求職失敗的原因你知多少?.

　　你在面試中表現優(yōu)異，你的簡歷也令人贊嘆，但最終還是沒有得到那份工作，而且你很可能永遠都不知道原因所在。以下的文章也許可以幫助你理清思維。

　　You aced the interview, your resume sings, but in the end, you didn&apost get the job. Chances are, you&aposll never know why.

　　你在面試中表現優(yōu)異，你的簡歷也令人贊嘆，但最終還是沒有得到那份工作，而且你很可能永遠都不知道原因所在。

　　It is a painful conundrum of the job search process: Rejected candidates want to understand why they didn&apost get hired, but employers, fearing discrimination complaints, keep silent. And those who do speak up offer little more than platitudes.

　　這是求職過程中一個讓人頭疼的難題，一方面遭拒的求職者希望了解自己為什么沒有獲聘;另一方面雇主卻因擔心遭到歧視投訴而保持緘默，就算有雇主坦誠直言，所說的也只不過是陳詞濫調。

　　Without specifics, candidates are lt to repeat the same mistakes, while hiring managers complain they&aposre swamped with applicants who miss the mark.

　　如果沒有具體的反饋，求職者就會重復犯下同樣的錯誤，招聘經理則抱怨他們總是遇見一批又一批不合格的求職者。

　　&aposYou don&apost know how to adjust going forward, &apos says technology professional Lisa Roberson. When she wasn&apost selected for a job in her field a few years ago, she emailed one of the people who had interviewed her to find out why.

　　從事科技工作的麗莎·羅伯森(Lisa Roberson)說：“你不知道該如何調整取得進步?！睅啄昵?，在應聘一份科技領域的工作落選后，她給其中一位面試官發(fā)了封電子郵件詢問原因。

　　The response: Someone &aposmore suited&apos to the job had been hired. &aposWell, I could have guessed that, &apos said Ms. Roberson, who works in health-care IT.

　　面試官的回復是：他們找到了“更適合”那個職位的人選。羅伯森說：“好吧，我都能猜到這個回答。”現在她在醫(yī)療IT行業(yè)工作。

　　Such exchanges frustrate job seekers, especially those who have been searching for long periods and desperately want some insight into how they are viewed by hiring managers.

　　如此這般的交流會讓求職者心生沮喪，而那些找了很長時間工作、迫切希望深入了解招聘經理如何看待他們的求職者更是如此。

　　Providge Consulting, a Delaware-based consulting firm, has a policy to keep candidates apprised at every step of its hiring process and scores candidates on a range of criteria to keep its decisions as objective as possible.

　　特拉華州咨詢公司Providge Consulting制訂了一項政策，在其招聘流程中的每一步都會通知求職者消息，依據一系列標準給他們評分，以此使招聘決定盡可能保持客觀。

　　But when the reasons for a rejection can&apost be boiled down to more clear-cut measures like experience or education, HR managers &aposattempt to minimize those conversations, &apos said Tara Teaford, director of operations. That may mean offering a vague response, adding that the company will reach out if appropriate positions arise in the future.

　　該公司運營總監(jiān)塔拉·蒂福德(Tara Teaford)稱，如果求職者遭拒的原因不能以比較明確的標準來歸結的話，比如工作經驗或教育經歷等，人事經理則會“試圖簡單應對那些談話”。這可能意味著他們會給出含糊其辭的回復，另外還會補充說，如果未來有合適的職位，他們還會聯(lián)系你。

　　&aposMost of it is trying to protect ourselves from potential litigation, &apos says Ms. Teaford. &aposOnce you cross the line between objective and subjective, it gets very, very challenging.&apos

　　蒂福德說：“那樣做主要是為了盡量保護我們自己免于潛在的訴訟，一旦你越過了客觀和主觀之間的界限，事情就會變得非常非常危險?！?/p>

　　And many of the firms that want to provide feedback have their hands tied by company lawyers.

　　此外，許多意欲提供反饋的企業(yè)也受到來自公司律師的約束。

　　Employers were put on notice in late 2012 when the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission identified discrimination in hiring practices as one of its priorities for the next three years, partly out of a recognition that few job seekers have the resources to hire a lawyer and press their claims through civil courts, according to Amy Fratkin, an employment lawyer. That means individual complaints will be more likely to result in lawsuits brought by the EEOC if the agency establishes a pattern of discrimination by the employer.

　　就業(yè)事務律師艾米·弗拉金(Amy Fratkin)稱，各企業(yè)在2012年底接到通知，美國平等就業(yè)機會委員會(Equal Employment Opportunity Commission，簡稱“EEOC”)將把鑒定招聘過程中的歧視行為列為未來三年的首要任務之一。這么做部分是因為，他們意識到很少有求職者擁有聘請律師將其權利主張在民事法庭推進到底的資源。這意味著如果EEOC一旦確立了企業(yè)歧視行為的形式，個人的投訴將更有可能發(fā)展為由該機構提起的訴訟。

　　Linda Jackson, a partner with employment law firm Littler Mendelson, says she advises her clients against offering specific feedback to job candidates. For instance, telling someone he has too much experience for a particular job might be interpreted as age discrimination, she said.

　　琳達·杰克遜(Linda Jackson)是就業(yè)事務律師事務所Littler Mendelson的合伙人，她說她會建議客戶不要向求職者提供具體的反饋。她舉例說，告訴某個求職者他的經驗對于某個職位來說過于豐富可能會被解讀為年齡歧視。

　　Then there is the discomfort of relaying hard-to-hear information. Some hiring managers are so uncomfortable at the prospect of these conversations that they ruse to bring their business cards to interviews, says Amelia Merrill of Risk Management Solutions Inc., a risk-modeling firm in Silicon Valley.

　　其次，轉告讓人難以接受的消息也會讓人不自在。硅谷風險建模公司Risk Management Solutions Inc.的阿米莉亞·梅里爾(Amelia Merrill)說，有些招聘經理一想到未來可能會有這樣的談話就覺得非常不舒服，所以他們去面試求職者時都不愿意帶上名片。

　　Despite how awkward it can be, Ms. Merrill expects her recruiters to call finalists to let them know they weren&apost hired, giving those applicants a chance to ask for more information. She wants even rejected candidates to leave thinking they want to work there.

　　盡管氣氛可能會非常尷尬，梅里爾還是希望招聘人員能打電話通知進入最終面試，卻未被聘用的求職者，以向他們提供一個詢問更多信息的機會。她甚至還希望遭拒的求職者最后心里還會想著希望在她們那兒工作。

　　On rare occasions, she added, a rejected candidate will argue with the recruiter or insist he was the right pick for the job.

　　她還說，只有在極少數情況下，會有未被錄用的求職者與招聘人員爭辯，或堅持認為自己是該職位的合適人選。

　　Of course, lots of candidates don&apost seek feedback: HR managers put the number of those who request it at around 10%. But of those who do, barely any get it. Only 4.4% of more than 2, 000 job candidates surveyed in 2012 by the Talent Board, an organization dedicated to improving companies&apos recruiting practices, said they received specific feedback from hiring managers and recruiters.

　　當然，很多求職者不會尋求反饋，人事經理估計要求獲得反饋的求職者的比例在10%左右。但是，在那些提出這個要求的求職者中，幾乎沒有人能得到反饋。專注于改進企業(yè)招聘行為的機構──人才委員會(Talent Board)在2012年對2,000余名求職者進行了調查，其中只有4.4%的求職者表示他們得到過招聘經理和招聘人員的具體反饋。

　　But it raises the question, will the gap ever be bridged?

　　這就引出了一個問題，這其中的差距有可能得到彌合嗎?

　　&aposIf you want an ficient labor market, you have to have people understand where their talents are best used, &apos says Elli Shar, co-founder of HireArt, a website that matches job seekers and employers through video interviews and assessment tests.

　　HireArt網站的聯(lián)合創(chuàng)始人艾莉·沙勒夫(Elli Shar)指出：“如果你想要一個高效的勞動力市場，你得讓大家明白他們的才華最適合用在何處?！痹摼W站通過視頻面試和評估測試幫求職者和企業(yè)配對。

　　After hearing from hundreds of frustrated job seekers, Ms. Shar recently decided to try offering feedback, despite some trepidation from her lawyer.

　　盡管律師表達了憂慮，但不久前，沙勒夫在聽取了數百名失意求職者的抱怨后，還是決定嘗試提供反饋。

　　In May, HireArt emailed 127 job seekers who had submitted video interviews for jobs in educational technology and offered the chance for a 15-minute personalized critique from Ms. Shar herself. The 21 available slots were filled in less than 10 minutes.

　　去年5月，HireArt給提交過應聘教育科技領域崗位面試視頻的127名求職者發(fā)送了電子郵件，向他們提供獲得15分鐘來自沙勒夫本人的個性化評論的機會。網站提供的21個空缺機會在不到10分鐘的時間內即被申請滿了。

　　Most appreciated the assistance, but overall, reactions to the feedback varied. One person complained that 15 minutes wasn&apost enough time for the session. Others admitted they hadn&apost given much thought to what they could contribute to the prospective employer, which was the most common criticism.

　　大多數求職者都很感激這次幫助，但總的說來對反饋的反應各有不同。有一名求職者抱怨稱15分鐘的評論時間還不夠長。其他人承認，他們并未仔細想過他們能給潛在雇主做出什么貢獻，這也是最常見的批評。

　　HireArt has since decided to offer a limited number of weekly feedback sessions. But as the company weighs scaling up the service to more users, it is also wrestling with questions about how people absorb and use constructive criticism. It can be difficult to hear &aposnegative information about yourself, especially when you&aposre already in a vulnerable position, &apos says Ms. Shar.

　　自那以后，HireArt決定每周提供少量面試反饋機會。然而，就在該公司考慮擴大規(guī)模向更多用戶提供這項服務時，它也受困于有關大家是如何吸取利用建設性批評的問題。沙勒夫說，聽到“關于自己的負面信息，特別是當你已經身處脆弱境地時”可能會很不好受。

　　Companies&apos job-application software could provide another source of feedback, albeit automated, suggests John Sullivan, a management professor at San Francisco State University.

　　舊金山州立大學(San Francisco State University)管理學教授約翰·沙利文(John Sullivan)建議，企業(yè)的求職軟件能充當另一個反饋來源，盡管它的反饋是自動生成的。

　　These applicant-tracking systems, which are used by almost every large employer, score candidates based on rough measures like the number of keyword matches between a job description and a resume. Employers could theoretically send candidates their scores, says Mr. Sullivan.

　　幾乎每家大企業(yè)都采用了此類求職者跟蹤系統(tǒng)，它會根據職位描述和簡歷之間關鍵詞的匹配次數這樣的大致標準來給求職者打分。沙利文稱，從理論上說，雇主可以將求職者的評分發(fā)給他們。

　　&aposIf you scored 90 out of 100, you might apply again later. But if you scored a 20, you know you applied for the wrong job, &apos he said. So far, none of the companies for which he has recommended this, have adopted it.

　　他說：“如果100分的總分你得了90分，或許以后你還可以再申請。不過如果你只得了20分，你就知道你申請錯了工作?！彼蛞恍┢髽I(yè)推薦了上述這個方法，但迄今為止還無一企業(yè)采納。