|
Written by Bridgette Chambers
|
|
Tuesday, 14 April 2009 00:00 |
|
Over qualified…. what does that really mean today? If by that you mean an MBA with ten years of professional experience applying for a cashier’s position, I understand. Yet, in a matrix, complex enterprise, I disagree that the label of over qualified is a problem.
There are numerous reasons a job seeker may adjust his/her search criteria. Quality of life, change of industry, acceptance of new responsibilities may be some of the reasons advanced job seekers happily apply for a position that, at first glance, may seem beneath their qualifications. The job seeker has a responsibility to adjust his/her compensation requirements to be commensurate with the position being sought. If the job seeker is adjusting search criteria for self-serving purposes, then the trade off in compensation should meet the burden to make the role sufficiently interesting and compelling. If the job seeker is looking for a lesser-qualified role because of fear of unemployment, the compensation adjustment may be a bigger issue that will ultimately be grounds for disqualification. Recruiters and employers will likely hold one of two views: short term or long term. A short-term view will shun candidates that appear too qualified or credentialed for the role. The short-term thinker will fear retention problems and the subsequent cost of churn. On the other hand, a long-term thinker will invite a highly qualified candidate in as an opportunity to reshape the culture and benefit from the expertise the candidate provides. As it usually goes with long-term thinkers, they will plan to upgrade their environment holistically to encourage retention of high potential employees and breed a culture of growth.
|