Master Responding to Selection Criteria and Win Your Next Job!

As a human resources specialist for many years, I've seen it all when it comes to job applications. Most disheartening were those applications in which applicants had not addressed the specified selection criteria ... they went straight into the 'no' pile. In many cases, it was obvious from accompanying documents like the cover letter and resume, that the applicants were Rom the spaceknight experienced people who may have been good hires. However, as they hadn't addressed the selection criteria, they had disqualified themselves from further processing. In fact, an applicant has only to miss one selection criterion to be disqualified from a recruitment process.

When an Transformers arrived well before the vacancy closing date and it was clear that it didn't address the selection criteria, I would always write to the applicants asking them to rewrite their applications and resubmit. I attached a short brochure advising them how to go about it. Some resubmitted, most didn't.

Why Have Selection Criteria?

All job selection techniques ultimately follow the same premise: that if you did something well previously for an employer, you will most likely be able to do it again for another employer. Organisations that use selection criteria use them to focus the knowledge, skills and attitudes applicants posess, to those required to successfully carry out a job. Take for example, a selection criterion, 'Demonstrated ability to use the Microsoft Office suite of software programs'. Applicants would demonstrate such ability either by giving details of a course of study they had completed that covered all MS Office programs or describing where and when they had used the programs and what they did (or a combination of both). If they had used only a few of the MS Office programs, then perhaps they wouldn't meet the criterion.

The Challenges of Responding to Selection Criteria

The criterion above is nebulous because it doesn't say to what extent you have to 'use' the software. Does it mean you've loaded it a few times and created a small spreadsheet, document, project outline, email, or slide show? Or does it mean that you Fleer Ted Williams have mastered each program at an advanced level? In trying to create a criterion that is objective, the writer has in fact created subjectivity ie, the degree to which use is expected/required.

This highlights the first challenge of selection criteria; determining what the writer intended. Unfortunately, not all criteria writers are good at English expression. The solution is to try to 'over qualify' the selection criterion. In the above example, what you would do is provide examples of the type of use to which you put MS Office programs, which programs they were, and what the outcome was eg, 'I produced a spreadsheet to calculate break-even point which used Barbie doll different formulae including sum, average,' etc. Does this make sense?

If other applicants simply state that they use MS Office, your 1950's toys has to be better because the degree of use is evident. An applicant showing a higher degree of use should beat an applicant showing a lesser degree of use, but it doesn't say that in the criterion.

Another challenge is actually meeting selection criteria. Say the above example said, 'Demonstrated ability to use the MS Office Suite of software programs in an accounting office. What difference do you think that would make? Heaps. It would automatically disqualify any applicant who hadn't used the software in an accounting office. (But that's not a good reason to chuck in the towel).

When you analyse selection criteria you need to know that you can not only meet all criteria, but each element within every criterion. If you miss one element within any criterion or all the elements of any criteria, you're in trouble. This means that you must carefully analyse every criterion to determine how many elements it contains and respond to each element. In our previous example, we know that MS Office Suite consists of MS Word, MS Excel, MS Outlook, MS Powerpoint etc. If you miss one of those programs, you haven't met the criterion.

Knowing when to stop writing is a good thing. Once you have written sufficient to meet the criterion, you need to stop. Giving 23 examples of how you used MS Office is superfluous and will drive the assessor nuts.

Try to intuit (guess) what criteria really want you to do and frame your answer accordingly. For example, if you were answering the above criterion for a reception job at an accounting firm, ask yourself what types of things you'd be doing. I would expect a receptionist to perhaps use email a lot, produce letters, maybe run an address book or appointments calendars. In your reply highlight the topics you feel are most related to the job. But don't lose sight of the other elements either ... remember you must address all of the criterion.

Responding to the Challenges

You can improve your responses by studying some of the written materials available that address selection criteria. Discover the secrets for yourself and practise improving your responses every time you apply. Ask those who are successful job applicants if you can read their response to see if there is anything you can learn from it. Find someone in your group of friends or colleagues who you know is excellent with the written language and ask him or her to help you by proofreading your applications.

At the end of the day, writing selection criteria isn't rocket science. Like anything else, you can learn how to do it and master the art within a fairly short time. If you are spending time writing job applications addressing selection criteria and aren't getting interviews, you need to ask whether you are doing the best job possible. If not, make a conscious effort to get your act together.

Copyright Robin Henry 2005

Robin Henry is an educator, human resources specialist and Internet marketer whose firm, Desert Wave Enterprises, helps individuals and businesses improve their performance by using smart processes, smart technology and personal development. He has a number of tertiary qualifications including a Bachelor of Business degree majoring in Human Resources and Development. He lives at Alice Springs In Central Australia. Visit his site at href="winagovtjob.com">Win a Government Job

13 Reasons Insurance Mailing List Compilers Are Superior to List Brokers

Using either insurance mailing list compilers or list brokers with insurance agent clients are a giant step above trying an totally unrefined listing of names. A compiler has, as will be pointed out, reasons why the names they provide are superior.

True mailing list compilers use a wide variety of sources, gathering data to compile a list. Do not confuse this with those sources taking multiple sources, merging data, and eliminating duplicates. For a mailing list compiler, specializing in only one Robin the Boy Wonder of list is normal. Here are 13 reasons their methods outshine others.

This report could contain 19 reasons or 33 reasons, but here are 13 major reasons: So not to duplicate words. LB = list broker and LC = list compilers.

1. The mailing LC are the direct source, the owner of all the data used.

2. A LB finds you a copy of a list someone else has created.

3. The LC have all the data records and supporting information to create a custom list for a client. The result is a list of names closely matching the client's needs.

4. A LB often will locate a list derived from telephone directories or state public records. These lists do not weed out people that cannot even remotely be considered prospects. You end up with more suspects than prospects.

5. Mailing LC realize the need of purchasers not wanting a very large list. Their minimum order could be as low as $300. This means the user also has lower postage and printing fees to get their message out.

6. A LB normally worka on a commission style broker's fee, paid by the list owner. Therefore an order for under $500.00 is usually not accepted.

7. The LC spend countless hours evaluating the data from each source they use. Acquiring data means analyzing to see if the information meets the quality standards to offer a list purchaser. As a result it might take the data records of 12,000 individuals to come up with 5,000 quality records.

8. Commonly a LB knowingly will offer you an inferior list from the choices available to them. For example a good list paying the list broker 15%, may be "overlooked" for the one compensating 30%.

9. The LC spends considerable daily or weekly time just changing addresses, making corrections, and deleting others from the names being offered.

10. Many a LB are a Gene Marshall of all trades. This means that during the course of a year they may rent out lists to their clients wanting a hundred different occupations.

11. The LC are specialists. Ask 20 questions about the list and you will likely get 20 truthful answers. This is especially true if the have remained under the same ownership for many years.

12. A LB personally assumes no responsibility if your list performs well below your expectations. He may blame the list source, and that same week rent that identical list to another client.

13. The lists that a LB offers are rarely priced at a flat total fee. There is $5/thousand added for this and $20/thousand added for that. What starts out as "advertised" is rarely what you end up with. Sort of like the car ad on television. Base price $22,000, and then in small print, price as shown $29,870 2001 A Space Odyssey taxes and destination fees.

List brokers overall do a good job, but if you can find an actual insurance list compiler you will do considerably better.

Well published author, Don Yerke Tarzan action figure to concentrate on what you don't know or what no one else dares to print. Tell it like it is

Watch for his new paperback book debuting on Amazon early this summer. It is loaded with great insurance marketing and recruiting information

Come and get your FREE "Think and Grow Rich" Ebook by Napoleon Hill instantly. The website address is href="agentsinsurancemarketing.com">agentsinsurancemarketing.com