The most important factors to land a job

[EngWiPy]

I want to make this a general question: what is/are the most important factor(s) that determines if an applicant to a job will be at least a candidate (selected for an interview). Is it previous professional experience? Is it credentials? Is it professional/personal projects? Is it networking? What recruiters are looking for in a candidate primarily?

 

[Dale]

For me, the credentials and skills are a first-pass rejection criteria. If a candidate does not have the necessary credentials and skills then I immediately reject.

Then I do phone calls which I use to confirm that they have practical experience using those skills. I also try to judge communication skills, motivation, enthusiasm, etc. I discuss the requirements of the role and listen to their questions.

After that, if they are top candidates then I do an in person interview where I have them give a presentation in front of a panel of colleagues and judge their ability to present professionally, manage time (I tell them 20 min, and they drop in the rating sharply if they go over), defend their ideas, etc. Overall demeanor and professionalism are critical. We try to ask some challenging questions and make them a little uncomfortable to see how they respond to stress.

 

[EngWiPy]

For me, the credentials and skills are a first-pass rejection criteria. If a candidate does not have the necessary credentials and skills then I immediately reject.

Then I do phone calls which I use to confirm that they have practical experience using those skills. I also try to judge communication skills, motivation, enthusiasm, etc. I discuss the requirements of the role and listen to their questions.

After that, if they are top candidates then I do an in person interview where I have them give a presentation in front of a panel of colleagues and judge their ability to present professionally, manage time (I tell them 20 min, and they drop in the rating sharply if they go over), defend their ideas, etc. Overall demeanor and professionalism are critical. We try to ask some challenging questions and make them a little uncomfortable to see how they respond to stress.

Thanks for the response.

1. How flexible are the credentials for a job? For example, suppose a field requires a knowledge in statistics and programming, but my major is neither statistics nor computer science, but I have used them both (statistics and programming) in my field and in different settings, in this case will my credentials be considered? I am asking this question because I was once told by a recruiter in data science that if he saw electrical engineering as credentials in a resume, probably he wouldn't consider the applicant, and said that "he/she [the applicant] should apply for electrical companies". Is this attitude common among recruiters? Maybe they don't have time to read carefully through all resumes, and credentials are their entry point to the resume.

2. What if someone lacks the practical experience because he/she is a fresh graduate, switching careers, or transitioning from academia to the industry, what a person can do in this case to acquire this experience? will personal projects be considered to prove the skills? or maybe internships?

 

[Mark44]

1. How flexible are the credentials for a job? For example, suppose a field requires a knowledge in statistics and programming, but my major is neither statistics nor computer science, but I have used them both (statistics and programming) in my field and in different settings, in this case will my credentials be considered? I am asking this question because I was once told by a recruiter in data science that if he saw electrical engineering as credentials in a resume, probably he wouldn't consider the applicant, and said that "he/she [the applicant] should apply for electrical companies". Is this attitude common among recruiters? Maybe they don't have time to read carefully through all resumes, and credentials are their entry point to the resume.

Many job announcements list the minimum requirements, such as a degree in a certain field. If the job posting requires a degree in statistics or computer science, the screeners will most likely reject you application if you don't have one of these degrees, regardless of whether you have used statistics or written some code. The "credentials" required typically are degrees or certification in some specialized area.

Job announcements often have some optional qualifications, in which knowledge in, say, statistics or programming experience are helpful. However, if your application doesn't include the basic required credientials, it's very unlikely to be considered.
@Dale summed it up pretty well:

For me, the credentials and skills are a first-pass rejection criteria. If a candidate does not have the necessary credentials and skills then I immediately reject.

2. What if someone lacks the practical experience because he/she is a fresh graduate, switching careers, or transitioning from academia to the industry, what a person can do in this case to acquire this experience? will personal projects be considered to prove the skills? or maybe internships?

Many job announcements list a requirement of, say three years experience in a particular area. If you are a a fresh graduate, you probably won't have this experience, so your application won't be considered.

 

[Dale]

How flexible are the credentials for a job? For example, suppose a field requires a knowledge in statistics and programming, but my major is neither statistics nor computer science, but I have used them both (statistics and programming) in my field and in different settings, in this case will my credentials be considered?

It sounds like you are confusing credentials and skills. If I am asking for credentials then I want someone that has gone to some accredited organization, successfully completed a defined course of study, and been certified by the accredited organization.

If I need someone who has six-sigma black belt certification then I will put that in my requisition. If a candidate does not have those credentials then they are dropped, even if they have used statistics.

On the other hand, if I don’t need someone with six-sigma certification, but want someone who understands statistics, then I will list that as a required skill. Then I would discuss with the candidate how his skills would fit in the role.

I would make different job descriptions depending on if I need a credential or a skill, and if I need a credential then there is no flexibility. Some managers will make a bad job description and they will put requirements in that are not actually required for the job, but I am not one of those. I take care to craft a good requisition and then use that to weed out candidates.

I am asking this question because I was once told by a recruiter in data science that if he saw electrical engineering as credentials in a resume, probably he wouldn't consider the applicant, and said that "he/she [the applicant] should apply for electrical companies".

I typically tell my recruiter a list of typical majors that are likely to be successful in the role. Some are directly compatible, and some would require additional professional experience. In my case, biomedical engineers are directly compatible, but with relevant experience I have had successful electrical engineers, chemists, and physicists.

 

[Andy Resnick]

I want to make this a general question: what is/are the most important factor(s) that determines if an applicant to a job will be at least a candidate (selected for an interview). Is it previous professional experience? Is it credentials? Is it professional/personal projects? Is it networking? What recruiters are looking for in a candidate primarily?

When I am involved in a hiring process, my first (and largely only) question is "can this person solve existing problems that we cannot currently solve?" Convincing someone that you can solve their problem involves a mixture of evidence, one of which is demonstrating understanding of what their problem is. Having the same skill set as their existing employees is not helpful (IMO).

 

[CrysPhys]

To: OP. Here are some general comments related to your post and situation. They are based on my experiences in the US; not sure whether the practices in Canada differ.

(a) For a legit recruiter, the fees are always paid by the employer, never by the applicant.

(b) In general, an employer will not pay a recruiter to recruit newbies (those with little or no experience), since typically there are plenty of fresh grads scrounging for jobs. [As usual, there are outliers, such as in the late 1990's, when the InterNet Bubble was still rapidly inflating.] So a recruiter's perspective and advice will be biased by this.

(c) Some job posts aren't real. That is, the employer does have an opening, but the hiring manager already has selected someone to fill the opening (possibly an internal transfer); however, due to legal issues, a post is still published. Also, some openings are posted in the expectation that funding for a program will come through (that is, employers want to have candidates lined up in advance so they can act quickly once the funding is approved); but in some instances the funding does not come through.

(d) As discussed above, some hiring managers conscientiously craft their posts, carefully specifying required (minimum), preferred, and optional credentials, skills, and experience. Other hiring managers, however, are not so diligent and sloppily put down overly restrictive requirements (such as a degree in a certain field), when they really would consider a broader set of candidates (e.g., those with experience in a particular area, regardless of the field of their degree). Regardless, the first step in many companies is for HR to run software against your resume to filter applicants against the posted parameters (whether diligently thought through or not).

(e) That's where personal networking plays an important role in landing a job. Because if you can bypass the HR filters, you might get the opportunity to persuade the hiring manager of the value you bring. This is more likely in a flexible R&D environment than in instances in which there are strict legal requirements for certain professional certifications.

 

[EngWiPy]

Thanks all for the replies and the information.

I searched the Applicant Tracking System (ATS), and it seems that this software doesn't eliminate unqualified applicants only, but also many qualified applicants with ATS-unfriendly formatted resumes! How common is this software? Is it only common in large companies, or all companies use it?

Networking is a problem for me. I have a problem in presenting and selling myself to others. I tend to be quiet and invisible. I know I need to put myself out there to be noticed and to get out of my comfort zone, but it a huge challenge for me.

Another problem I am facing right now is that, after months of not finding a job because of my lack of experience and possibly bad formatted resume and no networking, I have a gap in my resume. How can I justify it? I have been reading more on the topic I am interested in, and took some online courses, and doing some personal projects.

 

[Dale]

after months of not finding a job because of my lack of experience and possibly bad formatted resume and no networking, I have a gap in my resume. How can I justify it?

I wouldn’t worry about that. A few months to find a job is not a big deal. Focus on the networking and presentation bits. That will be far more important.

 

[Choppy]

I searched the Applicant Tracking System (ATS), and it seems that this software doesn't eliminate unqualified applicants only, but also many qualified applicants with ATS-unfriendly formatted resumes! How common is this software? Is it only common in large companies, or all companies use it?

I can't really speak to how common this specific system is, but this does underscore the point that it really pays to put in the effort to conform to whatever application format the potential employer is requesting. In my own experience, I've found that as much as possible, you want to try to speak to an actual person who's involved in the hiring process, and preferably someone involved in the actual work you'll be doing. This does not circumvent the formal application process. You still need to go through the formal submission process. But sometimes speaking to someone on the inside, will ensure that there's someone looking out for your resume and application, and allow you to uncover any details of the application process that you might otherwise miss. Perhaps even more importantly, it can help you to identify whether the job is a good fit for you, and if it is, help you to tailor your application to what they're looking for.

Networking is a problem for me. I have a problem in presenting and selling myself to others. I tend to be quiet and invisible. I know I need to put myself out there to be noticed and to get out of my comfort zone, but it a huge challenge for me.

Sure, networking isn't easy for a lot of people. You do tend to get better at it the more you do it though. And you don't have to be a natural "socializer" to do it. Sometimes it's really just a matter of finding people and asking the right questions. For example, if you have the opportunity to attend a conference for an industry you're trying to break into, make a point of going around to the different companies represented there and ask a few simple, but open-ended questions. What's it like working for this company? Are they hiring? Will they be hiring in the near future? What kinds of people will they be looking for? You can also ask about how the person you were talking to got hired. As a general rule, people like talking about themselves.

If you can't get to conferences, it can be a little tougher, but not impossible. You can apply the same general approach whenever you have an opportunity to speak with someone in the field.

Another problem I am facing right now is that, after months of not finding a job because of my lack of experience and possibly bad formatted resume and no networking, I have a gap in my resume. How can I justify it? I have been reading more on the topic I am interested in, and took some online courses, and doing some personal projects.

People take time off for all kinds of reasons. I agree with Dale. A few months generally isn't a problem. Once it gets to a year or two, the gap might raise some eyebrows. But even then a gap is not an insurmountable obstacle. Most people who are hiring are well aware of what the job market is like.