#Desperate to Work and Willing to Be Vulnerable

A Wall Street Journal article describes increasing popularity of the LinkedIn banner, “Desperate.” Students might discuss the value of vulnerability and whether they would use the banner given the tough job market for recent grads.

A few months ago, I wrote about the “Open to Work” banner, but the urgency to find a job has escalated for some seekers. The pink is glaring, and the message is clear, but as we might expect, the results are less clear, according to the WSJ report:

The #Desperate banner draws even more attention to someone’s need for a job. Recruiters say the tag could help people get noticed and hired. It also could backfire, because some hiring managers might see it as a signal that someone caused problems in their previous workplace.

Brené Brown has made vulnerability a household word, and we know the value. Allowing ourselves to risk emotional exposure inspires connection, and that may be true for job seekers. Those with the banner report receiving good support from others, if not full-time offers. One poster said, “I don’t think the desperate banner takes away my confidence or bravery,” while another said, “Frankly, as a victim of redundancy, I am desperate, and I don’t think that’s anything to be ashamed of.” 

My guess is that the banner will be short lived. The bold color and novelty draw attention that might fizzle the more we see it. I also hope the job market for this cohort improves, which would reduce the desperation and the need.

Image source.

AI Tools Help (a Lot) During Interviews

A Business Insider article says we shouldn’t call it “cheating,” but using these interview AI tools seems like cheating to me.

Final Round AI will revise a resume, generate a cover letter, and run mock interviews. After an interview, it will summarize, follow up, and somehow—coming later this year—negotiate a salary. But wait, there’s more: Its Copilot product (no relation to Microsoft’s) will transcribe the interview and, in real time, provide sample answers to questions. Cofounder and CEO Michael Guan says, "It can prompt the candidates with the right thing to say at the right time. Like a magical teleprompter, using AI."

Although intended only as a meeting transcription service, Otter.AI is being used as a "proxy interview" tool. This could involve the candidate lip-syncing as someone else answers questions for them. Other tools, like Interview Buddy, provide sample responses or bullet points for the candidate, but Interview Buddy stops short of technical questions, which the CEO says would be "kind of crossing the line, where it's not actually in the interest of the candidate or the employer if they're getting information that they don't actually know."

Students should consider ethical issues of using these types of tools. Where does AI assistance cross a line so that students are no longer representing themselves, which raises questions of integrity and authenticity? How would students answer questions from the Framework for Ethical Decision Making (Chapter 1 of Business Communication and Character, Figure 7)?

From a practical perspective, are students setting themselves up for failure in a job? Guan says using AI reflects a candidate’s “ingenuity,” and he isn’t concerned about results on the job: "If they can use AI to crush an interview, they can for sure continue using AI to become the top performer in their daily jobs.” Can they? Any job? Maybe they can perform only the type of job that is increasingly rare because AI is already doing the lower-end work.

Learning From Ghosting During Job Selection

Ghosting while dating raises ethical questions that apply to the job search. In both cases, students learn compassion and resilience.

Psychologists say the uncertainty of not hearing anything can be more painful than rejection. One therapist said the consequence is that people “start to question their reality.” They doubt their interpretation of a “good” date or an interview, wondering how their perceptions were off.

Of course, this might not be the case. A date or an interviewer may have felt just as connected at the time, but other candidates were better matches. Some interviewers also seem positive and encouraging during the selection process just to be nice—to make candidates feel comfortable, to allow candidates to represent themselves well, and to represent the company well. The opposite also happens: A candidate thinks an interview went horribly because the hiring manager was inexpressive, but that could be their personality, or they may fear implying an job offer, a questionable approach I’ve heard from several managers.

This Forbes article posits several reasons an employer might ghost a candidate, including hiring an internal candidate, changing budgets or hiring priorities, or discomfort with giving bad news. None are valid reasons when a candidate is left hanging. Discomfort in conveying bad news is the most illogical because no news is worse than a rejection that allows students to move on emotionally as well as practically.

Our job as faculty is to help students take ghosting in stride. As the Forbes article states, “The reality is that ghosting has become unofficial standard operating procedures.” Redditors describe the emotional toll, but unfortunately, it’s expected, so students should do their best to brush it off and not take it personally.

We can coach students to follow up a couple of times with enthusiastic-sounding emails and voicemails, and then they have to practice letting it go. They certainly shouldn’t hold up their search waiting for a response. Resilience has its limits; knowing when to quit is also an important skill. Ruminating about what they did wrong could lead to losing hope or feeling resentments that could sour their search. Instead, reframing ghosting as an unfortunate but expected part of the selection process could help.

Image source.

Crop Tops at the Office

Students might be interested in debating whether crop tops are acceptable work attire. Of course, the decision depends on the industry, company, culture—and students’ own ideas about professional dress.

A Wall Street Journal article explains the importance of pairing. A crop top with high-waisted, wide pants or a pencil skirt might look better than, say, leggings. Also, a button-down crop might stand alone on top, but a tight-fitting one is safer with a jacket. Students might agree with the informal dress code I remember at school: no belly buttons.

Women interviewed for the article say the top makes them feel taller, cooler, and a little rebellious.

Images source.

Arguments About the Noncompete Clause

As students sign employment agreements, they might be interested in researching arguments for and against the noncompete clause. Here are a few sources for students to explore:

• The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) initiated a new rule that U.S. employers can no longer include noncompete clauses:

  • The 570-page “Final Rule” document

  • Summary “Fact Sheet” that quantifies benefits of reducing healthcare costs, allowing new businesses, increasing innovation, and increasing worker earnings

  • CNN interview with FTC Chair Lina Kahn, who claims that the FTC has “clear legal authority” to institute the ban

The FTC rule distinguishes between “senior executives” (who earn more than $151,164 per year and make policy decisions) and the rest of us. Noncompete clauses may remain for executives and not for the many bartenders, hairstylists, and others who are currently subjected to these contract restrictions. Still, business associations aren’t happy with the FTC rule.

• The U.S. Chamber of Commerce filed suit against the FTC. The organization focuses on “reasonable noncompete agreements,” not those that, for example, limit people from working within “hundreds of miles away or many years after leaving a job.” The suit questions the FTC’s authority and claims “irreparable harm to businesses and employees” and argues for delaying implementation.

• Ryan, a tax company in Texas, also filed suit, announced in this news release. The firm’s focus is on damage to “IP protections and talent development and retention.”

Students will find additional arguments—and will have their own experiences and ideas to share. If they have signed employment contracts, they could compare the noncompete clauses, and they might reconsider signing such an agreement in the future.

Image source.

Discrimination Against Black Names on Resumes

Many studies have shown that employers are more likely to offer interviews to white than to Black applicants. New research may help prepare students.

Students have difficult decisions to make about how to present themselves in employment communications. In Chapter 13 of Business Communication and Character (11e), I wrote:

Applicants have a difficult choice in deciding whether to downplay their race and other affiliations. Some students choose to do so to avoid bias—to increase their chances of getting hired when they are at a disadvantage in the selection process. Others downplay their identities for a different reason: if an employer does want to increase diversity, they don’t want to be hired to “fill that quota.”

I reference an Administrative Science Quarterly article. This new research identifies companies by name, with some companies, for example, Kohl’s, Lowe’s, and Hilton, not discriminating, but AutoNation and GPC coming out at the bottom. This study also tested age and LGBTQ status and found low penalties for those over 40 and applicants with Black names who mentioned affiliations with LGBTQ groups, although the penalty was larger for applicants with white-sounding names.

The resumes in this study seem to be for lower, service-level jobs. It would be interesting to evaluate the effect for professional- and management-level jobs for which our students might apply. I’m cautious about assuming the same results.

"Open to Work" and Other Desperations

Although LinkedIn offers an “open to work” option, at least one recruiter says it’s the “biggest red flag" for employers. This reminds me of other ways students inadvertently appear desperate to recruiters.

LinkedIn explains the feature, which offers the option to show the banner to all LinkedIn members or only to recruiters. Users might select all members, thinking about networking strategies, but this might increase the look of desperation. LinkedIn also explains, “[W]e can’t guarantee complete privacy” because, if someone is still employed, recruiters at the company might find out from other recruiters that they’re on the market.

One recruiter compares job seeking to dating and encourages “exclusivity.” Business communication faculty may refer to Cialdini’s scarcity principle: people want what they can’t have.

We coach students to be more selective in their search. When a recruiter or hiring manager asks, “What’s your ideal job?,” students should have one in mind—not too narrow, but not too broad either. “I’ll do anything. I just want to work for xx” likely won’t inspire an offer. This reminds me of reading applications for the Cornell Nolan School of Hotel Administration. Many students would write that they applied because “it’s the best” program. That answer says little about the applicant’s decision process—or maybe the answer says it all.

On the other hand, students who lie about multiple job offers are playing a dangerous game. In addition to the obvious issues of integrity, college recruiters talk.

Networking requires more effort than a banner. Years of curating a network, which develops from supporting and being helpful to others, results in people who care about an applicant and want to see that person succeed. For students, this is more challenging but starts during school.

Troublesome Article Headline About Women's Communication

A New York Times opinion piece by Adam Grant titled “Women Know Exactly What They’re Doing When They Use ‘Weak Language’” has been gnawing at me. What troubles me is not the advice but the headline, which sounds like women are purposely manipulating the situation—perhaps more so than any person would in a similar situation. I may be overly sensitive (disclaimer! weak language!), but “women know what they're doing" reminds me of a sexist throwback. Google the phrase and you’ll find references to leaning over a table for tips and other examples of how women dress and behave around men (for example, see this ESPN story).

Otherwise, Grant’s points are worth sharing with students. He summarizes:

Disclaimers (I might be wrong, but …), hedges (maybe, sort of), and tag questions (don’t you think?) can be a strategic advantage. So-called weak language is an unappreciated source of strength. Understanding why can explain a lot about the way women acquire power and influence — and how men do, too.

Grant offers good advice and cites several studies about hiring and promotion decisions:

By using a disclaimer (“I don’t know …”) and a hedge “(I hope …”), the women reinforced the supervisor’s authority and avoided the impression of arrogance. For the men who asked for a raise, however, weak language neither helped nor hurt. No one was fazed if they just came out and demanded more money.

I’m guessing that the headline-writer’s intention (not Adam Grant’s doing) was to capture attention—and perhaps the phrasing was harmless, complimenting women on using a strategy, whether purposeful or not, that works. But the phrase has a history, which is why I saved the article in a browser tab for more than a week.

One person who commented on the article pointed out inherent problems with the word “weak”:

I recommend we find an alternative to the phrase “weak language.” Weak language according to whom? A patriarchal world view? Let’s give it more dignity, the dignity it deserves. How about calling it “sensitivity to relationship” or “sensitivity to connection.” Something we need so much more of in our world today. (Anne Yeomans)

Others suggested “respectful” language. Some women lament being “between a rock and a hard place”—too weak or too assertive, nothing gets their voice heard.

Students will need to navigate these contradictions. Perhaps the best advice is to adapt to the industry, situation, and person—the same advice business communication faculty give to all students: to tailor to the context and audience as best they can.

Image source.

New Studies Suggest Humility for LinkedIn Writing

New studies emphasize writing about the journey, not just outcomes, in LinkedIn profiles, Twitter bios, and other employment communications. Across seven studies, authors found describing difficulties and growth as well as accomplishments conveyed a greater sense of warmth.

Ovul Sezer, an assistant professor at Cornell University, summarizes the findings:

We define “journey” as a long and often difficult process of going from one point to another, which reflects a determination to learn, an acquisition of skills, and a sense of growth and development. For example, obstacles one faced or learning processes they went through could be great information to include in one’s personal story. We find that journey information leads to greater perceptions of warmth because journeys help to communicate humility, mitigating the appearance of arrogance often associated with self-promotion.

Part of humility is being able to learn from mistakes, which any employer would value. Humility is also described as, not thinking less of yourself, but thinking of yourself less—being rightsized.

One study evaluated LinkedIn introductions of MBA students according to “high journey” or “high outcome,” defined as follows:

In accordance with the elements of journeys and outcomes uncovered in the pilot studies, the “high journey” cells in Table 2 showcase elements of a determination to learn (curiosity, eagerness to be challenged), difficulty (operational hurdles), the acquisition of skills (studying design innovation, organizational culture, etc.), and development/growth (exploring personal interests). The “high outcome” cells mention educational degrees (MBA, dual degrees) and job positions (member of a cross-functional team).

The authors clarify that introductions can illustrate both high journey and high outcome. For a class exercise, students could rate their peers’ introductions and provide feedback on journey and outcome criteria. Then they might discuss the degree of humility and warmth conveyed and offer suggestions for improvement. The article describes additional studies, including one with HR professionals, and offers examples of effective statements, which might be useful for students to see.

In another study, authors include a chat and offer this example:

B.2.4 Outcome plus journey condition You introduce yourself to Michael and the two of you engage in the following chat:
You: “It’s great to connect with you and congratulations on winning a BDC award! I’d love to hear more about it.”
Michael: “Absolutely! It’s great to be selected as an award winner. I had to overcome a lot of obstacles along the way, like time constraints with my freelance work, and it was really challenging to reflect on my unique perspective of the world and translate that into my designs. I was nervous! But I was motivated to apply because I knew it would help me grow as a designer. Along the way, I realized that what makes me tick is to inspire people – that’s what drives me to want to be a designer.”
You: “Wow! That’s great to hear.”

One concern is the length of LinkedIn introductions. As we might expect, the most effective statements are somewhat longer than a list of accomplishments. However, authors found that, when both journey and outcomes are included, the number of words was still within an acceptable range. At the same time, including their journey will challenge students to write concisely, even when telling more of their story.

Chronicle Recommendation for Full Disclosure Raises Character Questions

A Chronicle of Higher Education article suggests that academic leaders practice full disclosure when applying for jobs. The recommendation is to avoid issues later in the hiring process, and the decision tests candidates’ character, particularly integrity, courage, and authenticity. Our students face similar decisions.

Here’s the search consultants’ advice:

Be forthcoming and candid about any sensitive or confidential information that may affect your candidacy. Search committees and hiring managers—and I can’t stress this enough—hate surprises. So it’s critical to disclose a potential roadblock as soon as possible once you’ve decided to become a candidate.

Hiring managers “hate surprises” for a few reasons. First, no one wants to waste time. If a candidate, even at an entry-level, will be ruled out, HR wants to know early on. Students with a criminal record of theft should not bother applying for an auditing position. Second, employers want to hire people with integrity, which includes being honest up front. This takes courage, a worthy topic of discussion with our students. Yes, students risk missing out on a job offer, but better to remove themselves from the process early than wait until the third interview or, worse, after they’re hired. When I worked in HR, terminating hired employees after a discovery was a painful process, and this only makes it harder for someone to find another job.

In their list of disclosures, the search professionals include legal issues, negative publicity, barriers to relocating, and leaving previous employers on bad terms. Students might want to discuss gaps in employment, negative social media posts, family obligations, and job terminations—not all at once, of course. Depending on the situation, job market, industry, and so many other factors, students have difficult decisions to make about whether, how, how much, and when to disclose issues that might negatively affect their candidacy. Some of the advice in Business Communication and Character is rooted in Chalice Randazzo’s work: "A Framework for Resume Decisions: Comparing Applicants’ and Employers’ Reasons” (BPCQ, 2020).

Here’s an inspiring story about a researcher at Intel who decided to talk about his history of addiction during his job interview. In the end, what students choose to reveal reflects on their character. They might find this discussion and handout about the Character, Audience, Message (CAM) Model useful.

Image source.

Negotiating Salary for "Mission-Driven" Organizations

Applicants are hesitant to negotiate higher salaries when organizations use “social impact framing” in job ads, but using business communication principles, students can get more pay. New research published in Organization Science found that candidates feared seeming selfish and reducing their chance of an offer. You never know how managers will perceive salary negotiations, but we know that people in majority groups are more likely to negotiate and that taking the first offer can lead to hundreds of thousands of dollars in lost pay over someone’s career.

In Business Communication and Character, I recommend the following process to help students muster up the courage to negotiate. I hope these suggestions are useful for your students:

• Consider the entire package. Negotiating an increase in salary is best because annual merit increases will build on a larger base every year. But the compensation and benefits package also could include bonus and equity (company stock) pay, healthcare benefits, relocation assistance, tuition reimbursement, sign-on bonus—and other aspects of the job that you may value, such as, how much time you can work from home, the start date, and so on. Think about what is most important to you and where the company might have flexibility. For example, vacation time and retirement plans may be fixed for every new hire at your level, but a hiring manager might have more leeway with relocation, a sign-on bonus, and remote work options.

• Know your value. Review your resume and focus on your skills and accomplishments related to the job and company. Be confident about what you bring to the table. People in dominant identity groups may have an easier time with this idea, which is part of the explanation for the gender pay gap in the United States and elsewhere.

• Research starting salaries. Explore your college’s career management office, Glassdoor, PayScale, Salary.com, and other sites to determine the likely range for the position and location. You might share your offer with other students; people are surprisingly willing to talk about their finances, and transparency helps reduce the pay gap. Keep your expectations realistic. You can ask a recruiter about a salary range—but not too early in the process. Negotiations typically don’t start until after you have a job offer. If asked about your requirements, try to get a salary range from the employer first, so you don’t “low-ball” yourself.

• Highlight your assets. When you begin to negotiate, give concrete examples, for example, similar work and accomplishments at other companies. Think about why the employer should pay you more. Often, they are looking for your motivation level. In other words, how can you prove—with evidence—that you’ll work harder than other employees and, therefore, be worth the extra compensation? Avoid talking about your needs, for example, student loans; other than relocation, an employer will pay more for what you can contribute—not for your expenses.

• Decide on your approach. Include all your requests up front so the employer doesn’t get frustrated and feel manipulated when you negotiate each term separately. If you don’t get the salary or other terms you request, what will you do? Be clear about what you’re willing to compromise and at what point you will decline the offer.

• Practice. Practice what you’ll say with friends and others to address counterarguments and hold your ground. You don’t need to apologize (“Sorry to bother you with this. I know you’re busy”). Instead, adopt a confident, persuasive, yet friendly tone (“I’m very excited about the position and joining the team, and I know I’ll bring a lot of value to the table, particularly because of my experience at ___ [or something relevant you accomplished]. I'm wondering if we can explore a slightly higher starting salary of $ ___”). Your goal is to convince the employer, without sounding too demanding, that you’re worth the extra compensation.

Do Better than “CFBR” for Social Support

A WSJ article describes the increased use of “CFBR,” meaning commenting for better reach, a way to elevate a social media post. A popular way of giving laid-off employees more visibility during their job search, the approach raises questions of authenticity and true compassion.

Hootsuite’s definition makes it sound careless:

CFBR, or Commenting For Better Reach, is a popular comment used on platforms like LinkedIn and Facebook.

Since most social media algorithms favor content with high engagement, “commenting for better reach” is a way to offer an organic boost to a post you think should have more exposure. When you comment on someone else’s post, that post is more likely to show up in your followers’ feeds.

This tactic may be effective, but it’s a little spammy. If you want to take a more thoughtful approach, we recommend leaving an authentic comment that engages with the post’s content—or even resharing that post with your followers.

Typing CFBR may be the “Good luck!” of social media posts despite heartache shared in the original post. I wonder how students view and use the comment. Maybe they can find better ways to support their peers.

Image source.

George Santos Resume

In case you didn’t see it, here’s the resume of now U.S. Representative George Santos. Although we’ve been hearing for weeks about his fake jobs at Goldman Sachs and Citi and his fake education at Baruch, it’s quite shocking to see it all in print.

Students might enjoy reviewing his resume, finding errors and other ways to improve his employment communication. For example, the summary and list of skills at the top are jargony and sound like boiler plate; I’m surprised to see so little tailoring to a political position. Students will find other issues, for example, unparallel bullets, an odd page break, misaligned spacing, a lower-case i, missing periods, a missing end parenthesis, and acronyms that readers might not know.

Another fun discussion with grammarians in your class: I’ve avoided writing “Santos’s resume” as did The New York Times. The paper titled the article, “The Résumé of George Santos.” I chose the modifier form instead. And I’ve given up on the accent marks in résumé because I rarely see them in business job descriptions.

"Embellishment" vs. Lying

New York Representative-elect George Santos misrepresented himself during his campaign for Congress and is facing calls to resign. The story is relevant for students finding the line between “putting their best self forward” and lying during a job search.

Santos now says, “My sins here are embellishing my resume. I’m sorry.” But his claims are clear fabrications in several cases. What’s interesting about the situation is how easily his claims could be verified. The New York Times simply contacted Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, and Baruch College, and none could verify his employment and graduation claims.

In his position paper, he claimed to be “a proud American Jew.” He also said he is “half Jewish” and a “Latino Jew” and claimed that he has Holocaust and Ukrainian heritage, which has not been supported. Now he clarifies: "I am Catholic. Because I learned my maternal family had a Jewish background, I said I was Jew-ish.”

Santos also defended himself during an interview. He said, “I didn’t outright lie,” but he did admit that he used “a poor use of words” and included “a little bit of fluff.” He blamed “elitist” outlets like The New York Times for referring to his customer service experience as “odd jobs,” which forced him to inflate his experience.

His justification raises an issue about how students can handle their own vulnerability. Business communication faculty encourage students to explain how their experience relates to a prospective job. Some students downplay their experience, so we ask them to highlight the relevance to an employer. But none of us would encourage students to include experiences they didn’t have.

We’ll see whether his colleagues vote for him to stay or leave.

Image source.

Emails to "Boost Your Career"

Wall Street Journal writers suggest sending emails to someone in your inner circle, an influencer, a VIP, a long-lost contact, and someone leaving the organization. They offer good advice for students to maintain and build relationships; even as interns, thinking about reaching out regularly is a good way to develop this habit in the future. I know someone who starts his day by sending a recognition or complimentary email to someone. It’s a kind of daily gratitude.

Of course, the trouble with these emails is being genuine, offering something without expecting anything in return. The article authors suggest avoiding tired phrases, for example, “Can I pick your bring?” As we teach in our classes, they recommend getting to the main point quickly, being brief, and making a response easy, for example, asking for a 10-minute call.

Underpinning these emails is authenticity: being yourself and sounding conversational to make a genuine connection. Although the authors don’t mention it, many of these contacts can be made on social sites as well.

---

Related: I asked ChatGPT, “How should I write an email?” and got this response—not bad for the basics!

There are a few key things to keep in mind when writing an email:

1. Start with a clear subject line: The subject line should clearly and concisely convey the purpose of the email.

2. Use a professional greeting: Begin your email with a formal greeting, such as "Dear [Name]," or "Hello [Name]," followed by a comma or colon.

3. Keep it concise: Keep your email brief and to the point. Use bullet points or numbered lists to make it easy to read.

4. Use a clear and concise writing style: Use simple, straightforward language and avoid using jargon or technical terms that may not be familiar to the reader.

5. Use proper formatting: Use paragraphs to break up your text and make it easier to read. Use bold or italic text to highlight important points.

6. Use a professional closing: End your email with a formal closing, such as "Sincerely," followed by your name and contact information.

7. Proofread your email: Make sure to carefully proofread your email for spelling and grammar errors before sending it.

By following these tips, you can write a clear, professional email that effectively conveys your message.

Image source.

Interview Advice from a CTO

Deloitte CTO Leo Alexandru offered interview advice in a Twitter thread. Most of it is common sense, but the examples could inspire a good class discussion, including why tech has trouble attracting more women. Here are his (non-parallel) main points in bold, with some commentary:

1. Honesty. Of course, but he recommended admitting concepts that you “never heard of, haven't used in a while, and want to learn more about.” Students would do well to prepare for the last two.

2. The right attitude, which Alexandru describes as “positive, trustworthy, and solution-oriented.”

3. Don't talk s**t about their previous job. This is a good one, and students should prepare for questions about their internships. Even if they were disappointed, how can they describe the experience in a balanced way?

4. Chemistry. This one worries me and reminds me of other assessments about “fit.” Sometimes, this is a veil for “just like me” and leads to a homogenous team.

5. Communication skills. Alexandru writes, “So I am very interested in how well you express a point of view. Without being aggressive.” His perspective could be a difficult balance for women, who, in one study of performance reviews, were far more likely than men to be criticized for being “too aggressive.”

6. Don’t be a “yes man.” See above!

7. Preparation. This is always a good reminder for students: know the job description and research the company ahead of time. The bigger challenge might be integrating what they know into the conversation.

8. Asking questions. Alexandru suggests asking about challenges in the job, what success looks like, and why a previous person left. A colleague told me that she starts an interview by asking what questions the candidate has. Other hiring managers prefer most of the interview to be led by the candidate. An interactive discussion is usually best, and students need to be on their toes.

9. Passion. This is a good reminder for students to show enthusiasm and prepare reasons for wanting the job other than, “Apple is the best company in the world.”

10. Proven track record. Alexandru wants candidates to “show” not just “tell” results. An ePortfolio or other documented work will help.

Public Talk of Layoffs

I remember when people where ashamed of being laid off. Old movies show men leaving for “work” months after they no longer had a job.

Today, people find community in discussing their fate, and they use their favorite platform—sometimes their former employer—to share their stories. Partly, the shame is lifted because of the numbers: 11,000 at Meta; 10,000 at Amazon; 3,700 at Twitter; 950 at Salesforce; and many others. In a colorful, but mostly unreadable chart, TrueUp logged 192,997 so far in 2022. (Maybe the logos could be scalable?)

The unfortunately named Blind app connects employees in several industries, particularly tech (95% of Twitter employees signed up). Students can review comments for an inside scoop just as they do on Glassdoor.

I feel encouraged by the public postings. In addition to the obvious compassion and vulnerability, the stories—good and bad about the layoff process and communication—keeps employers on their toes. Also, people are finding new jobs, and this will get easier as the market, once again, opens up.

CAM Communication Model

At the 2022 ABC Conference, I presented with colleagues about the CAM communication model. Useful for deciding whether, what, and how to communicate, the model walks students through three steps:

• Character Check: What drives me to communicate? To what am I reacting, and what is my purpose? What impact do I want to have? How do I want others to perceive me? How can I demonstrate good character?  

• Audience Analysis: How can I tailor my communication to my audience? What context should I consider? How does communication travel within the organization? What barriers might get in the way?

• Message and Medium: What is the content of my message, and how will I convey that message?

You’re welcome to download and use this handout, which provides generic questions and then a sample activity for students to apply the model when deciding whether to include something potentially controversial or perceived negatively during the job search.

Helping Students Negotiate Salary

With more companies posting salary ranges, students may have an easier time negotiating job offers. New laws in California, New York, and Colorado require companies to be more transparent, and the hope is to reduce gender and racial inequities. Advice from Business Communication and Character, 11e (Chapter 14), follows. Asking for more requires courage, so students need encouragement and practice.

Consider the entire package. Negotiating an increase in salary is best because annual merit increases will build on a larger base every year. But the compensation and benefits package also could include bonus and equity (company stock) pay, healthcare benefits, relocation assistance, tuition reimbursement, sign-on bonus—and other aspects of the job that you may value, such as how much time you can work from home, the start date, and so on. Think about what is most important to you and where the company might have flexibility. For example, vacation time and retirement plans may be fixed for every new hire at your level, but a hiring manager might have more leeway with relocation, a sign-on bonus, and remote work options.

Know your value. Review your resume and focus on your skills and accomplishments related to the job and company. Be confident about what you bring to the table. People in dominant identity groups may have an easier time with this idea, which partly explains the gender pay gap in the United States and elsewhere.

Research starting salaries. Explore your college’s career management office, Glassdoor, PayScale, Salary.com, and other sites to determine the likely range for the position and location. You might share your offer with other students; people are surprisingly willing to talk about their finances today, and transparency helps reduce the pay gap. Keep your expectations realistic. You can ask a recruiter about a salary range—but not too early in the process. Negotiations typically don’t start until after you have a job offer. If asked about your requirements, try to get a salary range from the employer first, so you don’t “low-ball” yourself.

Highlight your assets. When you begin to negotiate, give concrete examples, for example, similar work and accomplishments at other companies. Think about why the employer should pay you more. Often, they are looking for your motivation level. In other words, how can you prove—with evidence—that you’ll work harder than other employees and, therefore, be worth the extra compensation? Avoid talking about your needs, for example, student loans; other than relocation, an employer will pay more for what you can contribute—not for your expenses.

Decide on your approach. Include all your requests up front so the employer doesn’t get frustrated and feel manipulated when you negotiate each term separately. If you don’t get the salary or other terms you request, what will you do? Be clear about what you’re willing to compromise and at what point you will decline the offer.

Practice. Practice what you’ll say with friends and others to address counterarguments and hold your ground. You don’t need to apologize (“Sorry to bother you with this. I know you’re busy”). Instead, adopt a confident, persuasive, yet friendly tone (“I’m very excited about the position and joining the team, and I know I’ll bring a lot of value to the table, particularly because of my experience at ___ [or something relevant you accomplished]. I'm wondering if we can explore a slightly higher starting salary of $ ___”). Your goal is to convince the employer, without sounding too demanding, that you’re worth the extra compensation.

Should Students Change Their Names for the Job Search?

A new working paper confirms and expands what we know about discrimination in the job search. Applicants with names that are difficult to pronounce are less likely to be called for interviews and may suffer career loss down the road. The researchers describe related studies about racial bias: within minority groups, which already face discrimination, those with less “fluent or familiar-sounding names” are 50% less likely than those with “white” names to get called for an interview.

Students make difficult decisions about whether to change their names or “whiten” their resumes in other ways. In Chapter 13 of Business Communication and Character (11e), we explore the advantages, such as more callbacks for jobs, and the disadvantages. Understandably, students may want to keep their given name, which they feel is an important part of their identity. They also may resist because of moral reasons or because of concerns that, even if they get the job, they might not feel as tough they belong. Chalice Randazzo’s Business and Professional Communication Quarterly article, “A Framework for Résumé Decisions: Comparing Applicants’ and Employers’ Reasons,” offers useful guidance for all resume decisions.

Of course, the real onus is on employers to reduce bias by changing attitudes and hiring practices, for example, with blind hiring. In the meantime, students bear the brunt of a discriminatory system.

Image source.