All About Jobs

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

Believe it or not, but most of the recruitment people I have met don’t have a good command of grammar. Many are not that good at analysing job documentation and writing an advert that accurately reflects what is required of job applicants.

What are the implications for you?

Simple, if the advert says that the “successful applicant will have five years experience”, don’t be put off applying for it if you have only two or three. Consider this: a motor mechanic who had five years experience balancing and aligning wheels might say he has had five years experience as a motor mechanic, but really have little experience at tuning cars with electronic systems.

In your case, you may have learned much more in two years than Debbie has in five years because of the variety of work. Therefore, when you responded, you would detail the things you did to get that experience.

There are several scenarios that could make you more successful than someone with five years experience:

1. Your listed experience may be just what your potential employer wants even though it’s less than five years
2. Other candidates might have just stated that they had five years experience and recruiters don’t really know exactly what that entailed
3. The employer might realise that it is not essential to have five years experience, that two or three would have been sufficient
4. There may be no other applicants with five years experience

The only time you need not apply is when there is a regulated/licensing requirement eg, if you had to hold a trade certificate and didn’t have one, then there’s no need applying.

The rule I would use is this: if you feel that you have the overall skills and experience for a job despite the advertised requirements, apply. After all, it will only cost you a few sheets of paper, an envelope and a bit of postage.

Robin
“Think success - Achieve success”