Skip navigation

Reposted (url below) April 10, 2009 02:29 PM ET | Michael S. Wade | Permanent Link | Print

Michael Wade

One of the most frustrating things a job seeker can encounter is the objection that he or she is overqualified.

“What am I supposed to do?” they ask. “Hide the fact that I have ten years of experience, or that I have a graduate degree?”

Put me down on the side of the applicants.

Some employers may argue that the overqualified applicant will get bored with the less demanding or lower-paid work and soon move on. Who can deny that happens? On the other side, however, are some points that deserve more attention:

1. There may not be that big of a difference between the turnover rates of the overqualified employees (especially in this job market) and the less qualified ones. It can be better to have an experienced performer for four years than a so-so one for five.

2. The employer will have to spend less time training the seasoned employee. That’s a savings right there.

3. The more experienced/better trained employee will be producing at a high level much sooner than the less qualified counterpart and can bring some valuable insights gained from hands-on performance.

4. The overqualified employee may want to stay in a position that provides less stress and more time for the family. Not every person who was a manager or supervisor loved the experience. Many want a position that is less likely to dominate their weekends and home life.

5. There is the danger that a failure to select the overqualified applicant will be perceived as age discrimination. This depends, of course, upon the individual case, but the overqualified objection may be a cloak to hide illegal bias.

6. Having experience elsewhere does not automatically produce a reluctance to accept how things operate here. It may even carry a greater knowledge of an employer’s expectations.

In tight economic times, organizations are going to be seeing more applicants who far exceed the basic job requirements. It makes no sense for hiring departments to place a stigma on the overqualified. Doing so excludes a pool of extraordinary talent.

Michael Wade writes Execupundit.com, an eclectic combination of management advice, observations, and links. A partner with the Phoenix firm of Sanders Wade Rodarte Consulting Inc., he has advised private and public-sector organizations for more than 30 years.

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/outside-voices-careers/2009/04/10/lets-drop-the-overqualified-objection.html?goback=%2Ehom

Advertisements

2 Comments

  1. “The employer will have to spend less time training the seasoned employee. That’s a savings right there.”

    The problem is most employers don’t realize this. They concentrate on “salary savings”.

    • gerrytreuren
    • Posted April 22, 2009 at 2:47 pm
    • Permalink

    On this point, there is a really powerful paper – J. Pfeffer. 1998. ‘Six dangerous myths about pay,’ Harvard Business Review, 76(3): 109-119…superficially about the differences about pay rate and employee productivity per dollar, but more broadly about employer short-sightedness.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: