effect on your personal brand.

Remember that employers will decide whether to give you an interview or not in an average of 15 seconds. Also remember that your resume is almost always read online – Since so many companies (and their outside recruiters) use some sort of applicant tracking system, they digitize all resumes received.

In that 15 seconds, how much of your resume do you think a reviewer can read?

Realistically, all your reader sees before making an interview decision is the top half of your first page. Print your resume and fold it in half … that’s the information your reader uses to decide if you’ll get an interview. The information below the fold is rarely considered when deciding if you’ll get an interview or the discard pile.

This presents a conflict with how most of us actually write our resumes … because there’s a conflict with the traditional way most of us were taught to write resumes.

Because almost all of us were taught to write our resumes with our best stuff on the first page. Hey, being on the first page is fine if your resume is being read on paper. But the interview/discard decision is almost always made based on reading your resume on screen … so the reader can see much less right in front of their eyes.

When you have your best information on the bottom half of your first page, or worse on page 2, you’re making the assumption that anyone who is interested will get to your good stuff further down the resume. But remember … your reader makes the decision if they are interested based on the top half of your first page. Therefore, your reader won’t see your best stuff before they decide if they are interested or not.

In reality, when you put compelling information on the bottom of your first page or on page 2 … the placement causes you to lose opportunities.

So start to think about where you present the information that forms your reader’s first impression. Is it where your reader can easily see it on screen in 15 seconds? Or are you writing your resume in a more traditional way, which has you bury it further down your resume, past the average reader’s decision point?

Article originally published by Phil Rosenberg on Dan Schwabel’s PersonalBrandingBlog.com at http://www.personalbrandingblog.com/use-resume-real-estate-to-amplify-your-personal-brand/ .

Source: http://reCareered.com
Author: Phil Rosenberg

I’m proud to have been named a weekly columnist of Personal Branding Blog. I will be republishing my articles from that site here on reCareered. This was my article published Monday, 2/4/13 …

Your references can mean the difference between being winning the job vs just being a finalist.

Can your references increase the chances you’ll actually win the job over the other finalists?

Think about your references from past employers. Sure, all your references probably say great things about you (otherwise you probably wouldn’t list them as references, would you?).

Just because your references say nice things about you, is that enough to differentiate yourself from other candidates … whose references also say nice things about them also?

We’ve been taught that the level of the person giving the reference is the most important thing. So most of us think that seeking C and V level references from large companies will be the most impressive to our target hiring manager.

Sure, if Bill Gates or Warren Buffett are willing to give you a reference, their “star power” might temporarily impress your target hiring manager. But for most of us, will Bill or Warren really know what it’s like to work with us, unless they were our direct manager or a one-up (our manager’s manager)? So while this reference might be exciting, it’s unlikely one of those references would be able to provide a reference that would cause a candidate to stand out.

However, your references might differentiate you if you’re lucky enough to find a hiring manager who cares about the things your references are complimenting you about. Then again, your target hiring manager might not care … because the things you’re being complimented about won’t help your hiring manager solve his/her problems.

Most of us leave this up to chance …

We leave it up to chance because we give the same references, who say the same thing to each hiring manager. Some of us just give the same letter of recommendation to each employer – I’m not knocking letters of recommendation … but giving the same letter of recommendation to each employer gives you poor chances that your recommender will correctly guess what’s important to the hiring manager.

But you don’t have to leave it up to chance. Instead, you can increase the odds that your target hiring manager will care about what your references say.

4 ways to help your references to differentiate you:

1. Understand the hiring manager’s priority problems: Once you understand the hiring manager’s priority problems, you’ll know what they care about. If a hiring manager’s goals are to increase revenue, they won’t care about references who sing your praises as an awesome cost-cutter. But until you know what your specific hiring manager’s priority problems are, you and your reference will just guess. Instead, research by talking to people inside your target company to better understand the hiring manager’s goals, problems, and priorities.
2. Match references to hiring managers: Not every reference is a good match for a specific hiring manager. Industries, job functions are the matches most often chosen, but they are often the least relevant. Instead, look for hiring managers where your accomplishments and the value you provided best match the hiring manager’s priorities. Matching by story is usually more relevant than by industry/function.
3. Prep each reference: If you did a good job for your reference, there are probably many complimentary things your reference could say about you …they are not all created equal in your hiring manager’s eyes. If you leave it up to the reference to choose what he/she thinks is best, there’s much lower odds that the reference will be relevant. Instead, when you prep your reference first, asking them to talk about a specific accomplishment/value provided or personal trait, you have much higher odds that the reference will hit the hiring manager’s hot button (especially when you’ve done the right research – see point #1 above). You don’t need to put words into your reference’s mouth, but can instead guide them about what parts of your work with the reference will be most meaningful to the hiring manager.
4. Have many references: You won’t have much choice if you only have one or two references. Your best bet is to have 8-10 references to choose from. Don’t make the same mistake I see from many job seekers, who list all 8-10 references, allowing the hiring manger to choose who to call. Instead, list 2-3 references, selected based on hiring manager matching – see point #2 above. Your references will appreciate they aren’t getting calls from every company that sees your resume – plus they will be more likely to return reference calls if you’re selective about who you give the reference’s name to.

By using the above 4 tips, you’ll be able to customize your references to the hiring manager’s specific needs. The way you’re likely providing references today, you assume one-size-fits-all in a custom fit world.

So will you continue to provide all potential employers the same list of references, without customizing the messaging your references’ add to your personal brand?

Or will you decide to actively manage the communication and input your references provide that influence hiring decisions?

It all depends if you’re satisfied by leaving your odds of getting hired up to chance, or if you want to improve those odds for specific employers.

Article originally published by Phil Rosenberg on Dan Schwabel’s PersonalBrandingBlog.com at www.personalbrandingblog.com/personalized-hiring-manager-references-improve-your-personal-brand/ .

Source: http://reCareered.com
Author: Phil Rosenberg