Insane transparency -- Seeing or even setting what your colleagues earn

At Google, we have pretty radical transparency, at least in Engineering where I sit.  With few exceptions, we can all see what every colleague is working on (via the Project Database or “PDB”), what they’ve recently accomplished (via weekly self-composed “Snippets”), and even what their core contributions have been to the company (their Google resume).  Through our performance review system, we can not only review our peers (and have them read exactly what we wrote about their strengths and weaknesses) but even review our bosses.

I think on the whole this transparency is outstanding… ethical and useful.  But one part is missing, right?

- We can see what people are working on.
- We can see how people are performing.
= We can see what they accomplish.

but…

- We CANNOT see what their compensation is.

and beyond that…

- We do not have a direct SAY in their compensation, only quite indirect input into promotions.

Let me make one thing very, very, very clear here:


I believe that total compensation transparency (beyond one’s own private understanding of his or her own salary and compensation mechanisms) IS A BAD IDEA.  Let me repeat that.  I am NOT seriously advocating that companies disclose the salary of each employee within or even outside of the company, nor do I suggest that employees be empowered to set and adjust their peers’ compensation packages.

But… what if?  And why does salary remain so strongly one of the last taboos in this increasingly hip world of transparency?  What is it about human nature which makes us (even me!) shudder at the thought of this specific set of ideas?

*  *  *

Notwithstanding my quite-likely rational revulsion to the idea of compensation transparency, it would seem that there are some good arguments for such openness:

• This might fix (what rank-and-file consensus would deem) stunningly inappropriate salary packages… on either end of the spectrum.  That do-nothing middle manager?  He’s making WHAT?  Not any more he isn’t!  That super hard worker in internal systems who stays late and doesn’t get the glory of working on glamorous projects?  Totally increase her salary!
• People would (at least in theory) be paid more along the lines of what they’re currently worth vs. what they had the savviness to negotiate.
• You could potentially stress out less when asking for a raise because either you’d have full knowledge of where you are on the pay scale or, in the scenario in which peers set your pay, it’d be out of your control.

But I do believe there are far more arguments against radical compensation transparency.

• Biases based upon “visible wealth” might skew perception and adjustments, resulting in harmful demotivations.  Have you seen the car that manager drives?  She surely doesn’t need more money.  Let’s dock her pay (even though that may drive her out of the company, to the firm’s detriment).
• That aforementioned super dedicated hard worker in internal systems?  Her low profile and lack of direct revenue impact may cause many to perceive her as less driven, less worthy of compensation star status despite the actual criticalness of her work in the background.
• Study after study has shown that our perception of and happiness with compensation is driven less by raw numbers or trends or even buying power, but rather keeping up with the Joneses.  In other words, getting a raise of $5000 is apparently not nearly as satisfying as earning $5000 more than one’s teammate.  Can you imagine the drama involved with compensation transparency given this aspect of human nature?!

*  *  *

And here’s an even crazier additional proposal:
What if you could actually set your own pay (again, with the group transparency)?  As in, each quarter or year, literally determine how much you’re paid (though obviously if you asked for $10 million, the company could fire you on the spot due to reasons of insanity).

• Rich folks who were working just for the love of it could more easily adjust/decline “excessive” salaries.
• People might temper their pay a bit out of embarrassment, realizing that they really shouldn’t be earning 8x what their equally-worthy colleagues do.
• People who needed a bit extra short term (for a house payment, etc.) could temporarily front-load their salaries.
• When an individual employee accomplished an admirable but not very visible achievement, they could again temporarily increase their pay.  Or when they realized that they’d been slacking, they could dock their pay.
• Or if an individual felt like taking a couple of extra days off, they could take that as “unpaid time” without form filling and bureaucracy.

There’s some precedent for this self-determination at work; Netflix, for instance, lets their employees take vacation “as needed” without a preset limit.  And vacation is a type of compensation, right?

*  *  *

What do you think?  Again, please remember that I’m bringing this topic up not to advocate change but to philosophically examine our thoughts on compensation, transparency, taboos, and so on :-D

Zap ridiculous disclaimers, reform CEO pay in one fell swoop

Stupid disclaimers.  You know ‘em, and you probably either ignore them or laugh at them.  Slightly enhanced samples that are either spoken at 420 words a minute or that take up a bazillion lines of tiny tiny text on the back of ads in news magazines.

• “Warning: Stunt driver on stunt track in stunt car.  Do not drive like this [except in Rome]”
• “Warning: Medication may cause sniffling, itching, numbness in extremities, permanent paralysis, or death. [+ 31415928 more lines that no one bothers to read]
• “Remember, drink responsibly!  [Also, be nice to your mom.  Put up the toilet seat.  Don’t be prejudiced.  Love a geek today.]
• “Results not typical.  Your results may vary. [Let’s face it… 99.9999% of people on this diet don’t lose an ounce.  We just managed to find the one freak who had liposuction after taking our product.]

Completely useless, aren’t they?  Somehow I don’t think we’re gonna hear stuff like this from beer-bongin’ frat boys:
“Hey Sarah, I’m concerned about you!  I mean, Mr. Jose Cuervo insists that we drink responsibly, and I just don’t think you are!  Can I get you an orange juice instead?”
“Whoa, dude!  Didn’t you listen to that ad?  It said DON’T drive like this!  Come on, pull it back to 55 man!”

*  *  *

And then there’s the seemingly unrelated issue of corporate compensation.
Forbes magazine lists some of the worst (most unproductive) CEOs and notes their compensation, including:
- Richard M Kovacevich, Wells Fargo, $72.04 million
- Edward E Whitacre Jr , AT&T, $49.01 million
and, brace yourself:
- Barry Diller, IAC/InterActiveCorp, $295.14 million (over half a BILLION dollars in the last 5 years, and ranked as one of the 15 most unproductive CEOs in the entire survey)

Which raises some questions:

1. If compensation is intended to reward good performance, why are so many outstanding leaders (in the public and private) sector making five figure salaries while many total losers and ruthless-jerk CEOs are making more than 100x their salary?
2. If we also assume that compensation is intended to incent good performance, shouldn’t we ask: do any humans really *need* $xx millions per year to get out of bed and work hard for the day?  Given that there are, absolutely without a doubt, an enormous number of extremely intelligent and hardworking and respectable folks who would do wonders for a company at $x milion or even $xxx thousand per year, well… WTF?!

Admittedly, I’ve kind of stacked the deck in my above examples a bit:  I mean, really, who loves their bank?  Or their phone company?  Personally, I find AT&T to be one of the most unpleasant, irresponsible, and customer-non-centric companies out there, but then hey, maybe that’s just me ;-).

*  *  *

Never fear, I have the answer to both problems… a way to get rid of moronic speed-read or 1pt font disclaimers while effectively shaming the grossly overpaid CEOs who perform worse than would Paris Hilton in a dramatic Shakespearean theatre role.

In another article, Forbes complains that trying to do anything about CEO compensation is likely to either be unsuccessful or backfire, perhaps resulting in a further crapification and obfuscation in shareholder reports.  But my idea wouldn’t have that problem.

Ready for it?  Replace the disclaimers with two required placements of Consumer and Stockholder Truth:

• On every TV, radio, and print advertisement, the following must be sanely presented: “Last year, the [company-name] CEO made $78 million, median [company-name] worker: $11,000.  Stock has decreased 17%.”
• On every stockholder quarterly / annual report, the company must present a “Compensation and Performance Summary” in one page, in normal font.  It’d include exactly what the CEO and other key executives took home, how the company did (particularly in its sector), and so on.  No forward-looking B.S., no big long charts.  Just a one page, ideally-bulleted summary.  I mean, hell, I don’t have time to read 50+ page shareholder reports, do you?  Didn’t think so.

Okay, so I’m kidding a bit with the first part of the idea.  But seriously… don’t you think that there’d be some hell to pay for CEOs who were (effectively) publicly outed as greedy and incompetent asses?  And, in an ideal world, also some come-uppance for the lazy or thoughtless jerks who approved their compensation structure?  My favorite is when *especially* bad CEOs are finally shown the door… and then they get a $100 million dollar severance package or the like.  Often times, this happens around the same time that free coffee is eliminated from break rooms and lots of minimum wage folks are let go with two weeks pay.

*  *  *

Having seen what I perceive to be more sane and more humane economic structures and practices in place in Europe and Australia, I admit that if I could wave a magic wand and force exec pay to be no more than 10x worker bee pay, I’d do it.  But yeah, that’s never going to happen here in America.  So instead, I’d love to see executive losers simply get tomato’d in the public eye and forced to resign in shame.  Can you imagine, for instance, an “American CEO Idol” combined with a “CEO Gong Show” and “CEO Survivor” where CEOs have to defend their performance and keep others happy or get voted out of the cushy work world?  Not quite sure how instructive it’d be, but it’d sure be entertaining :-D.

*  *  *

Related BLADAM entries:
- The Free (and Stupid) Market

Getting hired by Google

I recently noticed that a fellow Googler posted some thoughtful tips about interviewing at Google, and -- now that I'm a bit more comfortable blogging about Work -- I figured I'd contribute to the conversation a bit by offering my own, unofficial tips.

Note the unofficial part. I work in Search Quality; aside from occasionally being asked to interview candidates (like most Googlers) -- I have nothing to do with our recruiting, recruiters, etc., nor do I pretend to speak for the HR folks. The stuff below is based on my own observations and opinions.

* * *

Application and interview tips
Broadly: be interesting, be humble, demonstrate outstanding competence in your direct area, briefly highlight your well-roundedness (academically, workwise, and personally), and clarify how you are an excellent
fit with both the position you're applying for and Google overall.

Admittedly, with an insane number of applications a year, it is a bit of a numbers game.  Some outstanding people get rejected.  And, though I haven't witnessed this personally, I'm sure some jerks get offers.  Luckily, Google's been overhauling its hiring processes, and I'm optimistic that particularly the percentage of great people getting overlooked (in relation to the number of apps) will decrease.

Some specific tips and notes:

• Write a decent cover letter


• Write with a tone that's professional yet warm... not stiff or dry.  Your (discernible) voice should come through.
• Keep it to one page (max!) or less.  Maybe even a lot less.
• Convince Google of the fits described above -- that's critical!!!
• Your resume can be in PDF, Word, HTML, or text formats (unless otherwise requested, of course!)


• But note that it will be ultimately printed out.  This means that reasonable pagination can be helpful and also suggests that a comprehensive 20 page document is perhaps not a great idea.  When you want your recruiter and interviewers to know more about your background & interests, links are your friends. 


• Respectful persistence can be appropriate


• If you genuinely have another offer on the table, let your recruiter know! If the recruiter promised to get back with you in [x] days, and in [x+1 or x+2] days you haven't heard back, politely e-mail them.
• If you have a friend at Google who can articulately and sincerely vouch for you, that can work in your favor.


• Your association / relationship with that person matters.  They'll be asked how they know you and how well they know you (and your skills).
• Passion matters and is skillfully perceived.  You're probably wasting your time unless you really are
  excited about a particular position.
• Getting turned down for one Google position does not mean you're ineligible to apply for another position down the road.
• General interview advice that probably applies for pretty much any company:


• Ask thoughtful questions.
• Allow time for traffic and parking and finding the right building. Google -- at least the Mountain View campus -- is a big place!
• Dress one or two steps better than you expect your interviewers to be.  Less than that, and people may wonder about your judgment. More than that, and people may think you're clueless or arrogant.


• The "right" dress at Google probably varies by department. Engineering folks tend to be more informally dressed than sales folks.  If you're interviewing for a senior management position, I'd probably dress a bit more formally than you would for an intern interview.  But the official advice also really makes sense here:  dress comfortably.  If you feel comfortable and confident, it'll show.
• Get a good night's sleep the two nights before.  Sleep deficits are cumulative.  If you have a
  morning interview, make sure you're getting up early the two or three mornings before to get yourself ready to be mentally and physically alert during your interview time.  On a similar health note, drink and eat smartly the day of your interview.  Hunger pangs are distracting.
• Invest in a good pen to take to interviews.  The heft and reliability can be a real-even-if-small confidence booster.  Taking occasional notes can help you remember info or questions for later, and also might indicate a sense of thoughtfulness and interest to your interviewer.
• On the whole, think of interviews kind of like first dates.  You don't want to do all or even most of the talking.  You're there to impress, to learn, to help determine whether there's a good potential for a relationship.  First impressions are important.  Show you are caring and thoughtful by asking good questions.  Avoid having spinach in your teeth (floss beforehand!).

Possibly-little-known factoid:

No Googler -- not even Larry or Sergey -- can singlehandedly extend an employment offer to anyone.  While candidates don't have to go through as many interviews nowadays, most candidates -- regardless of level -- typically interview with quite a few peers; team-fit is critical!

* * *

I expect to offer some more Google-thoughts in the future, but -- as a reminder -- this is my personal blog, and as such, I expect to generally blather on about anything I feel like discussing, ranting, dissecting, punning, lamenting, etc... which is more likely than not to be boring to the impatient sort.

Oh, and one last thing: please keep comments on-topic as a courtesy not only to me, but to the cool folks reading my blog. Thanks!

* * *

Related entries:
- A blunt note to HR folks and interviewers
- How to evaluate your current job & career... and thoughtfully consider future options

and lastly, for a blast-from-the-past... some perspective & a bit of cranky ranting...

- What do you do? (self = job?) And how are you?

How much would YOU pay not to be obligated to tip?

I’ve had it with tipping.  The more traveling I do—for business or pleasure—the more I despise the uncertainty, the uncomfortableness, the need to have petty cash on hand.  When will someone—an influential someone—say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH?!

Tip too little, and you risk imperiling the quality of service you receive in the future from that person… plus you may look like an idiot or a miser in front of friends and business acquaintances.

Tip too much, and you look like a chump… and your wallet is made thinner (sometimes much thinner).  And you feel like a moron for being taken advantage of.  Heck, in some countries, you risk really offending someone!

This is one of the many reasons why I love Europe: you typically round up to the nearest euro when you eat out, and that’s that.  Adding to the coolness… for takeout food and pretty much else, what you see on the billboard or pricetag is what you pay.  15EUR?  You pay 15EUR; taxes, fees, etc., all included.

Now, back to the insanity that we endure in the States… Here’s just a sampling of recommended tips from a recent AAA (Automobile Association of America) article:

$2-$3 to your shuttle driver, $2 per suitcase to the skycap, 15-20% for the taxi driver, $2-$3 for a shoeshine, up to $5/night to your hotel maid, $5/day to a pool attendant (?!), up to $3 per round to the bartender and $20 (!) to your sommelier.

Sick yet?  I am.  After all, where’s the $5 we should be giving to our professor after a fine lecture, the $3 to the garbage man when he picks up our smelly refuse, $5 to the guy who trims our garden, $4 to the busboy in your work cafeteria, and $10 for your colleague after he helps you draft a memo.

But that’s ridiculous, you note.  Isn’t the colleague already getting a salary?  Why should you be responsible for bribing him to do a job that he’s already supposed to be doing?

And you may further argue, hey, but the waiter is getting a crap salary… if it weren’t for our tips, he’d practically starve.  But, I’d retort, why the hell is it OUR (awkward) responsibility to make up for employers’ cheapness?  And who the hell picks 1) who gets tips and 2) how much a “proper” tip is by profession and location?

Don’t get me wrong:  I think that everyone deserves a living, decent wage.  And I’d be quite pleased to have 15% or whatever automatically tacked on to my restaurant bill… so that the cost of my meal actually covered an appropriate salary for all involved with the occasion.  What about crappy service?  I’d do what I do when I encounter crappy service or products anywhere else:
- Firmly yet politely complain to the right people.
- If the matter remained unresolved, simply refuse to patronize the establishment again and warn my friends.

...and, of course, the opposite for good service (yes, I *do* write “thank you for the outstanding service” letters, sometimes by hand… and I wish more people did this).

Frankly, I doubt most folks are primarily motivated by money in their jobs anyway.  Does giving the waitress an extra $1 cancel out the urgent and occasionally rude demands we sometimes inflict upon her?  Not to her, I’d bet.  In fact, I’m pretty sure she’d rather we stuffed the dollar back in our wallet and treated her with respect and patience.

By extension, one could even see tips as demeaning… suggesting that “those kind” of people are only apt to do a good job if they’re thrown fish (dollars) like trained seals.  You don’t see people giving tips to lawyers and doctors, and no, it’s not purely a pay thing.  Frankly, I’m betting my bartender friends make quite a bit more per hour than most of my lawyer friends… honestly.

Of course, with all this said, I’m not only angry, but also rather resigned and un-optimistic about the crappy tip-required culture of ours ever being reformed.  I mean, what would it take?  If Our Goddess Angelina stopped tipping tomorrow, she’d just be vilified in the Enquirer and nothing would change.  If Bush didn’t tip next week, people would just (probably correctly) assume that he was unable to compute the tip even using a calculator.  No, I think it’d take an act of God, or maybe a good-looking denizen from outer space.  Until then, I guess I better just remember to keep a lot of ones in my wallet and just grit my teeth when I say “thank you.”

How I blew off Google... and more pre-Google career tidbits

Happy Googleversary!
As I was getting ready to board the Google Shuttle home recently, a colleague (who started at Google on the same day I did) poked me and jokingly wished me a "Happy Googleversary!"  Right then it hit me that, yeah, I had been at Google for a full year.  Wow!

Also in the last few weeks, coincidentally I presume, many folks -- particularly fellow alums -- have been e-mailing me to ask about what it's like at Google, how they can get a job there, etc.  I will be e-mailing all of
them back (sorry for the delay!), but in the meantime it's prompted me to do something I've been planning to do for a while:  write a few (okay, maybe more than a few) words on how I ended up at Google and what my thoughts are about working there.

How I blew Google off
As many of you likely know, I was fascinated with Google for years before I started working there.  In fact, in 2000, I featured Google in a department newsletter I wrote for the then-high-flying high-tech PR firm -- Niehaus Ryan Wong ("NRW") -- which I worked for as an Interactive Strategist.  In 2001, my entire department was laid off and so I got to Google for "how can I save my pride and find a cool new job?"  I ended up using my online communication skills to keep me sane and mostly in the black doing consultant / contractor stuff.

I think it was in early 2002 that I made a pretty big mistake, however. The conversation went something like this:

Friend:  Hey... I got a job at Google... you know, the search engine... it's really great!  I think it has some huge potential, you should work here!  Want me to submit your resume?

Me:  Congrats!  But... it's in, what, Mountain View or something?  And -- no offense -- how interesting could working on search really be?  And I'm doing just fine on my own, but thanks!

Yes, I now rank that as one of my most severe and painful bouts with cluelessness.  I wised up not too long after that and applied for a couple of jobs at Google; got some interviews and the recruiters ultimately told me
politely and firmly that I had a good attitude, fine credentials blah blah blah, but wasn't a good fit for the positions.  And looking back, it's clear they were right.

The good life... and how I grew weary of it
Over the next few years, I enjoyed working as a consultant / contractor with some super companies, a bunch of great people, and some understandably demanding but usually interesting clients.  But despite the cool projects and decent money and improving professional reputation, I grew weary.  I missed having a set of regular colleagues I could banter with and learn from face-to-face.  I missed having a mentor.  I wanted, also, to mentor others... and not just online.  I got tired of flying back and forth to Los Angeles for a client; 'twas a nice client, but I hated the city and the traffic that plagued it.

Most of all, I felt wistful about never having worked for a medium/big company, never getting to really have a feeling of ownership in a company that provided products/services internationally.  I wanted to be even a small part of something big but not faceless, have an impact, have significant room for growth careerwise and otherwise.

As you'll see below, I am thankful to have found this in Google.  It's not a utopia; there are things about the company that greatly frustrate me, there are days in which I feel overwhelmed and stressed.  But these days are few in number and gratifyingly dwarfed by the days in which I am very, very happy to be surrounded by people I respect, doing things I see as valuable, for a company that excites me and treats me ridiculously well.

A few words about companies I worked with or even just interviewed with pre-Google
Before I talk more about Google, I thought I'd share with you a few quick personal thoughts about some companies.

Some companies I worked with before Google:

• Plaxo: Very smart people. Collegial office conveniently served by a shuttle from Caltrain. Fascinating problems to solve. And their core product is hugely useful, increasingly well-designed, and truly has no equals. No need to send out "update my info please" notes; just enjoy the network effect of having lots of addressbook info updated. My interviews here were friendly, hands-on ("Okay, show me how you'd do this..."), and challenging.
  
• Intrapromote:
  Friendly, hard-working, supportive folks who've been doing SEO for quite some time... and who happen to have one of the more concise, unpretentious, and underrated SEO blogs around. Through Intrapromote, I got to work on some pretty huge online campaigns with major Fortune 500 companies and the experience opened my eyes to a lot of tough issues that large sites face every day. The
  interview process with Intrapromote was refreshing: very open, informal, and sensible (no lame questions, no useless under-pressure crap).
  
• Virgin Digital:
  I'm saddened by how this service flamed out in the U.S. The execs I worked with here were admiringly passionate about music and about enabling people to share their love of and insights about music with each other. They were motivated by the right ideas but -- given that the service didn't survive -- unfortunately hobbled by either a lack of resources, bad luck, poor execution or all of the above. My
  interviews were... well, not really interviews. This was a case of, hey, Adam, we know your work, we've had some good chats, when can you start on this project? That's not to say that Virgin's consultant/contractor hiring was haphazard or careless, but rather that the President (who hired
  me directly) was pragmatic, efficient, and no-nonsense... operating on an intuitive (and, I humbly think, accurate :-P) sense that I was a decent and appropriate fellow to work with.

And companies I interviewed with and received offers from immediately prior to
working for Google:

• Art.com: Classy and friendly people, very nice office overlooking the bay, and a damn neat product. The recruiter I dealt with was helpful and instantly likeable. All of my interviews were comfortable, reasonable, and -- most importantly -- truly two-way... conversation, not interrogations.
  
• Microsoft's MSN AdCenter: The MSN AdCenter campus is in beautiful Redmond (nice!) near one of my favorite cities (Seattle... yay!) but... located adjacent to a shopping mall away from the main MS campus (yuck!). Interview questions tended to focus on what I've done, and how I might handle client situations. Not terribly surprising. Suggestion to the AdCenter team and all other companies, for that matter: If you're having a final-stage candidate do a full day of interviews, invite him to lunch with some of his potential-future colleagues. Giving him a box lunch to eat alone in an office is not only a bummer for the candidate, but robs you of the opportunity to see how he or she relates to others... and that sort of interaction, IMHO, can be quite revealing ;-). On a more positive note, I was relieved and pleased at how thoughtful my MS recruiter was throughout the process. When I told the guy I had an offer from Google, the fellow didn't throw any chairs, but rather was extremely kind and supportive and urged me to take the time to make a decision that was best for me.

Being under the microscope

I’ve been at Google about four months, and it’s been a hell of a great ride so far.  I really need to write more about this later, but in a nutshell… my colleagues rock, the flexible and trusting environment is awesome, and I’m very excited about what I’m working on.

However, I do have to admit to sometimes being a bit freaked out :o.

I spend a good chunk of my morning reading relevant industry news and also thoughtful blogs from Webmasters and others all around the world.  I glean a lot of great ideas (and yes, sometimes also bugs) that I share with colleagues here at Google. 

A few days ago, I came across a pretty untraditional note, and I thought, hey… wouldn’t it be kinda funny if I actually went ahead and mailed Al a Tylenol packet?  So I did.  I figured he’d get a chuckle, maybe share it with some friends or even post a quick update on his blog.

I had no idea that something this silly would capture this much attention!

Anyway, yeah, this little mailing was indeed sent on a whim from a random Googler (me!), and though I’m a bit shocked by the response, I’m glad that my letter ended up entertaining not only Al, but also lots of other people.

Along with many others here at Google, I’m working on some very cool projects dealing with Webmaster communications.  But aside from all of that official stuff, I’m reminded that it’s clearly the little things now and then that give a human face to this company.  Not to mention that when one of us Googlers decides to be a bit wacky, it’s far from a private moment :-P

A blunt note to HR folks and interviewers

I wrote this quite a while ago, both to vent my frustrations and also to sincerely urge HR folks and interviewers to improve their practices.  I’ve had pleasurable experiences with most of the companies I’ve interviewed with in the past, but there has still often been quite a bit of room for improvement.  Also, I figured my rant below might make for a useful counterpoint to the plethora of interviewee-advice pages out there :-D.

*  *  *

Dear HR folks and interviewers:

Write or call back when you say you will.  If you don’t, apologize.

Don’t ask us about our salary history.  That’s rude and completely irrelevant.  Perhaps we were working for the Peace Corp.  Maybe we were wildly underpaid at our last job.  Or crazily overpaid.  Instead, tell us (at least a range of) how much your position is paying and we’ll let you know if that’s aligned with our expectations.

Make job descriptions descriptive… complete with some day-to-day details.  Cut the jargon and market’y crap.  When your Craigslist ad contains verbiage about “best of breed solutions” and “every customer is #1” and “we offer GENAROUS [sic] benefits! [ahem, such as?]” we don’t know whether to laugh hysterically or run screaming.

Make the interview day pleasant.  Let us know the names and positions of each person we’ll be interviewing with.  Don’t have us sitting in a room alone for 45 minutes wondering what’s going on.  Maybe even take us out for coffee or lunch with a potential colleague or a group of colleagues if we’re one of the finalists for a particular position.

Consider starting off with at least a brief bit about your background to help establish a friendly rapport.  Help us see you as a (real, well-rounded) person we’d like to work with, not an adversary or mere interrogator.

Be respectful of us and our time.  Don’t manage your scheduled phone interview call time on a “+/- 20 minute” basis.  Don’t be on a speakerphone.  Both of those behaviors scream to the candidate “You’re not very important and I really don’t want to be interviewing you.”

Don’t be cheap-ass about reimbursements.  Reimburse us (promptly, please) for our transportation from the airport, for crying out loud, and the sandwich we grabbed in the terminal so we wouldn’t be starving when we sat down with you at the office.

Make sure you have our latest resume, not one that you got from the recruiter 6 months ago.

Remember that interviewing is a two way street.  You’re not just there for grilling us, you’re there to make us excited about your company and the position we’ve applied for (or you’ve recruited us for!)

Cut it out with the stupid “strengths and weaknesses” questions.  Ask us to tell you about a favorite project or least favorite project, talk to former managers about us, anything where you’re bound to get more interesting and less fake commentary (e.g., “My weakness is that I tend to get too into my work and forget to eat lunch sometimes…”)

Do share some of our key answers and info with future interviewers at your firm so we’re not asked the same question 5 times in one day.

If someone at your company is consistently an unpopular or lousy interviewer, don’t have them interview people!

Ask what we like in a job and work environment.  Ask what makes us happy.  Ask what stresses us out.  This is the sort of thing that’ll help determine if your job is a good match for us (and visa versa).

And, for the love of God, if at all possible… please don’t make us fill out an application—by hand!—after we’ve already given you a detailed resume and other documentation with all the same info on it.  At least let us type it… please?  We’ll all be much happier :-D

I've joined Google

A couple of months ago, I became a Googler.  Since my boss—Matt Cutts—has already so kindly introduced me on his blog, I feel this is probably a good time to say a few words about my new job :-D

The short version:  I’m honored, humbled, a bit nervous, and yes, very happy.  As a lifelong geek who’s been excited about search and Google in particular for many years, it’s hugely fascinating to be experiencing new adventures from the “inside.”

Okay, now for the longer version!


What I’m doing at Google

My main focus is on broadening communications between Google and Webmasters… learning as much as I can from both Matt and the Webmasters he chats with so amiably and then building upon this rapport.  Or, more colloquially, as it’s been joked around the office, my uber-challenging goal is to become a “MiniMatt.”  Though a colleague did note that a MiniMatt sounds like a scary cross between a convenience store and a diminutive vaccum cleaner.  Hmm.

You’ll find me hanging out at Webmaster conferences and various geek gatherings, occasional replying to Google-related blog or forum posts, tackling some Webmaster-related e-mails, and undoubtedly popping up in other random places.

I’ll also be a “Webmaster Advocate” inside the Googleplex.  I’ve seen firsthand that tons of folks here already eagerly read and appreciate Google- and search-related comments throughout the Web; I’ll be doing what I can to expedite concerns, bug reports, and other feedback to the right colleagues.

I’m coming into this job with a lot of knowledge about search, Google, and communications, but I know I have a lot to learn and also much trust to earn.

What my new job means for my blog

I’m not sure yet.  For the time being, I’m going to generally maintain a separation between the personal and work spheres of my life.  This means that you’re likely to be disappointed if you subscribe to BLADAM expecting to read lots of juicy Googly tidbits.

With that said, though, I do admire Robert, Jeremy, and, of course, my boss Matt and recognize that their work-related blogversations have very often educated, engaged, and entertained thousands.  So perhaps I’ll come up with a middle ground here—occasionally sharing my enthusiasm, useful Google tips, amusing Google observations, and so on—while avoiding topics likely to make my colleagues annoyed or uncomfortable.

“So I have a question about my site…”

Please, not here.  I’m enjoying tackling general and specific Webmaster issues every day at work… and my teammates and I are really, truly committed to opening up new channels of communication (like our Sitemaps tools and active Sitemaps GoogleGroup, for instance, plus MUCH more to come!).  But everyone needs a break from work now and then, so please respect my personal space here on the Web.  Thanks!

With that said, I know that Matt got some outstanding feedback on Google Communications, and so I’d be nuts if I didn’t also invite you to share your Google Communication ideas below.  I’d also love to hear from you about your favorite bloggers who masterfully juggle work and non-work topics on their blogs; I could use some more role models in case I decide to go that route eventually :-D.

*  *  *

Anyway… to you faithful BLADAM readers who’ve stuck with me during all my bloggily dry and/or boring spells, thank you.  To you new readers, welcome!  It’s a pleasure to have you here, and—as always—I look forward to your comments.  Now I’m heading offline to go celebrate my birthday weekend! :-D

Geeks -- the perception still hasn't quite caught up with reality

As seen by this Australian TV commercial from Super Geek and this admittedly damn funny Fear of Girls video, we learn that…
- Geeks are all guys, and not particularly attractive fellas, either
- Geeks are typically sporting taped-up glasses and completely uncool fashion
- Women AREN’T geeks (and they’re most often confusing/confused AND helpless)

While the videos above are funny (I’d be a humorless boob to suggest otherwise), in the back of my mind I do worry about the effects of the still-pervasive stereotypes on display.  Specifically, I’m thinking about junior high and high school girls.  After being immersed in a culture that continually reiterates that attractive girls are NOT geeks, how many of them will want to study math or science or computing?  Would you want to work with guys like the ones in the videos above?

Companies like Google are certainly making a laudable effort to recruit more women engineers, but I’m wishing that there were more positive and diverse portrayals of geeks in the mass media: (intentionally) funny geeks, sexy geeks, communicative geeks, athletic geeks.

Living here in the Bay Area, I know various geeks that fit all of the above adjectives.  In Silicon Valley, it’s almost chic to be a geek :-D.  But I’m more concerned about girls (and, for that matter, many boys) growing up in the heartland of the U.S. or in other countries where there aren’t such role models. 

We need more women engineers not to be politically correct, not so that we guys in the office can have more pleasant “scenery,” not so some HR or government bureaucrat can smugly check off another box on some form, but rather because we actually DO need the diversity of thinking and working styles and, quite frankly, the greatest pool of talented “knowledge workers” possible.

And okay, I’d like some uber-geeks to be worshipped in popular culture so I could go to Britain or Germany and be as popular as a David Beckham and such ;-)

—-

Hat tip to Alicja and John Paczkowski for the ad and parody video respectively.

The satisfaction of mentoring

I recently got an e-mail from a former workmate, asking if I'd be willing to join him for a coffee or a meal to give "some career advice [...] and honest opinion[s]."

I'm very flattered and I like doing this sort of thing for many reasons.

First of all, this particular guy is someone I have a lot of respect for... smart, driven, and clearly sincere. Helping someone like that is fodder for great karma and just a pleasure overall.

But the "help" isn't a one-way street. While I've unfortunately gotten very little direct mentoring in my work life so far, I've learned a great deal from those I've mentored... from interns to colleagues in different departments and so on.

That may seem cliched -- the mentor becoming the mentored -- but it's quite true and much appreciated. In particular, when giving career advice, I'm forced to do some deep thinking and soul searching on my own.

- How did I get to where I am? How much of it was planned vs. serendipitous?
- What are some of the mistakes I've made? How can I recognize the warning signs in the future and avoid future pitfalls?
- If I could go back in time, what would I tell a Past Adam careerwise?
- What do I have to be thankful for in my career?

And, despite an untraditional and often challenging, aw hell, even oft frustrating set of career experiences... I have an enormous amount to be thankful for. Reflecting upon my blessings in this context not only provides me with guidelines and encouragement to give to others... it also serves to consciously remind me of what makes me happy and motivates me in my career.

How to evaluate your current job & career... and thoughtfully consider future options

I'm doing the whole job-hunting thing again... searching for interesting contracts (I luckily am still blessed with several cool ongoing ones!) or a really smashing full-time opportunity. The latter option in particular has gotten me to do some deep soul searching about career / relocation criteria, and I thought I'd share a list I've been compiling.

Your feedback is VERY welcome! Any major missing categories / criteria, or some that should absolutely be split up or combined?

* * *

Oh, and I'm such a geek, that I'm thinking about making an Excel sheet out of the criteria list below, along with spots for optionally specifying item weights and having the sheet calculate optimal choices... e.g., you could specify that you especially care about being mentored and getting free food, and the spreadsheet would give more weight to jobs that offered those things.

Ideally, this list could be used to help one determine if they should stick with their current job or transition to a new one (with the same or a different company)... and also assist people who are unemployed and evaluating new opportunities.

So without further ado, here is my list (and yes, I realize there are parallelism -- or rather, lack of parallelism issues -- but this is just a first draft... I'll smooth over that later :-)

1) The industry (e.g., pharmaceutical, digital photography, pro sports)

• Alignment with your interests and passions
• Awareness / experience (how strong is your past history in this space?)
• Future (weak or strong demand for this area in the years to come)
• Perception of current and future HR folks & hiring managers (how association with this industry looks on your resume)
• Perception of others (what family, peers think of the industry and your association with it)

2) Position type (Product Manager, Software Engineer...)

• Enjoyment (do you like working in this sort of position?)
• Personality and skills fit (can you cut the mustard?)
• Perception of current and future HR folks & hiring managers
• Perception of others

3) Basics about the company and company site

• Company reputation, products, and positioning
  • Products and services (is it stuff you feel passionate about or disconnected from?)
  • Perception of current and future HR folks & hiring managers
  • Perception of others
  • Alignment with personal morals (e.g., donates a lot to charity, possibly
    not a cigarette company, etc.)
• Physical atmosphere
  • Conduciveness to concentration (quiet, not too quiet, etc.)
  • Office surroundings (plants, decorations...)
  • Immediate work space (privacy, ergonomics...)
  • Resources available (modern computers, enough pens, etc.)
• Overall feel
  • Size (startup vs. BigCo)
  • Morale
  • Socialness (fun atmosphere daily, special parties...)
  • Excitement (cutting edge sector or boring)
  • Pacing (relaxing, stressful)
  • Department / position fluidity (can you easily move amongst departments, job types?)
  • Security (company -- and your position -- will be around in 5 years)
• Your department or immediate team
  • Your relative placement (big fish in little pond or the reverse...)
  • Your department's placement (revered or shunned in company with regards to resources, opinions, etc.)
  • Size
  • Morale
  • Socialness
  • Pacing

4) People

• In general
  • Personal attributes (smart, friendly, interesting, helpful, thoughtful...)
  • Work habits (hard working, sane...)
• Direct contacts
  • Boss (communicative, has reasonable expectations, smart, thoughtful)
  • Subordinates (respect you, do work effectively, enjoyable to work with)
  • Department / team members (respect you, pull their weight, good to work with)
• Leadership, your position, and autonomy
  • Opportunities to be mentored
  • Opportunities to mentor
  • Hierarchy (flat, deep)
  • Responsibility and autonomy (highly structured task list and oversight vs. high levels of responsibility and autonomy)

5) Your actual work assignments and available / required tasks

• Short term / current value (satisfaction, joy derived from them)
• Future value (good or useless for career)
• Stimulation (intellectually or emotionally challenging)
• Corporate relevance (your work measurably contributes to company's bottom line or company's visible
  presence)
• Perception of current and future HR folks / hiring managers
• Perception of others (what family, peers think of the industry and your association with it)
• Travel required (little, lots, to cool places, horrible places, stressful, enjoyable, etc.) 

6) Benefits

• Compensation package
  • Upon start (signing bonus, moving allowance)
  • Salary and bonuses
  • Stock and stock options
  • Vacation and personal days
• Other direct benefits
  • Free or discounted access to desired services / products
  • Good health insurance, other types of insurance
  • Education and training (on site / external)
  • Substantive discounts on commuting
• On-site benefits
  • Cafeteria (pricing, food quality, quantity, nutrition, hours...)
  • Utilitarian offerings (car wash, laundry...)
  • Health-related (dentist, doctor on staff, gym, nutritionist...)
  • Daycare

* * *

P.S. -- A special thanks to my friend Kelly for providing such a thoughtful sounding board and suggesting many of the items above!

How not to win over colleagues

So last week I was eating lunch at Google as I do every so often for business (meeting up with my AdWords rep) or pleasure (hanging with friends). And, as usual, I had a delicious, delightful lunch.

A few minutes later, I arrived at my afternoon consulting gig around the corner, all smiles. I had e-mailed my colleagues there that I'd be in a bit later than usual on a Friday... "around 2:30 after some errands and lunch" and here I was, happily waltzing in to work about 2pm.

My colleagues, though, looked at me funny.

Finally, one said, "Google, eh? Hmm!" whereupon I recalled with quite a bit of embarrassment that I was still wearing a prominent Google Guest sticker.

Considering that there's at least a minor rivalry between the firms, this oversight of mine wasn't exactly the best way to win friends and influence people. Oops!

Hmm... I wonder if there's any correlation here?

[...] [Cisco] paid $650,000 to book the rock legend, according to Web logger Robert Scoble. Cisco spokeswoman Abbey Smith would not discuss how much the company spent but said the expense was justified.

"We wanted to recognize and thank our employees," she said. "They have not received raises for the last four years."

- From a CNET article, detailing companies' holiday parties this year.

Though I couldn't suppress a snicker given the quote above, I can't say that I necessarily blame the company for choosing to have an extravagant holiday party. I don't know how many folks Cisco has, but $650K might not have made that much of a life difference as bonuses spread across the employee base.

Then again, I can certainly think of better ways *I* would rather see $650K spent. Daily snacks, anti-glare monitor shields, subsidized fitness classes or gym memberships, and so on... things that could help and/or at least appeal to a vast swath of employees on a regular basis, rather than just making a few folks smile'n'rock-out on a single night.

The RIGHT way to AUTHOR privacy policies

You'd think that companies would "get it" by now. Most don't.

Privacy policies aren't rocket-science, but they're absolutely critical to the long-term success of a company. Without earned trust and strong communications, firms have little hope of surviving, and thank goodness!

So without further ado, here is my free advice to companies wanting to create or update a privacy policy:

A privacy policy must do all of the following:
- INFORM: Let visitors know, in accessible language, how the site collects and manages data acquired
- REASSURE: Offer confident and truthful promises about the safeguarding and respect of this data
- PERSUADE: Successfully invite visitors to fully utilize the site's functions, and to provide honest data and feedback without fear
- PROTECT: Guard the company itself against basic legal or public relations challenges that may arise from improper or incomplete disclosures

Ideally, every company should offer both a comprehensive privacy policy (though preferably not in 'legalese' -- whip those lawyers into speaking English, please) and also a concise one paragraph summary of what they will and won't do with their customers' data.

And then -- though I shouldn't have to say this -- they need stick by their promises... and they'll then be rewarded with greater loyalty and fewer lawsuits :-)

Party like it's 1999

Last night, I had the pleasure of attending the Google Dance 2003, and experienced wonderous but surreal feelings of deja vu.

Disclaimer: I have friends who work at Google, and I have interviewed for jobs there in the past.

---

Before I describe the Google event, let me fill you in on the weird and wacky events we San Francisco / Silicon Valley peeps were privy to during the heady dot.com days, BC (Before the Crash).

On any given week, there were at least several parties with open bars, free food, lots of dancing, plus large numbers of ambitious, optimistic, and attractive people.

Back then, companies justified the expenditure in several ways:

1) They were gaining branding and awareness.

2) During the days when talented techies were in huge demand but limited supply, it was cheaper to throw big attractive "look at our company!" bashes than pay recruiters to shop for talent. Recruiter fees for 15 techies: Easily $300,000. A huge party for the techies and their friends and their friends of friends? Probably a mere quarter mil... a $50K discount, and a hell of a lot more fun than hiring head hunters.

3) The dot.commers needed to release some steam after working extended long hours.

---

Fast forward to the Google Dance last night.

There were open bars, free food, lots of dancing (duh!), and a huge collection of ambitious, optimistic, and attractive people.

Sound familiar? But unlike the days in which such parties literally overlapped each other, this contemporary Google Dance was a freaky anomaly, and I don't believe it can be "justified" in the same ways as parties of dot.gone. No, it seemed pretty clear that Google threw a massive party to entertain its own employees and simply offer up some good will for everyone else.

I suppose this shouldn't have surprised me. While the rest of the technology sector still seems to be doing more firing than hiring, Google is hiring across nearly all its departments with a vengeance. And Google layoffs or drastic belt-tightening? I haven't ever heard of any of that, have you?

Perhaps this is because Google started off admirably and sensibly frugal (now Froogle) from the beginning. No Aeron chairs. No BMWs for newly hired engineers. No $30,000 signing bonuses. Though admittedly they do have a handful of Segway scooters on the premises :D

Instead, Google generally offers its employees generous albeit not outrageous benefits, and provides a place where folks are encouraged to innovate in a flexible environment. And the corporate culture is fun without being frivolous, it seems. I just learned that every AdWords staffer, for instance, was recently treated to a local Dave Matthews concert.

---

But returning to last night... one of the most noteworthy things that struck me was the sense of joy and exuberance, and not of the irrational sort, either, IMHO. There appeared to be a sort of Joie de vivre amongst the Google staffers that suggests contentment and a sense of security rather than the much less attractive insecure aggressiveness exhibited by more swaggering companies and their employees. The many Googlers I chatted with last night were proud without being arrogant or dismissive; they were friendly, respectful, and clearly happy with their employment.

With the party that they threw, it's no wonder.

In addition to all the stuff I mentioned earlier, the party featured foosball and ping-pong tables, lots of colorful bouncy-balls and lava lamps (Google fixtures), a humungous video screen featuring live feeds from the dance floor as well as live feeds highlighting current Google searches, plus random pulsating graphics. I also got a cool Google t-shirt, the chance to chat one-on-one with a Google engineer about my Web sites, and a $300 AdWords credit!

I definitely went home with a big smile on my face, and I understand even more than before why Google may currently be the Happiest Place On Earth.

---

UPDATE - 8/21/03: Pictures are now available at http://www.google.com/googledance2003/

Efficiency through trust

Jason Kottke recently wrote about an interesting phenomena -- A Manhattan donut-cart guy who trusts his customers to make their own change.

The result? Twice the throughput, perhaps even twice the business, and undoubtedly more money for the Donut Guy.

While just one tiny example, of course, this nonetheless struck me as interesting from business and societal points of view. And yeah, it's just plain cool!

A truly sick policy

Sick for more than seven days per year? At the ironically-named Mercy Medical Center in Baltimore, ill employees have a very direct choice: After seven previous absences, come in sick or be fired.

This policy is so transparently stupid, I'm almost embarrassed to blog about it. But kindly allow me to offer a few thoughts anyway.

The Mercy Medical Center ("MMC") sick-days policy will help achieve the following:

- Mild endangerment of employees' health, and perhaps fatal results for infection-susceptible patients
Think about it. How smart is it to basically force coughing, sneezing, infectious people to come to work, especially at a hospital?!

- Decreased productivity
Mom was definitely right about one thing: One can lick illnesses like the flu much more quickly by resting rather than working. Beyond this, it's common knowledge that trying to "push through" an upper-respiratory illness can result in a significant worsening of symptoms and overall health. So by coercing mildly-ill folks to come into work, MMC is trading off initial productivity (assuming sick folks can actually do good work) for longer-term productivity losses.

- Loss of workplace trust and morale
This is, of course, unquantifiable, but when your employer you with more suspicion than a truant officer handles a no-good kid, how dedicated will you be torwards your company's success? Kids who fail to be granted trust and respect from their elders often rebel by cleverly and silently subverting authority. How long before MMC notices pilfered funds, stolen workplace items, and so on? And how many employees would rush to snitch on the wrongdoers?

- Hampered recruiting
This one's simple: Would YOU be excited to apply for a position that heavyhandedly treats its employees with such mistrust? Didn't think so.

---

In comparison, I've been fortunate enough to work for much more enlightened companies. At both Ascena and Niehaus Ryan Wong, mildly sick people were often invited to work from home for a day or two; more severely sick people were simply told to just take some days off, and then do their best to catch up when they returned.

Google has the simplest and most reasonable policy. Sick days are to be taken "as needed." It's a sad commentary on our American society when such a common-sense approach is the admirable exception rather than the rule.

And fairness/compassion issues aside, I'm willing to bet that the aforementioned three companies have enjoyed considerably higher worker productivity than MMC.

The broader lesson to learn? The best firms treat their employees as adults -- with trust, respect, and honesty -- and expect the same in return.

On selfishness, obsolescence, and jubilant consumers

Several organizations are throwing up (their arms) in wild fear of their job sectors going the way of the dodo.

For instance, unless you've been living in a cave for the last few months, you probably already know about the new federal program which will block around 80% of telemarketing calls for those who sign up on the free national Do Not Call list.

The Direct Marketing Association (DMA) is livid. They cry that their revenues will plummet... and -- surprise! -- they plan to sue the government.

Of course, the charming DMA has also been dragging its feet on spam-reform, typically complaining that bills which limit spam are violating the rights of businesses and harming first amendment issues. Besides, they argue indirectly, some people may really want, nay, NEED to know about the latest cable descrambler or debt reduction miracle!

And these spokespeople are still able to sleep at night, or at least write their laughable press releases with a straight face? Perhaps they went to the same PR training school as Hilary Rosen of the RIAA.

---

What's particularly ironic, of course, is that organizations like the DMA and RIAA aren't just working against consumers (which is obvious), they're counterproductively styming progress and profits in their own industries.

Napster wasn't the first RIAA target, you know. This same organization screamed that CD's were going to kill off cassette tapes (well, true) and devastate the record industry. Just like the movie industry likened the VCR to the Boston Strangler and filed lawsuits to prevent the destruction of the entertainment world (yeah, right!).

---

So here we have the DMA wringing its hands about a program which is going to result in them learning which consumers do not wish to be solicited on the phone. In other words, the DMA is upset that they're going to be unable to contact non-prospects! Excuse me? Shouldn't this be a blessing for them? The federal government has created and implemented an infrastructure -- at relatively little cost to the DMA -- that will enable the DMA member companies to focus their time on those mutants, er, citizens who are so lonely that they WANT to be sold stuff via the telephone.

Pre-qualified customers. What could be better?!?

---

Even if the DMA is right and this law reduces sales in the short term, I have two things to say to that:
1) Diversity your marketing.
2) I'm so sorry you're not going to be able to make money at the expense of interrupting my dinner.

Sponsor a ballet. Create an affiliate program. Give away freebies. Or -- here's a radical idea -- go the route of the original once-scrappy Google and actually create a product or service of such quality and usefulness that no marketing is required. That's right... think about it. Did you ever see an ad for Google's search tool? No, you didn't, because Google grew to 250 million queries PER DAY purely based upon word of mouth. There's a lesson to be learned here, though I fear the DMA may be too dense to grasp it.

---

Of course, other industries are running scared, too. Tax preparers might have to wait tables if we ever got someone in high office bold and savvy enough to REALLY reform and simplify taxes. Gee, I wonder which lobbying organizations have been thwarting true tax reform in Washington?

Search engine optimization folks (the people who claim to get your site listed higher in the search engines) are increasingly screaming that Google's populist yet secretive algorithms are harming their bottom lines. Some have (gee, imagine this) filed suit against Google.

Boo hoo, I say. Would anyone really miss the telemarketers, the tax preparers, the search engine optimization folks? At the end of the day, do they inherently make our world a better or even more useful place?

And most importantly, isn't it time that laws and society tilted towards the consumers' interests and needs instead of the frantic and often misguided demands of selfish career interest groups?

Courtesy in HR

My parents raised me well. They taught me to say "please" and "thank you" and all that good stuff.

I wish some Human Resources folks had been raised by my parents.

During the dot.com boom, HR people were everyone's best friend. Desperate to keep their current employees AND attract new ones in an employee-favored market, they were all smiles and were seemingly never remiss in returning a phone call or e-mail from a prospective or current applicant.

In this negative economic shift we've been experiencing during which unemployment has grown by leaps and bounds, HR people have become decidedly less happy.

They've had the face the unpleasant task of laying people off -- sometimes for the first time in their company's history. And of course, they've likely started each morning with a few hundred if not thousand e-mails from desperate job applicants vying for perhaps one or two job openings... many of whom are not even remotely qualified for the positions.

---

It's easy to see how so many HR people have become justifiably cranky. But somewhere along the line, they also lost both their sense of courtesy and professionalism.

In each of the following examples, I had applied for positions that I was well qualified for, and had sent a brief but highly-tailored cover letter along with my resume.

Companies A, B, C, D, E and F didn't acknowledge my interest at all. Not so much as a simple automated note.

Company G's mailbox was full, and my resume bounced back. I sent another e-mail to them two days later, but never heard anything from them.

I e-mailed my resume directly to a senior employee I had met from Company H, and she assured me I'd hear back within one week. I didn't. I wrote a polite followup note, and was told that my resume was up for review at a meeting that Thursday, and I would hear back within a day or two after that. One week later, still nothing. Politely persistent, I wrote again, and -- to company H's credit -- I at least then did get an anwer (albeit a painful "no").

I was not just well-suited, but perfectly-suited for a position at Company J, and so you can imagine my disappointment upon not getting an acknowledgment from my submission. That is, until about 5 weeks later, when I received a friendly postcard from them thanking me for my interest. Well, better late than never!

In fact, excepting the delay, Company J was the only one to get things right.
- Acknowledgement: They acknowledged receiving my resume.
- Appreciation: They thanked me for my interest in their company.
- Information: They noted that my resume would remain on file for one year, and I'd be contacted if there was a match in the meantime.

---

Just three little things... three sentences... filled with important meaning. In fact, I now have a greater -- albeit unintentional -- understanding of all the companies I sent resumes to.

Companies A-F are either so disorganized or so callous that they can't be bothered with even acknowledging resumes.

Company G recruits via a Hotmail address. What else can I say about that?

Company H is a bit confused, but at least well-meaning and communicative.

Company J is rather backlogged, but otherwise on the ball.

---

And let me tell you, we employees (even temporarily unemployed ones) talk about our experiences with many of our friends, and likely most of us have long, long memories. Well after the pendulum has shifted once again back into employees' favor, we'll remember which companies had the courtesy to acknowledge us and which ones did not.

Sadly, a senior HR person I spoke with recently felt that I was way out of line in my expectations. "It's obvious what the answer is when you don't GET an answer, Adam. If they were interested in you, you'd hear back, trust me." This woman, actually a former colleague of mine, further noted that HR people are already swamped enough, and that it'd be ridiculous to expect them to reply to each and every applicant.

But, IMHO, it is she (as an HR person) who should change her behaviors and expectations. Here's why:

- Acknowleding an applicant's interest in one's firm should be considered unquestionably indispensible, or as my dad would say, "just the right thing to do." Can anyone imagine a company rep saying, "Hmm... we're kind of busy, so I think we'll avoid responding to 98% of our customers' [or partners'] queries. Let's only write back to the important ones"?

- It would take approximately 5-10 minutes TOTAL to write a short informative message (similar to what Company J mailed me) and set it to be sent as an autoreply for all incoming resume submissions. Heck, to avoid inane return e-mails, the HR folks could even set a reply address as "do-not-reply@please.com" or something similarly instructive.

---

Is long-term goodwill worth 5-10 minutes? Maybe I'm in the minority, but I think you know where I stand.

And is this rant above likely to further hamper my employment chances? Not with any company I'd like to be employed with.

Short People Got... No Reason to Live

So this afternoon, against my better judgement, I got drawn into an online discussion about racism. I added my two cents (bringing up the McWhorter Interview I mentioned in my blog here), and then also added my concerns about and frustrations with heightism.

As shown on this Web site, short folks are not only the butt of jokes in songs, movies, and general conversation, but are also systematically discriminated against at work (hired and also promoted less often than taller people), as well as in the social and dating spheres. Not just anecdotally (though I have plenty of personal experience in this area), but statistically and scientifically.

After my post, I was practically laughed and boo'ed out of the thread.

How dare you even equate being short with being black, folks shouted at me. You're talking apples and oranges, they insisted. Were you ever a slave, were you ever property?

No, I responded. Were you? You, PERSONALLY? Didn't think so.

One kind fella came to my aid.

So, the difference between the following two statements:
I was overlooked for a promotion because I'm black.
I was overlooked for a promotion because I'm short.

Is? The answer: The black guy has legal recourse, and won't get told to "just shut up because he's imagining it."

As I noted repeatedly in the discussion I was having, I was neither attempting to minimize the impact of discrimination against minorities, such as blacks, nor even trying to argue that heightism is equal in scope or severity to such discrimination... particularly historically.

But at the same time, heightism IS nonetheless a frustrating and insidious covert form of discrimination... and a form for which, I fear, there are no solutions. I can't see mandating hiring quotas for short people, or forcing women to date guys under 5'8".

It's one of those things that we short people just have to live with and adapt to.

It'd sure be nice, however, if our frustrations were at least acknowledged and not laughed off as mere insecurities or paranoia.

* * *

Edited on November 7, 2009 to add this link to the strange-but-catchy Randy Newman piece: