There are so many faulty and widely-held convictions about how to execute a successful career transition that I thought it might be helpful to address a few  – and debunk them. What follows are some of the most common:

1) The myth: In order to defuse some of the more painful aspects of all the rejection and difficulties inherent in any search, it’s a great idea to share your feelings freely. 

The reality: You don’t want your brand out there to be a negative one. The last thing you need is a general perception that things aren’t going well, or that you’re discouraged, or that things aren’t working out. Think about it. Why would people in your personal or professional network want to refer you to others if they perceive you as somehow damaged or discouraged goods? The perception you want to create is what I like to call “sunshine, light, and success.” It’s all going well, even if it isn’t. 

But you do need to vent and troubleshoot during this process. Limit that to one or two close friends, professional associates, or family members.  Try hard to keep the venting to a minimum with significant others. It’s tough for them, too, and you would much prefer they be more positive and supportive, rather than experiencing exactly what you are going through. A strong emotional support system is an essential piece of a successful search.

By the way, it’s absolutely permissible to take some time off. While I think that search is a full-time job, breaks are important. (That doesn’t mean take the summer off, or give up during the holiday seasons.) I’ve frequently observed that not taking time off will often make the search less effective and less energetic. 

2) The myth: Answer as many job postings as possible; the more resumes out there, the better. 

The reality: Sending out large volumes of resumes (even with great cover emails) is usually a waste of time. It’s reactive – or passive – job search. What many people hope is that by sending out large volume responses to postings, or sending out resumes blindly to various human resources departments, there will be market saturation and, by sheer statistical probability, many responses. In other words, they can just sit there and wait for the world to come to them. The phone will ring. Emails will magically appear. It doesn’t usually happen that way, but it’s definitely a great wish. 

One of the most negative images I have of a futile job search is someone in transition staring at both their computers and phones – and waiting. 

Statistically (since we just mentioned numbers), a significant proportion of jobs are found through relationships, not through sending out resumes or calling search firms. 

You need to take responsibility for your own search, in a proactive fashion.  That means while you may answer postings, you’re spending most of your time researching your targets, working on your self-branding, and developing relationships that will lead to learning about new possibilities. That’s a full time job, and it’s hard work. 

3) The myth: After having built those above-mentioned relationships, you can relax after you meet new people, and wait for the job possibilities and leads to roll in. 

The reality: We’re back to that proactive notion again here. One of the most common problems I hear about in transitions is that my clients or students have met many people, but that alone has still not led to job possibilities. 

Having one meeting with a valuable contact is not enough. 

An effective networking approach, one that is consistently proactive and does indeed lead to finding out about position openings, is one that involves tending those new relationships. That means multiple follow-up contacts – including a thank you/marketing email for positive reinforcement right after a meeting, then perhaps multiple communications  afterward, as many as you think reasonable. One of those might be telling the contact that you’ve met successfully with someone they’ve suggested. Or another might be sending a clipping about a relevant topic that was discussed in the meeting. Keep the communications short and unobtrusive. 

What we’re talking about here is pure sales technique. A contact won’t remember you from just one meeting, and especially not from just one phone call. (I always encourage, whenever possible, that meetings be in person.)  There have to be repeated contacts to create memory and relationship. This is more hard work.

4) The myth: When you think that an offer is about to come, suspend all other job search activities. You don’t want to have to cancel meetings and offend people. 

The reality: It’s dangerous to stop a search when an offer, or offers, seem imminent. Momentum is lost. So much can happen with that assumed offer. Funding could disappear, an internal candidate could appear; any number of variables could mess up your offer. So why rely on what you can’t control?  Keep things going. 

When I said “dangerous,” I meant that when all activity is stopped in anticipation of offer(s), and those don’t work out, it’s very difficult to get activities started again. It’s demoralizing to try to rebuild the search at that low point. Search is hard enough without adding unnecessary detours. 

If you do get the offer, and successfully negotiate it, then great; you can always cancel the other meetings you’ve scheduled. 

5) The myth: The more people I talk with, the better.

The reality: Volume doesn’t equate to success in job search. High numbers are better than low, but not enough. As mentioned earlier, I’ve heard many job seekers say they’ve met many people, and some may even enjoy the process (that always surprises me, because I’m not one who will talk about what a wonderful experience career transition is).  But they wonder why the volume hasn’t resulted in new job leads or at least new, reliable information. 

I recommend a system for analyzing the quality of your networking contacts.

• Level One contacts are peers, or just those who might be able to help you penetrate an organization, or simply give you industry information that you need to make yourself more of an “insider.” Level One is where most will spend significant time, particularly in the beginning of search – when you’re looking to validate your targets. But if a search continues to be only Level One, this may be a key reason why it’s not working.
  

• Level Two contacts are the right people in the right organizations in your target areas – and could also possibly lead you to decision makers, otherwise known as Level Three.  These Level Two contacts are great sources of information about your targets and your potential market.  
  

• Decision makers (Level Three) are those who make hiring decisions.  They are your eventual targets in search.  
  

If your search is stalled, chances are there are mostly Level One contacts in your network. If you’re making progress, you’re seeing Level Two and Level Three contacts.

In Part II I'll talk about more myths and other factors in successful search.   

Ellis

For a quick course on networking, pick up my Ebook, Networking: How to Make the Connections You Need
If you're looking for more in-depth advice on your job search, In Search of the Fun-Forever Job: Career Strategies that Work is available in paperback and Ebook. 

© Jpldesigns | Dreamstime.com

                       

When I’m analyzing a client’s or student’s career transition, trying to create a diagnosis of what may be going wrong , I’ll take a look at several critical elements:

• Are there two or three clearly defined targets?  How were these chosen?
  

• Are there well-designed pitches for these targets that will establish the value and unique qualities of the job seeker?

• Is his/her networking leading to contacts with decision makers?
  

• Are networking meetings resulting in new information, a reinforced or new relationship, and new potential contacts?  
  

• If interviews have taken place, is there a problem getting to the subsequent rounds? 
  

It is the last item on this checklist that is one of the most difficult to figure out. The job seeker is getting interviews, which is usually the most difficult part of the process. That means all the other components are working, indicating that what I consider to be the toughest aspects, especially relationship-building, have been successful. And she or he is getting past the first round of interviews, also a tough obstacle. 

Getting to the next round

I think the interview is generally the easiest part of the career transition process to fix. 

Learning how to answer the difficult questions, how to present well, how to actively listen and respond accordingly are more mechanical and direct than the somewhat amorphous nature of building networks. 

But something goes wrong when the applicant doesn’t get past that second round. Sometimes it’s pure chemistry, and sometimes it’s just not a good match. It can also be luck of the draw, perhaps even the timing of the interview. And, too often, it’s impossible to figure out what didn’t work; prospective employees end up trying to read tea leaves, endlessly.  

When the process ends after the second or third round (or later), I will ask a client or student to tell me details of all of the interviews. What I’m particularly interested in is – what was the difference in substance and tone between the second and third rounds or between subsequent ones? 

Where job seekers go wrong

In a majority of situations that haven’t worked, I have learned that the applicant’s tone has changed.

The problem, then, might be one of two issues that occur in the advanced stages of an interview process. First, there’s the sales notion of “closing the deal.” In other words, pitch and sell hard. Be more direct. Change tone and be more assertive.

Don’t. 

I usually advise job seekers to maintain the same tone that got them there in the first place. If an applicant gets past the initial screen, it means a representative of the organization feels it’s a good fit, stylistically and substantively. So why change in the next – or the one after that - round?

I think it’s important to stay the same throughout the process, continue being the person they thought was a good fit at the beginning. The only thing that should change, perhaps, is adding more “war stories,” more behavioral examples of accomplishments. 

The other potential problem in advanced rounds is an assumption that it’s “in the bag,” so acting like it’s a done deal, with confidence, will reinforce the interviewer’s positive perception.

Don’t.

Never assume anything. The selling nature of interviewing should be continued throughout the entire hiring process, including negotiations. It doesn’t stop. Not even when a decision-maker indicates that you’re the lead candidate. (How many times have job seekers heard that one, and then never heard from the person again?) The tone should stay the same, and the selling should continue.

What works

For as long as I can remember, I’ve advised people in career transition to always stick to my version of President Kennedy’s often-quoted inaugural speech, “Ask not what the organization can do for you; rather, ask what you can do for the organization.” That should be the focus of all interviews, and especially the later ones. With no change of tone. 

Ellis

For a quick course on networking, pick up my Ebook, Networking: How to Make the Connections You Need
If you're looking for more in-depth advice on your job search, In Search of the Fun-Forever Job: Career Strategies that Work is available in paperback and Ebook. 

© Airdone | Dreamstime.com

I started to notice around 10-15 years ago that many organizations were taking much longer to hire. It was especially noticeable right after recessions in 2001-2002, and again in 2008-2009.

The big investment banks were an exception to that change--long, involved interview situations have been part of their hiring process for years.

In general, though, what used to be 2-3 rounds of interviews at most organizations somehow has evolved into 5-6. Gradually, more hurdles have been introduced into the equation. Assessments. Interviews with potential subordinates. Group interviews. Initial phone screens (more and more common). Delays. Lack of response. All resulting in a much longer process.  

I'm not sure that the increased hurdles have yielded better results, but one thing is certain--organizations are afraid of making hiring mistakes, and want to try to guarantee a successful hiring process. Yes, it's expensive to hire the wrong candidate, but it’s not yet clear whether the new, extended interviewing has guaranteed the desired results.  

Unfortunately, job seekers will encounter these labyrinthine processes more often than not, and it's important to try to get through them by avoiding some of the pitfalls.  

Let's take a look at a few possible steps you might face in a protracted process:

• Group interviews
  

Group interviews are tough. You never know whether to address the questioner or behave as if the interview is supposed to be a performance for an audience.

I always think it better to address your answers to the person who asks the question. That way you can avoid the anxiety of having to perform for a group; the others in the group will hear the response, too. Responses to individuals are also more personal.

• Interviews with potential subordinates
  

Interviews with potential subordinates are tricky. You're always wondering whether the subordinate has already applied for the same job and been turned down (and may be a political problem later on). Or, you're thinking you need to impress with your command of the situation.

I think the best way to handle this kind of interview is to treat it the same way you would treat any other interview situation. Be prepared with those war stories that are addressed in the interview chapter of The Fun-Forever Job ("Would You Please Remove Your Blouse?"), to demonstrate that you know what you're talking about, and you've done your due diligence on the organization.

• Phone screens

I recommend what my senior sales clients have suggested, which is to have some scripted bullets in front of you, so that you don't go too far off target (time is limited and you want to make best use of it). Use a headset, so you can gesture, which adds energy to your phone manner. Stand up and walk around, which will add some depth to your voice. Don't worry about not getting much feedback; few phone screens yield any significant feedback, and you can't read the body language. Just accept that, and realize it's more typical to walk away from the interview not knowing anything than feeling optimistic about it.  

• Delayed response
  

I think it's an unwritten law that hiring managers and/or human resources professionals will not respond when they say they will.

I can think of many reasons for this, but it's important to understand it's not usually about you; it's about not being able to get a decision together from many decision-makers. Or a requisition signed. Or funding secured. Or a person terminated (sounds awful – but that's frequently the case). So the applicant ends up reading tea leaves, endlessly ruminating and interpreting the signs, which is rarely useful, while sitting by the phone or at the computer.

My general thinking is you never let more than 5-10 business days go by without reaching out. A simple email or phone call restating your interest, or restating what a great fit this job is--and why, and a request about the status of the situation. At this point, I love to ask my clients or students, what do you have to lose? Ego can’t be that important anymore. You just want an answer.

Years ago, when I was doing heavy recruiting at a large bank, if I didn't hear from a prospective employee, I would assume the person had lost interest, or found another job. So what's the harm in expressing interest, in a low-key manner? No desperation, of course, and no accusations of "You said you'd call me…"  Bottom line--be proactive.  

Here's where you'll need to do some juggling. Be proactive but don't try to "close the deal." Closing the deal means a change of behavior. That's the exact opposite of what should be done. If you've been asked back several times, that means they're interested. Why change your tactic? Be the same adorable, charming, brilliant person you were all along, because that's the person they've asked back--not the person who changes tone and becomes someone different (the deal closer). There is an old baseball adage that applies here: Dance with what brung ya. In other words, use the same strategy that got you that far.  

Assessment seems to be gaining some traction in some companies. That's a topic for a whole other blog. Tricky issue. 

You need to stay steady through all these steps, maintaining a consistent tone and building your value by showing what you can do for "them." I hope most readers won't have to go through all these steps, and can get to a decision with maybe two rounds. But it's always good to be prepared. 


ID 38259988 © Prudencio Alvarez | Dreamstime.com

One of the tougher aspects of career transition is explaining any gaps in a work history. Some interviewers, or those on the other side of an informational meeting, will frequently get hung up on gaps in employment, as though you’ve committed some kind of criminal activity. Others will ask, because they simply don’t know how to interview very well, and are focusing on resume issues more than skills or experience. They need something – anything – to talk about. Some may want to find out of if there are any problems in the work history, occasionally a more logical reason for such questioning. 
These gap questions usually fall under the “Why are you looking?” category, and the other person might think that any gap is a problem – just because. Either way, you need to have good responses prepared for all the contingencies. Normally, I think that this is one of those issues that’s better dealt with on a one-on-one advising basis, but here are some general thoughts about possible explanations for gaps: 

Left a Job – Why?

If a potential employer, or anyone else involved in your transition, doesn’t understand today’s work climate well (or, for that matter, the past 30 years or so), they may think that anyone who changes jobs, or who has left a job either voluntarily or involuntarily, is tarnished goods. Unfortunately, there have been way too many bad pieces in the media about this false notion, even in well-reputed media outlets. 

The notion is ridiculous. The facts are that nearly everyone will have made changes in employment during their work lives, and frequently several. Not just career moves, but career changes, too. There is no need to feel defensive, even if you were terminated for poor performance or a bad fit. You’re now in marketing mode, and there’s no room for negatives. There’s always a substantive way to market yourself effectively. It’s important to understand that part of the cultural norm now is to make changes, whether or not the person sitting on the other side of the desk understands that. 

The key is to never be negative about the former employer. By saying that, for instance, the organization was badly run, or that your boss was insane or just garden-variety narcissistic (unfortunately, very common), or that the organization had terrible financial difficulties, the takeaway for the other person, somehow, is that YOU are the negative one, that you are the one who is associated with the negative connotation. That’s not the brand you want. 

You didn’t leave the job for a new challenge; that’s like announcing you’ll leave the next one for the same reason. You didn’t leave for more money or better work conditions (although these may be true). You left for better reasons. 

Your reason for leaving statement should be something along the lines of your having left due to your wanting to more fully utilize what you have learned over the course of your career, and that the opportunity didn’t exist with your former employer. Again, this is something that needs to be crafted on a more personal basis, but I wanted to give just an idea here. There are many variations on this theme.  What you want to accomplish is a positive, logical reason for wanting to make a change. Whether it was your choice or not. You want that reason to make you look good. 

Of course, if an entire division was laid off or there was a restructuring of some sort, or if you worked at Bear Stearns or Lehman Brothers in 2008, then just say it. But also say that it was a huge disappointment because you liked your job a lot, liked the organization, and had the opportunity to . . . (and here’s where you get to pivot into a couple of quick accomplishments). 

Period of Unemployment

“You seem to have been out of work for several months. What’s the problem?” 

Yup, that one gets asked frequently. I don’t think it’s a particularly useful interview question, that it’s designed to put the interviewee on the spot, which is never a great way to conduct an interview, but - it does get asked. Way too often. 

Seriously, is a long period of unemployment indicative of anything other than either a difficult or, even, a bad search? Being bad at search, or being unlucky, or being discouraged, or somewhat stuck in a contracting industry – all of these may be the real reasons. Do these disqualify you from great opportunities? I don’t think so. 

But, since we’re in self-marketing mode, we need to explain this more positively.  How about making it appear that the too-long period of search was somewhat by design? Why not “I am working hard on a daily basis to make sure that I make an intelligent decision for my next move. A great fit is critical to me, and if it takes time, so be it.” That makes you look good, that you’re serious and deliberate about your career plans, and hey, it may even be somewhat true, too.

One more thing – it is NOT a stigma to be unemployed. It’s just part of the work process, and has been so for a long time now. Get over it. Don’t let it effect how people perceive you. 

Consulting

Maybe you’ve been consulting, either by design or as a stop gap during your period of unemployment. While some will say “I’ve been consulting” is somewhat of a cliché, be prepared to back it up with evidence of your building skills during this period. 

If you’ve actually chosen to consult, maybe for years, prospective employers will be suspicious of your wanting to return to a more traditional job.  They may be concerned that you’ve hit a rough time, and are only planning to return to the “job job” for a limited period, just to get back on your feet – and then leave to consult again.

So when you’re asked about why you don’t want to consult anymore, you can state that you’ve had a great experience, had the opportunity to . . . (and here’s yet another opportunity to talk about gained skills and experience). But, you miss the ability to work on a larger team, brainstorm, and have a wider array of resources to be able to do larger scale work. As a consultant, you feel sometimes isolated, and sometimes an outsider, and you miss being part of an ongoing group that sees a strategy through to completion. 

Family Medical/Childcare/Personal/Personal Medical

If you’ve had a family medical situation and needed to take an extended time off, or a personal or medical situation, or took off time to help raise children, none of these should be problems to explain. The only problem is when you feel defensive about it, or are uncomfortable explaining. Have a response prepared, and make sure it’s confident and assertive. You’re in charge of your situation. 

With medical situations, state that there was a personal/medical situation that you needed to deal with, that it’s over and resolved, and that you’re ready to return to work. Period. No details, no emotion, matter of fact. 

The children issue is sometimes trickier. While it’s illegal in the US to ask questions about having children, it does become important to explain a large gap in the work history by discussing having had children. It’s important to pre-empt the possible questions about childcare by offering your plan for childcare, that it’s several layers deep (babysitter/nanny/mother-in-law/sister/husband/cousin) and that there will never be issues about coverage, and will not affect your work in the least. You’re confident about this and you state this with no reservation. Don’t wait for it to be asked. 

Clearly, the gap questions will need to be tailored to each job seeker’s particular story. What I wanted to show here is that they can be addressed. I’ve rarely encountered situations that couldn’t be dealt with effectively. 

To find answers to your questions on job search and career transition, get your copy of In Search of the Fun-Forever Job: Career Strategies that Work

© Masterofall686 | Dreamstime.com

A Case

Nicole was a superstar marketer in media. She had it all. Social media, the quantitative/research background/great work history/product knowledge/branding, you name it. You just couldn’t be any more qualified for the position for which she was interviewing. That became obvious to me after about ten minutes of our first meeting. 

She did extremely well on the interviews for a job as Chief Marketing Officer of a major well-known organization, one of the leaders in its field. It sounded to both of us like a job that would make her career.

And she was terrified about dealing with the impending offer. Her inclination was to accept whatever was offered, because she was convinced that the CEO would renege if she even questioned any aspect of the offer.

We went through the basics (outlined in much more detail in the chapter of In Search of the Fun-Forever Job: Career Strategies that Work that deals with salary negotiations). 

• First, she deferred conversation about money as long as she could, thereby building her value more than she could have if she had talked about it up front.

• Second, she did not negotiate at the point of offer, because she needed to develop a negotiating strategy based on hearing the details of the offer.

• Third, she developed a step-by-step strategy for a collegial face-to-face negotiation with the CEO and the head of human resources. Every issue she had questions about was incorporated into her list. She pushed back mostly on bonus issues, because the word “discretionary” was used, and that’s almost always a red flag; she was seeking a clearer definition of what that meant.  She did get that clarification, which was a major part of the negotiation in her case.

She did very well in the overall process, and, frankly, was astonished that the CEO and human resources people did not even flinch when she pushed back. They, as I had predicted, had expected it.

Almost invariably, those who extend offers do expect some pushback, some negotiation. Actually, they are surprised if the offer is accepted on the spot. 

Nicole did not need for them to be her friends; this was a business transaction where she was trying to be compensated for her significant potential value to the organization. 

By the way, she’s now in line for the CEO position. The company is obviously thrilled with her.

If she had not negotiated assertively, she would have ended up unhappy in the position when she found out she was underpaid-–and she wouldn’t have clarified the bonus issue.  There were several other issues, too, that were clarified in the final phase of the process, as the result of a well thought-out strategy.  

I can’t wait to work with her on the next negotiation. 

Is There a Gender Difference?

For many years, I’ve been thinking about the issue of women and negotiating--or, as I like to call it, “making the ask.” While it’s important to be careful about stereotyping and generalizations, this seems to be one of those issues that appears and re-appears with my women clients and students, and hasn’t seemed to change much in the 30+ years I’ve been working in career advisement. 

In general, most of the women I’ve worked with have had difficulty in salary negotiations, performance reviews, and marketing themselves assertively.

I have tried hard to figure out why. I’ve found this to be true even with fulltime female MBA students in elite business schools, a population which you would expect to be more assertive and confident than most. Think about it – 26-year-old women (who grew up in an era where women can reasonably expect to do well in nearly any profession, including those on Wall Street) who have excelled in top colleges, done very well in their first jobs, and been admitted to extremely selective graduate schools, where the competition is fierce. 

Yet, when I teach classes on salary negotiations, I find that the women in the class almost uniformly will say this subject is difficult for them. Most of the men won’t. (Of course, there are exceptions to each side.)

Why does this problem exist? I’ve been trying to figure it out for a long time. Historically, culturally, psychologically, any way one could look at it. Is it because most women tend to be more relationship oriented and, therefore, more invested in caring that others like them? Maybe. 

I’ve often noticed that my women clients are usually better at building long-term networking relationships–-but when it comes to direct self-marketing, there’s still a problem. They’re frequently more comfortable joining groups in the career transition process, too. But still, taking credit and expressing confidence about accomplishments is often difficult. So I work with them on getting past worrying about whether the other person in the transaction is going to like them, or might withdraw the offer if they push back. 

Hey, it’s business! If you’re logical and present your material in a sequential, organized, factual way, that’s what will count. 

I’m convinced it’s some kind of hard-wiring , maybe cultural, maybe biological, maybe both, but that’s not my area of expertise. (Far from it.) 

If There IS a Difference, What Are Some Coping Strategies?

What many clients have asked is-–how can they overcome these feelings of discomfort in self-marketing and/or negotiating? 

I do have a fairly simple way of at least beginning this process. 

Prepare, Practice, Perform

I think this issue is similar to the problem of anxiety about interviewing. And, as with interviewing, it doesn’t matter how you feel; it matters what you say and what you look like when you say it. In other words, performance. Acting. You don’t have to solve the anxiety problem. You have to create stronger perceptions. That requires some performance practice. 

When talking about yourself, either in an interview, or a performance review, a meeting, or a salary negotiation, instead of getting anxious about whether you’re really worth it, why not prepare for these situations by outlining what you want to say and rehearsing it (back to the acting again)? If it doesn’t come naturally, do what I tell many introverted clients to do on a search-–prepare. Outline. And then prepare again. Don’t wing it. Don’t think you have to overcome whatever that hard-wiring is all at one time. Figure out what you want to say, how to say it, and practice it.

The first major step is believing that you have significant accomplishments, that you are worth the money and/or the job and/or the promotion, and write down all the reasons. Review your resume. You probably already spent too much time on it anyway, so put it to some good use. Yes, you did that. Yes, you helped the organization achieve that. Yes, you have this skill and that skill. 

Just in case I haven’t stressed the importance of asserting yourself (and “pushing back”) in the situations mentioned, here’s one more reason for negotiating. It sets the tone for your employment, should the deal be completed. You will make it known that, for salary reviews, promotions, etc., you will be a force to be dealt with.You will not be the nice person who will roll over and watch the more assertive co-workers get the promotion or get more bonus compensation, or new responsibilities.  Management will know that you will push back to get what you’re entitled to. 
Stand in front of the mirror and watch your body language when you’re saying your planned responses. Shoulders back, smiling, great eye contact, confidence (even if you don’t feel it). 

I realize that the above is basic, that many will still want to overcome the inner anxiety, or the need to please. In the meantime, while you’re trying to solve all that, why not focus on the performance and the content? 

© Chris Boswell | Dreamstime.com

Labor Day Thoughts

To most of the US, Labor Day is supposed to be a celebration of labor.  

To those in career transition, it's something entirely different. It can involve several thoughts, including: "Uh oh, time to get re-booted on the search," or "I can't believe I fell into the trap of stopping my efforts for the summer” or "Now I can REALLY get serious, because it's September and that's when things get going again."

I don't want to spend space here admonishing those who fell into the trap of thinking summer or holiday times aren't good times to look for employment. It's quite the opposite, because those times are actually great networking times.

But enough of looking backward (although we will keep this in mind when the November/December holidays approach).  

How to move forward? Statistics show that October/November/December (yes, December) are great hiring months.

For those who think they're going to go gangbusters into a post-Labor Day hiring frenzy, think again. Lots of people are returning from vacation; what are the odds they all would want to be approached immediately? I think September is a great time for researching, building networks, and preparing for a full-out campaign in the last quarter. (January is the same kind of month as September.)

Of course, these are all generalizations, and there are plenty of exceptions. But, my main recommendation is to take your time building those high-touch relationships in September, and don’t expect a flood of immediate positive results. This process is a slow-building one, and if you did indeed take off a lot of time in the summer, consider September as a gradual restart.  

After that, don't let up, ever, for the holiday periods. Losing momentum is hard, and it's even harder to regain it. Discipline and consistency are key components for successful search.  

To make your restart a little easier, the ebook edition of In Search of the Fun-Forever Job: Career Strategies that Work is on sale through September 2nd.

You can find it on Amazon, Smashwords, Apple*, Kobo*, Nook*, and Diesel*.

The paperback edition is also being offered at 25% off.

*If the sale price is not yet reflected on these channels, please purchase through Amazon or Smashwords.

Happy Labor Day!

And good luck with your search.

© Somartin | Dreamstime.com