Never Apply for a Job Again!: Break the Rules, Cut the Line, Beat the Rest (20 page)

Which approach do you believe stands the best chance of a meeting with Tom? Obviously, Approach #2. Let’s discuss the reasons why.

1. Approach #1—what the vast majority of folks send out in job search mode—has “I NEED A JOB!” written overtly all over it. On the off chance that Tom might actually have a need in his department, it
might
get shuffled off to HR with a note that says, “Please screen for possible interview.” Yet, that’s on the off chance…and then you’re left with a first contact of the HR department. More often, unless a company is either growing exponentially or is an absolute hellhole where people are leaving in droves, there isn’t going to be a position currently open. In that case, under Approach #1, your resume still gets shuffled off to HR, with no note whatsoever, or may end up in a file somewhere (digital, flat, or round) to be totally forgotten.

2. Approach #1 is all about “I”—me, myself, and “I”—and each sentence begins with that most-important, personal pronoun. Joe is clearly attempting to be interesting, rather than interested. Oh sure, Joe is interested in a job…but it’s all about what he wants and needs, and he’s trying hard to sell himself because of that need. His letter offers the premise, “Do you have a job for me?” If the answer is “Possibly,” then there might be a meeting down the road, long after the gauntlet of HR processing, initial screening, and so on. If the answer (more likely) is “No, not right now,”
then, again, this overture is quickly forgotten in some file.

3. Approach #2 presents a valid interest in a subject/topic of common interest: the tapping of wind energy in the area. Having a research project forces Rita to be interested rather than interesting…and the more detailed and granular she can present her research project, the more it has legs to warrant a legitimate information-gathering campaign that Tom might be willing to participate in. In other words, a broad general interest in green energy is less likely to capture the enthusiastic attention of Tom than a specific, in-depth interest in “the new technologies being adapted to wind turbines in the Central Valley.” The more specific your research, the more credible it is perceived as simply research.

4. Rita’s language in Approach #2 sets up Tom as an expert in his field, and his company as the leader in the industry. She attempts to have him feel that he’s the only person on the planet who could give her the information she needs. She appeals to something we all have: ego. This is not to say that shameless sucking up will get Tom to “hold all calls” just for Rita, but notice that the little flavor of expert ego-stroking creates a more attractive approach to requesting a meeting.

5. In Approach #2, Rita actually disclaims that she expects Tom to have a job for her, or to know of one, which addresses that little voice speaking in the back of his head wondering
just that. He definitely doesn’t want to be put in an uncomfortable position to be hit up for a job he may not have, so this takes the pressure off…allowing him to simply consider whether he has the time to be helpful in her quest for information. He may or may not have the time, but there’s a much stronger chance he’ll offer it if he can squeeze it in knowing that he is just being contacted for information. Notice the subtlety that Rita employs by not referring to her enclosure as a “resume” as Joe did, but rather, her “pertinent information.” Tom would naturally want to know a bit about the person contacting him, but the word “resume” takes the mind in a different direction.

6. In Approach #2, Rita asks for only five to 10 minutes, whereas Joe is setting Tom up for what could be a lengthy and cumbersome interview process if he accepts. Frankly, Tom doesn’t have any extra time, but if followed up with, poked, prodded, and engaged by phone a bit, he might cough up five to 10 minutes for Rita. Truth be told, if Rita follows the meeting format I’m going to share with you in Principle #8, “The 5 Stages of a Stealth Interview,” she’ll be there for more than an hour…and he’ll be tickled that she came by!

Clearly, Rita rules the roost when it comes to the chance of meeting Tom at EcoFan. But does that mean, because she wrote a better letter, that Tom will immediately jump on the phone and call her in? No! Again, he’s a very busy guy. But if Rita begins a consistent and steady follow-up process after
this letter—and all the other letters sent out to even more “only-person-on-the-planet” folks in this industry—she’ll eventually meet with a good percentage of them.

I keep stating “letter” rather than e-mail…but it’s all the same, right? Nope! Unless your target expert is someone you know personally, it is best to approach them in a formal letter rather than an e-mail.

Given the flood of e-mails we all receive daily, you don’t want to be mentally associated with the angst of the inbox: the pervasive feeling that there are so many folks to get back to, so many items to address, and so on. The last thing you want is for your Approach Letter to end up buried under a bunch of other unresolved issues.

Plus, in a world of so much daily technological communication—e-mails, instant messages, social network posts and tweets, texts—a formal letter actually makes you stand out and be noticed. Think about it: Nobody sends letters anymore! So a physical letter actually makes itself known on someone’s desk and must be dealt with, versus their bustingat-the-seams e-mail inbox.

Lastly, a formal letter is simply an elegant, old-world gesture that carries a bit of class with it if you do it correctly (proper grammar, spelling, punctuation, formatting—get a friend to check it!).

CareerGuy Tip: In today’s technology-based communications world, to stand out, mail a letter.

A research-based stealth method takes time and effort, an organized approach, and follow-up. Such planned approaches net you more of what you seek in any area of life. The spaghetti approach of throwing it all against the wall (blasting out resumes and “I Need a Job!” cover letters all over creation) and seeing what sticks may be easier…but far less fruitful.

A traditional, overt approach might eventually get you a job, but at nowhere near the pace, salary, and informational value that operating stealth provides—and definitely nowhere near the enjoyment of exploration. Plus, through overt search, you end up in any job where someone says, “Okay then, I guess we’ll hire you.” Using a stealth approach, you avail yourself of roles and environments more truly aligned with who you are and what turns you on.

Principle #7: Eyes-to-Eyes Gets You the Prize

Your next task is to simply follow up on your Approach Letter in a timely way. That means: getting on the phone to set up a meeting with your target.

Always remember that your objective—from which you will be neither deterred nor misdirected—is to meet with your target experts personally:
NOT over the phone, by e-mail, or via a social network!
The phone, and other forms of technological communication, is an impersonal killer of effective relationship-building.

It’s true that you may connect with people electronically initially, such as through mining your social network connections. But you want to transform that initial electronic contact into a personal, face-to-face one as quickly as possible…and you do so through the Approach Letter. (NOTE:
If
, and
only if
, you’ve already connected with someone via e-mail or through a social network, then you can e-mail your Approach Letter. If not, stick to the letter.)

CareerGuy Tip: Turn your online contacts to in-the-flesh contacts to create effective stealth relationships.

A case could be made that you are conducting a research project that could legitimately be discussed over the phone. But, the ultimate objective of this method is to create and maintain relationships with people so that you are someone consistently known by the people in the know. You can’t build something reliably long-term over the phone or by posting to a social network. It takes that face-to-face element to become truly embedded in people’s minds.

Therefore, from the outset, get clear on the purpose of your follow-up calls to your Approach Letter recipients. It is not to get the answers to your research project! It is specifically and only to set a meeting!

Be ready for this, because once you reach your target, that person may helpfully suggest supplying the information you need right then and there, on the phone. Avoid that at all costs and go for setting the meeting.

Realize that there are certain nuances—and even chemical reactions—that human beings experience in face-to-face encounters that you don’t want to miss, and you’ll absolutely
need
these factors working for you to establish a long-term relationship.

T
HE
M
EETING
S
ETUP

Here are seven guidelines to follow in setting up your face-to-face meetings:

1. Keep your word.

Call your targets at the time you specify in your Approach Letters (“I’ll call your office next week”) and, short of stalking, plan to keep following up until you speak to your target and set a meeting.

2. Ask to speak to your target, casually, and by first name.

Reach directly for the target (“Is Tom in?”) but be prepared to get to know others in the process. If you’re shooting high enough, you won’t always reach your target directly the first time you try. You may need to connect with his assistant…or even with the dreaded main system voicemail.

If you do reach a main system voicemail, or the specific target’s voicemail, a message as simple as, “Hi, this is Rita Researcher. I’m calling for Tom regarding some research I’m conducting. I sent in a letter and am following up. Please have him return my call at…” can generally get you a return call…at least from an assistant.

Notice that you don’t say, “Hi,
my name is
…” because that’s a dead giveaway that they have no obligation to know you. Make your follow-up call from the mindset that they
should
know you (because you sent in a letter) and with a focused intent to get the information you seek. This way of thinking will give confidence and poise to your message.

If you do speak to a gatekeeper (receptionist, administrative assistant, and so on), avoid getting into in-depth conversations and explanations as to why you’re calling. They are good people doing their job, and
your job
is to get past them.

For instance, if Tom’s assistant answers his line saying “Tom O’Malley’s office. How can I help you?”—definitely do not say, “Hi, I sent a letter into Mr. O’Malley last week about some research I’m doing and I’m wondering if he received it and could set up a time to meet me?” Too much information way too quickly! You’re just begging for interrogatories and gatekeeper nets to be thrown all over you!

This assistant is busy with a thousand things and, unless and until you call attention to yourself as someone outside of the ordinary rush of the day, she will oftentimes not notice you. “Hi, is Tom in?” or, even better, simply, “Is Tom in?” will get you way further down the road…especially if said in the casual, subdued way you would ask for your friend if another member of his family picked up the phone when you called his home.

NOTE: Make sure you’ve done a bit of research before you shorten Thomas to Tom, and don’t assume Robert is Bob either. Calling them something nobody else calls them is a surefire way to call attention to yourself! Check the website, ask the receptionist, or just listen to how the assistant refers to her boss.