The phone interview with the headhunter went well. It started with me asking questions about what the job really is. He said that they basically just posted a standard description for a full professor though this job is somewhat different. It is a research chair and may include teaching in a masters program. The direction of research sounds a lot more applied than I would really be comfortable with. If we go to another level of interview I think I will tell them that they need a mix of basic and applied research if they want to have a good research profile in terms of publication and citation and getting grants from more prestigious sources. If that's not their goal it probably doesn't match me well. The job sounds less daunting than the description that was sent to me which sounded like it would solve all of their problems.
After that he went through my CV and got me to expand on each item. That included explaining what I did in 2008 and more about the nature of my current position. He seemed to be OK with my explanations. "So if you had stayed with your Australian employer of 1996-2002 you'd probably be a full professor now". I said yes either Associate or Full and if I'd stayed with my US employer I would be seeking promotion to full professor about now. So he said he sees merit in me as a candidate and he might be in town in the next couple of weeks and would like to meet for a chat then. I should also send him Snork Maiden's CV...
Now I need to go buy a suit. My current one doesn't fit any more. I bought it in 1996 for an interview at Ohio State University. I had it reduced in size in 1999 after I lost a lot of weight. But now I've put most of that weight back on... I could get it let out again I suppose, but having more than one can't hurt?
6 comments:
I've noticed that trend in job applications and expectations over the past year: employers seem to be expecting more and more out of each individual candidate, and are surprised when they don't find a perfect match after months.
My boss (academician) is the same way when he interviews prospective professors.
Revanche - well given the recession and rising unemployment in the US that would make sense that employers get more picky. OTOH you seem to be saying that they are aiming too high. Here the boom has ended but we're not technically in recession and unemployment is only 5.4%...
Yes, I do think that being more picky is a natural side effect of the recession, but the kinds of minimum requirements being set are disproportionate to the existing employee base by a significant amount. A friend just commented that the minimum req for positions that they were interviewing candidates for [biotech] reflected the same sort of pie in the sky wish list. None of their current employees at the higher tier meet the minimum for the lower tier position!
There is a university here: University of Sydney that always states in all the selection criteria that they want the candidate to be "exceptional" or "outstanding" in almost everything. There are few economists in Australia who I'd regard as exceptional or outstanding in any regard on an international basis. Maybe the top ten. Sydney isn't even a top ten department.
I am not an economist but admire Steve Keen (Western Sydney)
Like your blog and the comments on Aust, pretty generous esp. since apparently you are in Canberra - not everyone's favourite city
B
I'm not a fan of Steve Keen :) Some of his critiques of mainstream economics are correct but many in his book "Debunking Economics" are simply wrong...
Canberra is a great place. But so is Sydney.
Post a Comment