Unfortunately, people who sell themselves to the company make more than people who don’t. Hell, sometimes just asking for a pay bump during the hire/on-boarding process can make a difference. Two of the last few gigs I’ve been at have given me 5-10k more a year simply because I laid out my creds and asked for the high end of the scale when I probably would have been given the mid range if I didn’t ask and justify it.
Many people don’t understand that you’re selling yourself to the company, and they’re buying your time and labor. If you present a mediocre product, don’t surprise when you get a mediocre offer. I can’t stand it, but not playing the game doesn’t get you anywhere.
the whole “sell yourself to the company” thing is not what it seems. it has less to do with candidates getting around the idea of self-presentation and more with the overall degradation of recruitment and human resources talent pool. there are lots of people who bear the titles but can’t do their jobs properly. and they look for shortcuts and easy decisions. “selling yourself to the company” is one of them. it’s not a knock on the candidate trying to get by, but if the recruiter whose job is to spot that (among other things) can’t spot that - that’s a problem that makes a mess. hell, most companies don’t even have transparent pay scale systems to clearly communicate who gets what and why so the salaries are all over the place for no good reason and it leads to toxicity and disgruntlement.
You’re also assuming recruiters are involved at all, and it’s not just HR and a hiring manager looking over resumes, which doesn’t match my experience at all. There’s also the explosion of hyper specialization in job roles, so a lot of HR drones can’t do much more than look for buzzwords and see if they think your personality will fit the org.
Just about every job I’ve had was either via resume or word of mouth, and in both cases, there’s not really someone between me and the interview process to handle those items you called out. So selling myself was how I both got the job and pay bumps. The one recruiter I used was good and put me in with a good job that was a good fit (and had a public pay range), and I still sold myself to the company to hit the high end of the range (a guy hired after me makes less than me in the same position, but has a lower skill set).
Selling yourself makes you more money, recruiter or not. It’s fine to blame the system for its failures, but the candidate needs to put themselves forward and advocate for themselves. The only time that isn’t needed is when you have something like a union that sets your pay based on seniority/position/tenure, and selling yourself doesn’t change your rate. Any other situation, and you’re selling yourself short.
Like I said before, I hate the game, but I have to play it. And ignoring the need to sell yourself only hurts yourself, even if it does feel icky in the moment.
And I don’t think you’re necessarily wrong about the degredation of the talent pool, but a lot of that is due to the current work landscape being back to the pre-pandemic state where companies have the upper hand in negotiations, leading candidates to spray and pray, targeting jobs they’re not qualified for (since all of the entry level jobs are being taken away). I got my current gig and the golden years after the pandemic (when we actually had the upper hand for like a year or so), and helping my manager interview for another body is painful with how many people are applying for a mid-level job when they’re a better fit for our entry level.
I don’t disagree about “the nature of the game” but it is not that case. There was no “selling yourself short” in that specific situation - it was the HR screw up, one of the many.
What i can’t stand is this, for the lack of the better word, gamification of recruitment process when the company makes up some imaginary assessments and bases their decision-making on that instead sticking to tangible facts. And i’m not making assumptions. i had to clean that mess afterwards.
The company’s lack of transparency regarding these things cost them quite a lot. It is specific situation when an impression took precedence over facts for no good reason and it also happened to be discriminatory towards women at the same time.
i can also go on and on how they wasted much of that middle talent by giving them zero upwards mobility with no real career development plan while also demonstrably hiring senior staff externally because “there were no worthy contenders in the company” type of shit. As a result, they rendered themselves into a feeder for other companies in the field with some insane turnover rates but hey - they had 10-year recruitment and human resources professionals with the “legacy of success” leading the charge.
Unfortunately, people who sell themselves to the company make more than people who don’t. Hell, sometimes just asking for a pay bump during the hire/on-boarding process can make a difference. Two of the last few gigs I’ve been at have given me 5-10k more a year simply because I laid out my creds and asked for the high end of the scale when I probably would have been given the mid range if I didn’t ask and justify it.
Many people don’t understand that you’re selling yourself to the company, and they’re buying your time and labor. If you present a mediocre product, don’t surprise when you get a mediocre offer. I can’t stand it, but not playing the game doesn’t get you anywhere.
the whole “sell yourself to the company” thing is not what it seems. it has less to do with candidates getting around the idea of self-presentation and more with the overall degradation of recruitment and human resources talent pool. there are lots of people who bear the titles but can’t do their jobs properly. and they look for shortcuts and easy decisions. “selling yourself to the company” is one of them. it’s not a knock on the candidate trying to get by, but if the recruiter whose job is to spot that (among other things) can’t spot that - that’s a problem that makes a mess. hell, most companies don’t even have transparent pay scale systems to clearly communicate who gets what and why so the salaries are all over the place for no good reason and it leads to toxicity and disgruntlement.
You’re also assuming recruiters are involved at all, and it’s not just HR and a hiring manager looking over resumes, which doesn’t match my experience at all. There’s also the explosion of hyper specialization in job roles, so a lot of HR drones can’t do much more than look for buzzwords and see if they think your personality will fit the org.
Just about every job I’ve had was either via resume or word of mouth, and in both cases, there’s not really someone between me and the interview process to handle those items you called out. So selling myself was how I both got the job and pay bumps. The one recruiter I used was good and put me in with a good job that was a good fit (and had a public pay range), and I still sold myself to the company to hit the high end of the range (a guy hired after me makes less than me in the same position, but has a lower skill set).
Selling yourself makes you more money, recruiter or not. It’s fine to blame the system for its failures, but the candidate needs to put themselves forward and advocate for themselves. The only time that isn’t needed is when you have something like a union that sets your pay based on seniority/position/tenure, and selling yourself doesn’t change your rate. Any other situation, and you’re selling yourself short.
Like I said before, I hate the game, but I have to play it. And ignoring the need to sell yourself only hurts yourself, even if it does feel icky in the moment.
And I don’t think you’re necessarily wrong about the degredation of the talent pool, but a lot of that is due to the current work landscape being back to the pre-pandemic state where companies have the upper hand in negotiations, leading candidates to spray and pray, targeting jobs they’re not qualified for (since all of the entry level jobs are being taken away). I got my current gig and the golden years after the pandemic (when we actually had the upper hand for like a year or so), and helping my manager interview for another body is painful with how many people are applying for a mid-level job when they’re a better fit for our entry level.
I don’t disagree about “the nature of the game” but it is not that case. There was no “selling yourself short” in that specific situation - it was the HR screw up, one of the many.
What i can’t stand is this, for the lack of the better word, gamification of recruitment process when the company makes up some imaginary assessments and bases their decision-making on that instead sticking to tangible facts. And i’m not making assumptions. i had to clean that mess afterwards.
The company’s lack of transparency regarding these things cost them quite a lot. It is specific situation when an impression took precedence over facts for no good reason and it also happened to be discriminatory towards women at the same time.
i can also go on and on how they wasted much of that middle talent by giving them zero upwards mobility with no real career development plan while also demonstrably hiring senior staff externally because “there were no worthy contenders in the company” type of shit. As a result, they rendered themselves into a feeder for other companies in the field with some insane turnover rates but hey - they had 10-year recruitment and human resources professionals with the “legacy of success” leading the charge.