What's more important - The absolute right person at a high price or the seemingly-right person at a low price?
Until a few weeks back, I kept meeting people who thought my resume was great, met and liked me, but as soon as I quoted a figure, they inferred I was an over-priced mess, who was looking at myself with rose-tinted glasses. Although various consultants kept assuring me I wasn't. Me was not convinced. It had now become a matter of self-confidence to test whether I truly was over-priced/ messed/ had a rose-tinted view of myself. So I changed tactics, I stopped answering the rhetorical question -What's your expected CTC? Did this help? You bet!
People actually looked at the brain and personality behind the resume and liked it. I was considered a good fit with organisations. I started progressing to the second, third, final rounds and then the offers started pouring in.
This turn of events actually led me to speculate over my performance in these various meetings. The one and only thing that I had done differently in these vis-a-vis the earlier set was come without a price tag. So is that the only thing which matters to companies today? Is your expectation in terms of cost to the company the only qualifying factor for getting a job? Does the age-old HR theory of 'getting the right person for the job' no longer apply? Or is the theory now being changed to 'gearing the person right for the job'?
The answer is yes and no. I spoke to one of my friends who has been working in the HR sphere since quite a while and she said that the one reason why India survived the recession was because companies all over the country followed one principle -'Do more with less'. So now, post recession, companies argue that if we can operate comfortably with less, why invest more? That would be bad business decision making. Basically hold your fist tight until and look at optimum utilisation of resources. The dictionary defines cannibalization as the use of a machine as a source of spare parts for another similar machine. According to me, the 'doing more with less' strategy of companies is actually an extension of this term, only the machine in question is human. So we can in effect redefine it as the use of one person on a job as a source of talent for other similar jobs.
Problem is in a country like ours, with a constantly growing population -one which is young, educated and ready to pitch in - no matter what, there will always be takers for this scenario. In short, there are a lot of 'right people' for the job, and among those, it is only the ones who can be 'geared right' (read work more for less) who are given preference. Talent, you see, is in abundance after all in India.
This brings up another query - If doing more for less is the new mantra - then how is it that people in a city like Mumbai - where there is no dearth of talent - are getting paid outrageous salaries? I know at least ten people in my personal circle of friends who are my age and drawing a package which runs in 7 digits!! Despite this I am considered outrageous when I come with a price tag?
My speculation did result in a conclusion. Getting a job is like marketing a gourmet meal. You have to have a tasting round along with an appealing presentation of the food- minus the price label. Get the taste buds of the audience titillated to an extent, where they realise that quality matters, the food is actually speaking for itself and even if it turns out to be expensive it will be worth it. And believe me, even if there are numerous dhabas and roadside stalls serving amazing food, there is always an audience who appreciates the luxury of gourmet, as long as you present it right.
So bottom line, get the companies to give you a chance to prove that you are worth it. Chances are when they realise that fact, they will respect your talent and not ask you to come cheap. In other words you don't really have to practice 'Gadha Mazdoori' or in the Queen's language - Donkey Labour!
Until a few weeks back, I kept meeting people who thought my resume was great, met and liked me, but as soon as I quoted a figure, they inferred I was an over-priced mess, who was looking at myself with rose-tinted glasses. Although various consultants kept assuring me I wasn't. Me was not convinced. It had now become a matter of self-confidence to test whether I truly was over-priced/ messed/ had a rose-tinted view of myself. So I changed tactics, I stopped answering the rhetorical question -What's your expected CTC? Did this help? You bet!
People actually looked at the brain and personality behind the resume and liked it. I was considered a good fit with organisations. I started progressing to the second, third, final rounds and then the offers started pouring in.
This turn of events actually led me to speculate over my performance in these various meetings. The one and only thing that I had done differently in these vis-a-vis the earlier set was come without a price tag. So is that the only thing which matters to companies today? Is your expectation in terms of cost to the company the only qualifying factor for getting a job? Does the age-old HR theory of 'getting the right person for the job' no longer apply? Or is the theory now being changed to 'gearing the person right for the job'?
The answer is yes and no. I spoke to one of my friends who has been working in the HR sphere since quite a while and she said that the one reason why India survived the recession was because companies all over the country followed one principle -'Do more with less'. So now, post recession, companies argue that if we can operate comfortably with less, why invest more? That would be bad business decision making. Basically hold your fist tight until and look at optimum utilisation of resources. The dictionary defines cannibalization as the use of a machine as a source of spare parts for another similar machine. According to me, the 'doing more with less' strategy of companies is actually an extension of this term, only the machine in question is human. So we can in effect redefine it as the use of one person on a job as a source of talent for other similar jobs.
This brings up another query - If doing more for less is the new mantra - then how is it that people in a city like Mumbai - where there is no dearth of talent - are getting paid outrageous salaries? I know at least ten people in my personal circle of friends who are my age and drawing a package which runs in 7 digits!! Despite this I am considered outrageous when I come with a price tag?
My speculation did result in a conclusion. Getting a job is like marketing a gourmet meal. You have to have a tasting round along with an appealing presentation of the food- minus the price label. Get the taste buds of the audience titillated to an extent, where they realise that quality matters, the food is actually speaking for itself and even if it turns out to be expensive it will be worth it. And believe me, even if there are numerous dhabas and roadside stalls serving amazing food, there is always an audience who appreciates the luxury of gourmet, as long as you present it right.
So bottom line, get the companies to give you a chance to prove that you are worth it. Chances are when they realise that fact, they will respect your talent and not ask you to come cheap. In other words you don't really have to practice 'Gadha Mazdoori' or in the Queen's language - Donkey Labour!
No comments:
Post a Comment