Skip to content

When the Experts Disagree

Ford vs. Chevy

My father and his brother had a disagreement which began from my earliest recollection as a child and continued throughout their lives. They were as close as brothers living in two different cities could be, but when they got together this topic always came up: Which is better, a Ford or a Chevrolet? They had other differences: Dad was an under-the-hood kind of guy and I remember that my uncle adorned his car with gadgets. I especially liked the swivel “suicide knob” on his steering wheel which I thought was pretty cool, but never dared to say it out loud. Both had a great sense of humor and joked about it a lot, but Dad was an avid Ford guy. My uncle argued that any Chevy ever made could beat any Ford any day of the week. We were lucky that the conversation never really left the kitchen table or they would have been out looking for a straight stretch of road to prove their point. Thankfully, Mom and my aunt never had to go bail them out.

There has been a lot of chatter in blogs and on Twitter lately about disagreements and the value of the “expert” advice offered in the various job seeker chat sessions. If you haven’t participated in a chat session on Twitter, you should try it or at least lurk and watch. It is like speed dating on steroids! As a co-moderator of several of these chats** I can tell you that it is a little like herding cats to keep the conversation on topic and moving forward. There is a wealth of information spewed into the internet in such a very short period of time. The downside is that it can also be difficult to keep up with all the comments, especially when there are clearly opposing points of view at times. I have heard several job seekers musing: I should worry AND not worry about keywords in my resume; I should use PDF formatted resumes AND avoid PDF resumes; I should follow up before AND after the interview; I should write for ATS screening AND for a human recruiter. So what is the job seeker supposed to do? You are looking for advice and are getting mixed signals. Does this mean that the advice is not worth the effort? I think not.

I suggest that it is best to consider where the advice originates and the thinking of the person giving the advice…all without calling the psychic hotline if possible. Like any other form of communication it is best to consider the source of the data before implementing or modifying a plan. For the purpose of this discussion I have divided the reasons for the disagreements into four categories which may be overly simplistic to some and a revelation to others. Start with this idea and move forward: In most cases, there is never one best answer!

  1. Different opinions: Advice is often unfounded and not based on evidence – We all know that there are opinionated people who will never accept an opposing viewpoint and adamantly defend their beliefs. Actually, while on the surface this may sound like a bad thing, it really is not. It is very much an important part of the process of getting and giving advice. It is a fact that the lack of proof does not mean that the advice is wrong. There are established practices in every field of endeavor, especially in recruiting. When these are challenged, it often results in no empirical evidence being provided to support the theory. Advice to job seekers based on generally accepted principals is useful if there is a consensus of believers who support the idea even though some may disagree. There may be as many theories about cover letters, resume formats and follow up as there are people who are offering advice. Unfortunately it may take acting on a gut feeling, the reputation of the advice giver and trial and error to decide on your personal choice. Logically applying the advice to different situations may not be easy, but recognizing that there are differences is critically important.
  2. Different experiences: All answers are relative – One of the clearest differences of opinions can sometimes be seen between agency recruiters and in-house corporate recruiters. They will both call themselves “recruiter” but may disagree on what they believe that term to mean. It is important to listen to them with the knowledge that these people are not the enemy. Most are extremely caring people who want to help. Why else would they take the time to participate in job seeker forums when there is no pay for this service? As if this were not already too dynamic to follow, to further complicate things all agencies don’t work under the same model and all companies have different rules for their recruiters. A lot of these experts have worked in both areas, understand and respect the other side’s viewpoint, but the prevailing attitude and basis for advice will be from their current perspective. Probably the true, text-book model of a recruiter is one who manages candidates, client relationships and just about everything else from initial contact through hire. But I have seen agencies pervert the system by arbitrarily shifting quota numbers, the recruiter’s report card, and in-house recruiters who are forced to react artificially to time-to-hire metrics. While not true in all cases, both of these practices do contribute to devaluing the candidate experience despite the best efforts of the recruiter. I could go on, but the reason I say that there is “no right answer” is because there are too many variables for anyone to declare one solution as “the” right way for all situations. Most advice is well-meaning and will add value in the right situation.
  3. Different crystal ball: Future thinkers are looking beyond today – Because these experienced professionals are looking to create tomorrow’s systems and procedures they are speaking authoritatively from a path that leads to their own personal future conclusion. Obviously, if the end point is different then the steps along that path will be different. There will be disagreements. I have seen respected leaders debate an issue and end up as polar opposites in their conclusions. As professional as these people are, and with the sincerest respect for each other, it is not uncommon to hear one of them comment, “That’s the craziest thing I’ve ever heard.” I love this dialog! By definition, if it is in the future it can’t be disproved…it is a THEORY. The value I take from this disagreement is not so much where they think we are going, but where they have been, getting inside their brains and analyzing why they think this way. Since this is discussing something that hasn’t happened yet, the advice given can only be as good as the path it opens up for you. I would consider advice from any of these people and in fact have adopted some of them as my personal mentors even though they may not even know me.
  4. Different motivation: Challenging the status quo improves processes – On a macro level, newspaper ads gave way to job boards. Job boards are finding the need to evolve in order to remain a viable force today. Social media is a powerful recent phenomenon and yet there is still disagreement on how it is supposed to work for recruiting and job searching. Strong advocates of all of these media are likely to take metrics and successes to justify their particular point of view. Newspapers still serve as a useful tool, although though I do it online and have not subscribed to a print version of this medium since the parakeet died and I no longer need cage liners. I love the job boards and continue to use them on both the seeker and recruiter side. I have embraced social media, but find that many people are skeptical and scared of this unknown thing. On a more micro, individual level, motivations spring from the occupation of the adviser. Ask a recruiter if you should get professional assistance in preparing your resume and you may get a different answer than when you ask that question to a career counselor or resume writer. You should study the pros and cons of all of the alternatives yourself and pick a side because the disagreements are not going away. The advice from all of these sources is relevant as long as you form a balanced approach and keep a controlled record of progress to capture the personal metrics for the use of each tool.

In summary, everybody answers questions based on their total life experiences and will offer advice based on those answers. The needs of each job seeker will be different as well, so some advice fits and some advice does not. Experts may disagree in their approach, however there is value in studying opposing viewpoints and tailoring a plan for your job search. It would be nice if there were only one way, but there isn’t. It will not be easy to sort out all the differences of opinions, but understanding that this is one situation where both sides of a disagreement can be right can help. Or maybe neither side is right…my father’s last car was a Buick.

** Disclaimer: I am a participant in multiple online chat groups and former co-moderator of #HFChat, so obviously I drank the Kool-Aid.

 

2 thoughts on “When the Experts Disagree”

  1. Tom,

    Great post!

    You, once again, are spot on with your message here. As long as there are people, there will always be more than one point of view, and that’s not a bad thing. Individual experiences and influences are what help shape opinions.

    I had a boss years ago who told me to always listen to what other people have to say. Her view on this was simple: It doesn’t mean you will concur, agree with or follow-through on their words, but it does give another perspective and certainly the more information gathered to help you form your opinion, cannot be a bad thing.

  2. I am embarrassed to admit that this is the first of what will be many visits to your blog, Tom. This is a wonderfully articulated and reasoned explanation.

    I think a lot of the stress that active candidates face as a consequence of different advice and counsel is the fact that often, candidates haven’t been on the other side of the desk. For candidates, the single most important thing they’re going all day is go to that interview. This is almost never the case for the interviewer(s). Sure, they recognize its importance, but there are business needs that the interview process takes them from.

    This asymmetric level of investment is, I think, an often under-recognized aspect to the recruiting process, because it is the chief driver behind most candidates’ most common complaint: lack of transparency into the process.

    I believe this stress puts candidates in the position of wanting to get THE answer. The answer that explains everything. Of course, the truth is that it’s just not that simple, as you have so expertly laid out here.

    They say content is king. But when the content conflicts, maybe it’s more accurate to say that the saying has to change by one letter.

    Maybe contex[/em>t is king.

Comments are closed.