Is "Too Senior Really A Euphemisim For "Too Old"?

We often get feedback that a particular candidate is “too senior.” Sometimes it is after interviewing sometimes we hear that upon submission of the résumé.  Is too senior a euphemism meaning too old or does it simply mean that the job doesn’t require either the level of experience or the degree of seniority that a particular person has?

The answer is sometimes yes, sometimes no.

I have written several times about why senior job candidates cannot and should not take or interview for junior jobs. Too senior often means just that.  To make my point, a former senior vice president, of any age, probably should not be interviewing for an account director job where he or she would be reporting to a less experienced person because the person they might be reporting to should actually be working for them.  If for some reason the senior person were hired, chances are that in the long term, It would not work.  This would be true of any case where the prospective applicant was, at one time, more senior than their potential supervisor, regardless of age.

On the other hand, “too senior” could in fact mean that the job really  does not require the level of experience the applicant brings to the job. Companies always worry about turn-over and are afraid that the potential employee may get bored and leave. This is a legitimate concern.  There is no sense in taking a dead end.job.

Despite anti-discrimination laws, there are companies where there is no room for older employees.  Is it discrimination?  I think not.  It would probably be a disaster for the senior people, despite the fact that they may well be able to teach the young people a thing or two and vice versa - they could learn from the less senior people.  One of the many reasons that many dot coms crashed in the late nineties, was because many of these companies were owned and staffed by people in their twenties and early thirties who simply lacked life experience.  When the market tightened and became tough, these owners and managers did not have the experience and know-how to solve the problems facing their companies. And by the time they hired more experienced executives it was often too late.

There are times when a job, despite its title or pay, may not call for someone with lots of experience.  Over the years I have met or heard of many candidates who took a job only to find out that they were over-qualified.  And there is nothing worse than being bored at a job. When companies hire someone too senior, It is often what I call an “ego hire.”  It may make the company or client feel good but long term it is a disaster.

I remember an account director who called me on her second day of work complaining that her observation after only one day was that what she was being asked to do could be handled by someone with only a few months experience,.  She approached her CEO after about a week and he became very defensive and angry.  His attitude was that the client expected to be serviced by senior people and she should just tough it out (he didn't even promise to give her more work).  She left after only three weeks and I completely understood.  That is what happens with ego hires.

If a company tells a candidate that they are too senior, it is perfectly legitimate to ask for an explanation.  It should be asked in a non-threatening and non-confrontational way. Often the company is right and their explanation perfectly acceptable.

How To Handle Being Late For An Interview

This post was inspired by my friend Lonny Strum, whose blog, Strummings, recently wrote about the culture of lateness which pervades business today. Lonny wrote that we have a culture of lateness.  It seems that people are so used to being late, particularly those who live in the most populous cities, that they think nothing of it any more. 

Lateness is pervasive in all aspects of our society – personal and business.  We once gave a buffet luncheon, called for noon to 3pm.  At 5 o’clock, people were still arriving and as I recall, few, if any, even offered an explanation or apology.

People think nothing about being late for business meetings. And of course, at the office, keeping appointments waiting is a routine matter. I have written before about this.

Lateness is so common it has become acceptable to many people.

The truth is that there is no excuse for being late; not traffic, not long meetings, not last minute assignments or duties. A little advanced planning goes a long way.

It is not my intention to give a lecture, but merely to remind people that being on time is a sign of respect.

Especially if you are interviewing, better to be too early (wait at a Starbucks if you are more than a couple of minutes too soon, but don’t wait at reception – it puts pressure on those you will be seeing.). One way to be sure to be on time is to make a practice run in advance.  Don’t assume that just because you know the city, you will know how to get to your destination or time your trip.  When Ogilvy Advertising moved to Eleventh Avenue they initially had a huge lateness problem because there is no public transportation nearby.  Even today, HR there tells me that candidates are habitually ten to fifteen minutes late because they underestimate the time it takes to get there. That is not a great way to start a relationship.

I recognize that meetings run longer than expected. If that happens, excuse yourself and make a call – it usually takes less than a minute. (I have never heard anyone who has ever gotten in trouble for being polite and excusing themselves for a minute to make a call or send a text.)   And if your boss schedules an 11am meeting at the last minute and you have a noon appointment, better to cancel than to be late. And please take the time to cancel. 

Among all the other issues resulting from being late, is that it screws up people’s entire schedule. We have all been kept waiting at a doctor’s office, but if it is habitual, I change doctor’s.  I feel the same way about candidates who constantly show up late for me or for interviews that have been arranged.

The worst part of being late is those who do not apologize or, at least, explain.  Not giving a reason shows arrogance and indifference as if the person who is not on time believes it is their right to be late. Some people actually think that if they don't bring up their lateness, it will be forgotten.  Wrong.  A simple explanation always helps.

One of my readers asked me how to handle a situation which is appropriate for this post.  It seems he went on an interview and arrived fifteen minutes early.  After being kept waiting for half an hour, he approached reception and discovered they had announced him to the wrong person (making him 15 minutes late for his original appointment).  He wanted to know how he should have handled this.  The answer is that he owed the person he was seeing an explanation, even though it was not his fault..  Managing perceptions is essential to successful interviewing.

The Bad And The Good Aspects Of Performence Reviews

What is a performance review, anyway?

Most of the details of a performance review are boilerplate and are the same from company to company.  The formats may differ, but the content is pretty much the same, despite differences from one organization to another. They are generally flexible to cover all facets of activity from personality, attitude, relationships to peers, skills and actual work.  The work section may cover all aspects of how the employee actually achieves his or her job.  Performance evaluations are generally formalized to the extent that they cover enough detail so that the company has a record of an employees’ contribution and activity.  They can be used to determine raises, promotions and transfers.  They should be given on a periodic and regular basis. Traditionally, the review is conducted by the person’s supervisor and is a formal document which is signed-off on by the employee. 

However, the reality of performance appraisals is often quite different. Too often they are casual and informal, so much so, that the employee does not know that it is an actual evaluation and review of their work.  When it happens in this manor,  they are not signed off on and may be conducted by HR or some other executive who does not directly work with the employee being evaluated.

In this litigious age, performance reviews are often used to protect the company,  Many companies try to tell their employees that performance reviews exist to track and improve the performance of their workers.  And while that may be somewhat true, they really exist to provide the company with a record that they have informed employees of deficiencies in their performance so that if the employee is terminated or a raise not given, the employer can fall back on the evaluation as a means of protecting itself if there is any kind of negotiation or litigation,

This requires that the employee was actually reviewed, that the employee signed off on the review and that the employee agreed with the evaluation.  You would be surprised at the high number of senior executives who are terminated for poor or insufficient performance but were never told about any deficiency.

Some companies actually lie. Recently, a senior executive who was fired less than six months after taking a job, was told that three months after his employment started, he was given a review and informed that his performance was insufficient.  That meeting never happened and the paperwork to support it was actually inserted into his personnel file at the time of his being let go.  His lawyers uncovered the lie when he sued and there was a sworn deposition and a manager testified that she was told to insert the paperwork in his file after the fact.  The irony is that the HR person who was told to insert the fraudulent document was let go just after the deposition, as if that made it okay because it was the company which told her to insert the document.. I am told that this kind of after-the-fact action is a fairly common occurrence.

While I am not a lawyer and this should not be construed as legal advice, if one is given a poor review, it should not be signed other than to note that you saw and heard the review but that you do not agree with it; this disagreement should be written right on the review and a copy made and kept. If one disagrees with it, you must write a letter/memo/email and detail your disagreement. 

Beware that otherwise high performing employees are given a perfunctory and negative review in preparation to their being let go. This often happens not for reasons of performance but because the company may be anticipating cut-backs due to poor business or account loss.  This frequently happens with tenured employees who may have contracts, but it is not limited to just them  The company can use poor performance as an excuse for termination and for not providing severance or other benefits. Should you find out that previously positive performance is suddenly in question, you must be prepared for a termination.

It is also true that some supervisors simply lie for unstated reasons. That is why it is mandatory to create a paper trail with your disagreement.  When there is a negative evaluation, most employees tend to put off the disagreement paperwork, but it is essential to respond immediately.  If the human resources department is well trained, they will know how to handle this situation.

This is not to say that all reviews are bad or negative.  The exact opposite can be true.  If there are inefficiencies in performance which have been pointed out and you agree with them, use this opportunity to correct the issue.  And if you succeed in fixing the issue, use it to your advantage.  One thing to do is to ask for a reevaluation before it is due to make sure you are meeting expectations and that it is in writing,

Employee negative evaluations can also be used to withhold raises and promotions.  That is another reason why you must make your disagreement with the assessment known in a timely manner.  However my real advice is to look for a new job when this happens.