Gatekeepers and Direct Approaches

The best situation is obviously when you can get the hiring manager's attention directly. When you can get him to say "bring this person in for an interview" you've completely eliminated the gatekeeper and turned him into an expediter.

If you must deal with a gatekeeper, try to identify the correct one to work with. If you can get to the hiring manager's administrative assistant, for example, you're way ahead of the game. This person usually has a pretty good insight into the unit, and probably knows many of the people working there (at least indirectly). He or she will be better able to "read between the lines" to see how your qualifications match up to what they're doing.

Regardless of who you contact, I suspect you need to change to tone of your approach. You don't want your contact to be about you ("I would like to work for your group"), you want it to be about them ("I understand you have this need/problem/pain, and here's how I can help"). The minute your contact sounds like a plain old job application is the minute you get referred to HR.

No matter who you deal with, treat the other party professionally and with respect. If you make someone mad, it's very easy for your documents to wind up in the "also-ran" stack without anyone being the wiser. I believe you can do this while keeping the conversation focused on the stuff that matters.

The best way I know to bypass gatekeepers in a situation were you have to submit yuor application and start your discussion with the gatekeepers is to ask questions. Questions should be relevant for the position and ideally sufficiently detailed (technically or about the position) for you to end up in a situation where the gatekeepers doesnt have sufficient informaion to provide answers. This means that questions will be forwarded to the hiring manager who usually will reply directly to you thereby establishing a direct link.

The best way I know to bypass gatekeepers in a situation were you have to submit yuor application and start your discussion with the gatekeepers is to ask questions. Questions should be relevant for the position and ideally sufficiently detailed (technically or about the position) for you to end up in a situation where the gatekeepers doesnt have sufficient informaion to provide answers. This means that questions will be forwarded to the hiring manager who usually will reply directly to you thereby establishing a direct link.

That's really an interesting idea, PG. Nice comment, and I can see many cases where that would work!

Dave

The best situation is obviously when you can get the hiring manager's attention directly. When you can get him to say "bring this person in for an interview" you've completely eliminated the gatekeeper and turned him into an expediter.

If you must deal with a gatekeeper, try to identify the correct one to work with. If you can get to the hiring manager's administrative assistant, for example, you're way ahead of the game. This person usually has a pretty good insight into the unit, and probably knows many of the people working there (at least indirectly). He or she will be better able to "read between the lines" to see how your qualifications match up to what they're doing.

Regardless of who you contact, I suspect you need to change to tone of your approach. You don't want your contact to be about you ("I would like to work for your group"), you want it to be about them ("I understand you have this need/problem/pain, and here's how I can help"). The minute your contact sounds like a plain old job application is the minute you get referred to HR.

No matter who you deal with, treat the other party professionally and with respect. If you make someone mad, it's very easy for your documents to wind up in the "also-ran" stack without anyone being the wiser. I believe you can do this while keeping the conversation focused on the stuff that matters.

This is great advice Rich.

One other element that make help provide some "lubrication" to get an application moving, is to go directly FOR the gatekeeper. Let's say that there's a situation you'd like to go for, but for which you just can't get anywhere networking or where the hiring manager is still hidden and you can't reach that person. In that case, try writing a great cover letter directed to the name of the H/R person who is handling that recruitment. While H/R may not want to pass along the name of their hiring manager, they likely wouldn't object to your request to find out the name of the H/R person working on the blah-blah project. Get that person's name and write the cover letter to them, giving some reasons why you ought to be considered in the short list. And as written here many times, making sure that it's not a "me, me" letter, but a letter that talks about what and how you can help THEM. H/R people read so many cover letters during the day that are "dear sir or madam" or some other anonymous kind of note that something directed to them would be remarkably different.

Dave

The best way I know to bypass gatekeepers in a situation were you have to submit yuor application and start your discussion with the gatekeepers is to ask questions. Questions should be relevant for the position and ideally sufficiently detailed (technically or about the position) for you to end up in a situation where the gatekeepers doesnt have sufficient informaion to provide answers. This means that questions will be forwarded to the hiring manager who usually will reply directly to you thereby establishing a direct link.

That's really an interesting idea, PG. Nice comment, and I can see many cases where that would work!

Dave

Good Feedback in General but becareful not to be too techinical or too subject matter expert with questions directed to the H/R Person as I may be interpreted differently, i.e. you don't understand whom your talking to and can't adapt, or too academic, or too deep dive for the Level of candidate processing. There is a Balance to be struck.

In General the questions you ask may not be specifically relayed to the Hiring Manager rather the H/R staff may communicate that you had "good" quetions, top Level.

However, some questions you may wish to ask can be centered around the organization set up, i.e. you may which to know how your function or Job Interfaces with other functions - you may ask for top Level clarity. You may also ask about top Level processes that you may be involved in. Don't go deep with the question but it can be as simple as asking if there such a process in place. etc. Avoid the deep subject matter / functional Expertise questions that only a Hiring Manager or an expert in their Team can know. So it may be self-defeating to go too deep. You can certainly communicate that you have questions related to the Topic that you'd welcome an opporunity to address with the hiring Manager if invited to the next step.

In General, with an interivew process the first Point of contact will be the Human Resources staff in the gate-keeper role. Once you've entered the process, in the absense of a Network, there is no way around it, at least, not that I have found. And in my case i've even opted NOT to activate a super positive Network contact in the process. Rare it was the Hiring Manager making first contact outside of a Network-based contact, in my experience.

So that being said, Rich summed it up well, be personable. Remember its NOT the HR Staff Job to know the technical Details of the Job they're hiring for, they've been briefed very top Level on the Job descripting by the Hiring Manager, they know the Company culture, they know what to Screen for high Level (to get past the gate).They may ask a very targeted question that the hiring Manager is looking to gauge. They may not know the finer Details of your answer, but they DO know what to look for, and don't ever underestimate that. They've been doing the Job for a while, so with thier Expertise Level, they know what a good candidate sounds like vs. a less competitive candidate.

So - in that sense be ready to address the following questions, though they may not be asked, this is what they're getting to:

1. Can you do the Job?
2. Will you like the Job? (if not love)
3. Will I and others like working with you? (i.e. the windshield test, would others be willing to share a 2 hour car ride with you).

That's the Basics and all discussions around interviewing and tooling up , counteless books and seminars, and prep are around those Basic questions, those are the elements that will get you past the gate-keeper, and get you the Job.

As for the interivew itself, you'll get to the other gate-keepers, i.e. those "other" People who interview you when you're invited, but that's not in scope of this thread.

Good luck,

Dx

Dustin is exactly right with his comments. It is especially important to show that you understand the company in depth and be able to demonstrate that understanding - perhaps with a question about something that shows that you have done your homework.

I was once conducting interviews for a position in my organization, and the candidate walked in, sat down and said "So, what does [your company] do? It was a very short interview...

Dick

This thread's got great advice from every angle. Thanks everyone!

My $0.02 perspective:

Gatekeepers are a common problem in Sales as well (and isn't applying for a job just selling yourself?). In my experience, I strongly recommend Rich's approach: zero in on the hiring manager who can sign off on or advocate for your hiring.

To that end, making contact with a hiring manager's executive assistant can be very valuable, and I think they are generally overlooked by today's job-seeker. Besides getting access to the Hiring Manager, they can have a great perspective on the company culture, positions, even the technical details of projects at the company. They can open many doors. Unfortunately they are sometimes treated by others as a receptionist or glorified calendar -- do not be the person who does that. They can close many doors as well.

Hi Dave Walker,

I'm glad you made the linkage to Sales as a viable approach in Terms of getting access and advocacy of the decision maker. Targeting the excecutive Assistent is a good Approach in that Setting.

However, I DON'T endorse that Approach to the Job seeker. It can be ackward for the hiring Manager to learn that you're having off line or out of process discussions with thier Assistent, it can be perceived that you're going behind their back. The assistents are busy enough as it is, i.e. dealing with Sales reps hamming them up looking for calendar appointments (ha ha), clearly the hiring Manager is not interested in Hearing an candidate engaging with the Assistent off-line.

This is not to say the assstant is not part of the interview process, you may meet them when they invite you for a Face to Face Meeting, the assisstent may be the one who greets you, takes you to the interview room etc.,

In this case, i recommend you Keep the conversation "Personable" and high Level, i.e talk about the weather, your travel, maybe ask them how Long they've been in the Company, comment on the nice Offices, etc. You may even crack a well humored joke. You Goal is give that Person the view you are friendly, personable and that you respect them (i.e. you won't treat them bad if you're hired). In this case this Gate-Keeper would contibute to "i would want to work with you " question and surely the hiring Manager may ask the Assistent on your personality (at least the saavy ones will).

I would Limit Dialog here to a post-interview thank you and nice to meeti you email, but nothing more than that, at least to this Gate-keeper.

Good luck,

DX

One other Point re: Dave's question on Direct Approach to hiring Managers.

In some cases the Hiring Manager will directly post on Linkedin that they have a Job opporunity in thier Team. In that case you are within you right to reach out to them on Linkedin to engage in exploratory discussion. It's a good Approach because they would be able to view your linkedin Profile for a prelimary assessment for fit.

I've used this Approach with positive outcomes (invite for TC). Of course you Need to do your sluething and see if there is fact a post such as this. So a bit of luck.

Good luck,

DX

I am always surprised by the HR interviews in that these gatekeepers have no skin in the game versus the situation for the hiring manager; the manager depends on a new hire's productivity and the gatekeeper doesn't. So why does the gatekeeper feel that they must control the interview process or scrutinize the candidates to a greater degree than the manager. Oddly, many gatekeepers (HR and career advice writers) don't advocate approaching managers directly because they feel this strategy is not respectful to the gatekeepers. If it helps fill an open position for which I am qualified and I have applied online, why should I care what the gatekeepers think if this strategy is more productive for me?

PG, Rich, and DaveW

Most likely, HR will actively try to discourage you from networking directly. Even if you are cordial and have a great rapport with a HR representative, it is likely they will just encourage you to apply online.

Hi Nate,

Thanks for sharing your experiences, clearly you have had many with opporunity to see the good and the bad of being in the process.

I just want to challenge some of your interpetations as naturally you Point of view is that of the candidate and is thus external, and subsequently not from the internal perspective so I want to give some Balance.

I would propose you not hold the view that HR staff have no Skin in the game. Or there is a disconnect between the HR staff and Hiring Manager. Internally, this is not the case.

The HR role in the interview process, from an internal view, is to complement the Hiring Mangers assessment and provide their Feedback in a supportive way that is geared in HELPING a hiring Manager take a decision. Whereas the hiring Manager may tend to be more focused on the subject matter or the techincal Expertise and fit to Team, the HR Person can complement that decision on perhaps giving insights on more behavioral aspects, just as an example. They may have a differentiated interview style as with any member of an interview Team. Ultimately the hiring Manager takes the decision but with complementary and supportive Input from the interview Team. The view of the interview Team can be different that that of the hiring Manager, but thats why a Team is used to sometimes give an interview right? The HR staff does have a Skin in the game because thier objective is to Support the acquistion of the "right" Talent to deliver on the Business objectives. I agree sometimes the HR interview can yield some interesting and differentiated experiences to the candidate however, I would not Interpret from an external view that there is a disconnect between the HR staff, gate-keepers, and the hiring Manager. Internally, they are well aligned and after interviews provide shared Feedback that fuel a decision for next steps in the process.

So I just want to put some Balance on your external view, vs. the internal realities.

In Terms of HR discouraging Networking in the application process and asking you to apply, actually that the wrong Interpretation. By asking you to apply, the are encouraging you to enter the process that will give you a stab at the Job. They can't do anything with your application until you have officially entered the process. Beyond entering the process, you're wasting their time after your first discussion, you Need to officialize their time spend and process. From a time persepcetive they just don't have it to set up exploratory discussions etc. etc. If after you've had a discussion with HR member and they say put your application in, then it means that perhaps they beleive you have something that should be looked at formally. If after you talk to an HR Person and you are not told or advised not to apply, then they are telling you that you don't have a sufficient Chance.

Some may volunteer to Screen the CV with hiring Manager then come back to you, but in this world Nate, time...is a valued asset. Most don't have that time to give personal Attention to all applicants like that. Internally, HR staff are generally over-burdened, stressed-out, under-pressure and over-worked. So also have that perspective in mind.

So i just wanted to challenged some of your external Interpretations from an inside view.

DX

Great comments by all. I agree with DX about H/R's role. In some organizations, it fits with Nate's comments that H/R is an unnecessary part of the process. But that's perhaps only 15-20% of companies, and H/R there is looked at as a bunch of clerks. But in most companies, they are an important part of the process. You can't buzz them off. No matter who arranges your interview, a hiring manager or an H/R person, your day will include an H/R interview.

One comment Nate made: "Oddly, many gatekeepers (HR and career advice writers) don't advocate approaching managers directly because they feel this strategy is not respectful to the gatekeepers."

I don't know if this is a reference to the Forum, or Tooling Up, but for more than 20 years we've advocated networking as the process and direction to use when job seeking. The only way to reach hiring managers is by networking -- sometimes cold call networking, the hardest of them all. My favorite approach is Peer +2 networking, where your approach is to build relationships with people just a couple of years ahead of you who can introduce you to their boss, and the internal bonus program compensates them for doing so. In my presentations, I refer to the online job application process as a black hole. Sure, you can apply all day long and get screened by H/R, but it will likely not be until you've connected with others via networking that things start to happen.

Dave

DX- I would like to come back to the issue of HR being heavily involved in the interview process and my thoughts on this. My experiences have been good and bad. It complicates matters, at least for me, when HR is so heavily involved in the decision making part of the interviews. It is like I am trying to please two different people with different agendas; for which I am more inclined to favor that of the hiring manager. Let me come back to this after Labor Day.

Hi Nate,

Well HR involvement may complicate matters for for you as a candidate but internally, HR involvement is part of the interview process. In the interview process where Teams that represents the functions you will be interfaceing with, in addtiion to the hiring Manager, HR are involved. This means when you do get to a face to face you are in a Situation as a candidate where you are in fact trying to please many different poeple beyond the hiring Manager and HR. At the Screening on phone Phase, consider yourself lucky that you only may have an HR staff and the hiring Manager to talk to. Again, this interaction, internally is complementary.

Later on in career, an interview can feel like that of a CEO interview process as more and more stakeholders from various functions are asked to interview you, and they can be pretty high up. So enter another level of interviewing later on. If you're complianing about HR now, wait until you have 4 or 5 different functions interviewing you. Then the complaint will become, why is that non-hiring manager Technical Production person complicating things, or why is that Regulatory Affairs person being difficult, or why is that Marketing person challenging me. Remember the mulitple Person Approach to naturally include HR is there to ensure a complementary fit of the candidate to the Company and Teams to includedm as appropriate, and beyond subject matter expertise. In one of my interviews, it was a technical laboratory lead who was challenging me for a Position that reported into a Commercial function! Sufficent to enough that i didn't get the Job despite good rapport with the hiring manager and HR.

In my experiences, I would have to say the number 1 reason for a candidate to not pass a phone Screen or an interview process has to do with a red flag centered on personality or communication deficit that is not identified from the CV Screen and short phone/TC Screens of HR and/or Hiring Manager triggering that face to face. This is why one should spend alot of time on interview prep. The over arching red flag here is quiet simply "personality fit".

Lesser reasons has to do with subject matter or techincial expertise, many times we don't really doubt this - how one answers in behavioral or situational questions with automatically yield insights into subject matter expertise.

Many times we see a candidate that Looks good on paper, but then in Person, to be blunt, is yuck. Sometimes they may have gotten along great with the hiring Manager but then another functional interviewer may spot something, maybe there was a hint of arrogance. Maybe there was an oddity in communication style or personlity oddity that was not seen by the hiring Manager leading an "ick" or "yuck" that gets back to the hiring Manager. As a hiring Manager, you don't want to hire someone in that may not have the crediblity to work with the functions they Need to work with on a daily Basis.

Also you just reminded me, that not everybody in HR has the same function. More and more companies are adding Talent Scouts to thier HR team. Thier sole purpose is to recruit - and they use the same Networking tactics as Recruiters to identify Talent. Many if not most were former recruiters working for various Talent recruitment firms. They are not, in General, responsible for handling you once you're invited, they are there to Screen and make recommendations, they work closesly with the highing Manager. Since recruitment is they key Task, These Folks might be the ones you can try Networking and preliminary discussions with, as they are then the gate-keeper.

Most of the established pharma's and biotects will have Talent Scouts. Try finding them on Linkedin if Networking is not working in your favor. They may be the closest you can get to a "Networking" relationship with HR. They can also talk to you about other roles in the organization where you maybe a fit, so try These gate keepers. They will usually identify themselves as Talent Scouts on Linkedin and they will have a Company email address (even though they may be contracted, they represent the Company).

One more Point, there is only one time you should put your CV into a Company Website that has not been addressed on the Forum. After you've spoking to HR and/or the hiring manager and they have expressed interest in your candidacy to secure an interview, be it phone or TC, they WILL ask you to put your CV into the Website and officially apply. In that case, do it. You are then following thier instructions, you already have a contact with them, and they Need to officially and legally Trigger the process (at least that's how it is in my Country of residence).

good luck,

DX

few Edits to include personal experience.

Totally agree with all you said there, DX. If you can't get along with one team (H/R), what's to say that you can get along with the manufacturing operations team, or the legal team, etc? That's why when you interview with a company, you meet a variety of people from different disciplines.

Agree also that the trend is for "Talent Scouts" to either be directly employed by a company by H/R or for the recruiter to be 100% engaged by them in a growth spurt on a contracted basis. Either way, however, the top performers would never do that because they can do better than to be a part of corporate H/R.

Dave

I know from experience that asking relevant questions but of a type that the gatekeeper cant answer actually works. I have seen it work when I have asked questions. I also know that when I am the hiring manager and people ask questions that our HR cant answer they relay those questions to me. Rather than giving an answer to HR for them to pass on to the applicant I usually answer directly myself.

This of course depends on both the HR representative and also on the hiring manager but my guess is that it works more often than it doesnt.

Agree also that the trend is for "Talent Scouts" to either be directly employed by a company by H/R or for the recruiter to be 100% engaged by them in a growth spurt on a contracted basis. Either way, however, the top performers would never do that because they can do better than to be a part of corporate H/R.

Dave

Hi Dave,

Many of the recruiter folks who transitiond in-house, especially those Talent Scout roles, typically don't want to have the stress of a financial Goal that's put on them when working for firms any longer. Also many are, for one reason or another, not interested in an entrepreneural angle or did do so but no longer interested in having a non-predictable income and stresss of Client Management, especially in this competitive landscape. So they come in house to a salaried role (usually well paid) leaving behind finaicial pressure linked to employee placement. They get to Focus more on targeted Talent acquistions while even getting some time to understand some industry Trends more broadly which probably they didn't spend much time on while in a firm or Independent - the lose nothing by coming in house and gain alot experience that they can always take externally.

DX