NO! Wear the dress pants. Khakis maybe. No jeans. Don't go in a full suit, but don't show up in jeans, even for fast food.
So I went, the drive to the interview was longer than the interview itself. No kidding. 5-7 minutes at most. And I didn't even meet with the woman who was going to be interviewing me, it was another worker. On top of that, the guy interviewing me seemed like he was in a bit of a hurry, so I wasn't able to get everything out that I wanted to say-or ask. I did, however, state my open availability and to compensate for lack of work experience, I have the ability to work well under pressure and have a keen eye for detail. I will be calling back tomorrow, just to reinstate my interest for the position. I was told I would hear back in a couple days. And yes, as a compromise, I did put my hair back in a ponytail. The open availability was a good card of mine to have, and seemed from the guys body language to work in my favor, since this location in particular often has college students working.
Then get rid of the facial hair. Now. No employer wants to hear about your willingness to change when someone else already has. I'm not telling you to cut your hair if you aren't willing to do that, but if you are willing to shave, then shave. No one cares that you might shave in the future. And I'm certainly not telling you to give up on your music-related dreams. Your goal now should be to find a job that funds that ambition.
I went clean shaven. The guy who briefly interviewed me had some scruff himself, so it felt more in place.
Just to clarify: I'm not trying to be a jerk. I'm just someone who's been there. Honestly, these entry-level interviews are waaaaaay tougher than the professional interviews I've had. I'll read up more on this thread and see if I can offer something -- I used to do resume and interview coaching.
Would you recommend lying about one's qualifications? I've gotten to the point where I'm considering lying to get a job. How often do employers check credentials? I talked to a guy recently who said he managed to lie about qualifications on numerous occasions and never had a problem. He was able to build great experience by doing so. As we've discussed in previous threads, I'm not opposed to doing what I need to do to get ahead, given where I'm starting.
I'd suggest against lying about your qualifications. However, you should put the best face on your qualifications, and your previous titles are not set in stone. If another title fits industry standards and better describes your expertise and accomplishments in the role, I (as an employer) wouldn't hold it against you at all if you gave a more appropriate label to yourself. In short--I don't suggest lying, but focusing on your accomplishments and strongest qualities should be a priority. As polarizingly different as the two of us are, I have absolutely no problem with people doing what they need to get ahead. On both an ethical and practical level, I'd suggest being honest while doing that, however. This could be just me talking from the point of view of a tight professional/social network, but blatant lies, when found, have a habit of making the rounds to other potential employers.
I already try to do that, but so far it hasn't been sufficient. What do you think about claiming a degree you don't actually have? The lack of a degree renders me ineligible for just about anything that doesn't involve cooking. Personally, this absurd obsession with degrees is driving me insane--most people graduating from college have IQ's of about 110, if that, which isn't terribly impressive. What do employers think they are getting from people who have degrees? Outside of more vocational degrees like teaching and engineering, I just don't understand the requirement. I find it ridiculously stupid that we can't use aptitude testing in employment but can demand 60k degrees for jobs that don't actually require them at all. I guess degrees have just become so plentiful that employers can use them as arbitrary disqualifiers. Yes, they can be useful signaling devices, but they are ridiculously expensive signaling devices. Simply ask people to take a standardized test, prove that they can meet the actual job requirements, and move on.
Ouch. Okay, let me just say that I agree, 100%, with the overinflation of the value of a degree, my own included. It has become a standard that is arbitrary as it is useless. As for your evaluation part, all I can say is that you aren't wrong. What follows is not employment advice. All I will say is that, on a purely hypothetical level, I agree that degrees are not an accurate gauge of ability or talent. I agree that 99.9999999% of employers will not follow up on verifying your degree. And I agree that I 100% would not care about the veracity of someone's degree, even if I were to find out that it were fake, if their other qualifications were up to par. I hope you will understand when I say that this is much as I can comment on the issue.
That is good to know, and thanks for your lack of advice It's just another barrier to entry based on financial resources. I can't tell you how many people I've tutored who now have degrees and better jobs than I can get. It's so *******n infuriating to not be allowed to prove myself because I failed to jump through an arbitrary hurdle. In China, they are even more obsessed with credentials, so that is no longer a real option either. One of these days, I'll just have to stop being paralyzed by anger and frustration. I literally stopped going to college because I was angry and jealous.
Hey, glad I could(n't?) help. No question: over-evaluation of education, especially bachelor degrees, has been one of the biggest, least justified pieces of inflation to hit the market. I can't blame you. The most qualified people I've met have done the same. I'm still trying to help my best friend from high school land a database management position, and he's way more qualified than myself to do so.
I think the increase in the division of labor has been a problem for certain personality types, such as myself. People who are very conscientious tend to enjoy performing repetitive tasks more than others, so they end up doing much better in life--they don't require much mental stimulation to be content. The most successful people I know, with only one exception, are not the most talented, but they are the most tolerant of mundane tasks and don't easily get bored. I usually excel in positions of leadership where I can engage in a variety of tasks and engage novel problems, but I detest anything that is highly structured and predictable. I was a terrible student in secondary school and only did well in college because it was more test-oriented. Once I was unable to cherry-pick my classes and was forced to do the mundane, I started hating school again and ultimately left. I probably need medication, but it's too late now! I think the rise in ADD represents a change in the environment, and we now live in a society that is far more boring and repetitive than it has ever been, so those who are less conscientious are struggling to adapt. What's worse is that the professions where people with my personality can succeed often require a huge amount of grunt work before one can get there. Studies have shown that a diagnosis of ADD or bipolar, no matter the IQ, is basically a death sentence for those who want to make a decent living in the modern economy--we're essentially obsolete phenotypes. It also explains why females are doing so much better than males--their brains are more suited to the modern lifestyle.
I've been a "Starvin Marvin" for employment, and even I wouldn't pull off a fraudulent resume (your suggestion reminds me of that one Simpsons episode when Marge made up qualifications on a resume).I second yard's advice.
We only get one life. We either do what it takes to live a good one or kill ourselves. I'd rather lie and cheat my way to prosperity than to just die.
I am a manager who used to employ the unskilled. You already have some great advice for getting the first job. If you are persistent it will pay off. My advice is for the next one. DO NOT QUIT for at least 9 months to a year unless you are 100% sure the next one will last even longer. I don't care how much you loath it, how much you are mistreated. You need to prove staying power, because that will be all that distinguishes you for a long time. It proves success, when your prick of a former boss refuses to provide you any other. Only twice in 35 years, did I leave a job before a full year, and I had a damn good and fully verifiable reason for both.
One thing you need to realize about Music is that the old days of "On the Cover of the Rolling Stone" and "Money for Nothing" are rapidly ending if not gone already. Fortunately, you seem to have no problem with performing and might very well fit right in with what seems the arrival of the Internet Street Performer as the new model of success in that field. If you haven't read it already, a book, called "Information Doesn't Want to be Free" by Cory Doctorow might be helpful. It's probably available from your local library or may be online. It's more about the Internet piracy controversy than anything else but since piracy is the main reason that the old style business model of Music is no longer useful it may contain some helpful insights.
In some cases it's necessary for skill acquisition; in others it is simply an unjustified waste of time--let the most talented win. Runaway credentialism needs to be put down like the rabid dog that it is.
Why is your goal to pretend that I am some kind of ignorant buffoon? If you disagree with me, just come out and say it.
Dammit, why can't people just be passive students and let me feel better by illustrating something? The line above is the famous one. The following line is actually more important, it's; "Drink deep or quaff not, from Knowledge's Spring" and, it changes the whole meaning. Pope is not being against education, (as many think that line is) but in fact arguing that one should study something DEEPLY, or not at all. If you don't do the "grunt work" then you're going to be vulnerable to lots of misinterpretation, because you don't know the broader CONTEXT which the knowledge you're working with comes from
Maybe if you are talking about fields that are extremely complicated and require serious intellectual depth, but this is not what I am referring to when I talk about runaway credentialism. I'm talking about the majority of jobs that can be learned quickly by anyone willing and able to learn. Many on here blame the government, which is just, but the private sector has also participated in the stupidity, and in many cases there is no excuse for it. These stupid employers who insist on degrees for entry-level jobs are actually making a financial mistake. They could be hiring more intelligent people without degrees whom they could pay less; instead, they'll skip the smarter or more experienced person just to get the degree. Two of the smartest business owners I know deliberately seek out those who are smart and don't have degrees, pay them nothing, and get huge returns. Any business owner who hires an entry-level clerk with a degree and pays them accordingly is an idiot, plain and simple. People who really need degrees to do their job are rare, and entry-level managers at a run-of-the-mill company certainly don't need them--they need experience and talent. If they can do it, let them climb.
