http://www.flickr.com/photos/pepemichelle

The news remains harsh regarding unemployment statistics. The national rate stands at just over 10%, while 11 of 50 states (a full 22 per-cent) now deal with double digit unemployment rates. Michigan, with its auto industry-heavy workforce seemingly on life support, leads the nation with 14.6% of its populace seeking work.

Californians have long experienced unemployment woes, and their jobless statistics stand at 12.1%. So when a California-based employment journal recommends that job-seekers augment their online job search with social media tools, its best to listen to their advice.

In a web-posting entitled Give your job search more direction, the California Job Journal recommends Linked-In as a mandatory job search process.

Complete a profile on LinkedIn.com and you’ve taken an important step toward creating a powerful online network. It takes, on average, 65 contacts to create a network large enough to result in substantial and meaningful findings on LinkedIn, notes Victoria Snabon-Heath, career services director at The Art Institute of Tampa. She urges jobseekers to set themselves apart from the ordinary, dime-a-dozen applicants who inundate companies on a daily basis. “Go social. Begin utilizing virtual, social marketing techniques in addition to your online job search.”

The Linked-In buzz has been present on the Internet for well over a year now, and I’ve spent the better part of the last few weeks coaxing friends and family towards the career based social network. With features allowing recommendations, quick-and-easy group establishment and membership, and question-and-answer modules, it certainly is more robust than traditional job boards, and allows for more social interactions between members.

But with all its great features, I have yet to personally hear a Linked-In success story, although a few minutes of Google research reveals a few successes.

Has anyone yet been hired thanks to their Linked-In profiles? How about consulting gigs or other employment situations. Let’s hear it in the comments if you’ve had any type of positive interaction on Linked-In, other than finding and reconnecting to lost colleagues.

Yesterday, this story about the faithful, almost Grateful Dead-like roving crowds that form a few days before the grand opening of every Chick-Fil-A in the country, floated around the social media sphere.

The crowd exists thanks to a standing offer for free meals once a week for a year, for the first hundred customers through the doors on opening day. Executives for the fast food maker developed the publicity stunt four years ago, and the resulting throngs invading the parking lots of the new restaurants take on almost cult-like status. Many people showing up for the event have been to multiple Chick-Fil-A grand opening throughout the state and region.

While the photo attached to the story showed the tents and party-like atmosphere, the gist of the story revolves around a different topic; the fact that Chick-Fil-A is closed every Sunday.

This is of particular interest to me, because I work in retail, and I almost always work on Sunday, and Sunday is always the busiest day of our week.

I used to work at a mall that had a Chick-Fil-A, and was always curious as to why they were closed on Sunday. But after a while, I began to envy those employees for the following reasons:

- They had a guaranteed day off

- They could make plans and not worry about being scheduled or rescheduled

- They were off on a day the rest of the “normal” world (family and friends) was off

- They didn’t have to deal with the throngs of Sunday shoppers

- Should they be a fan, they could enjoy football season, unencumbered

The custom of closing on Sundays began in the very first week of the company’s operations way back in 1946. In the article above, a company executive cites a story about the original owner being too tired to work on Sunday of the restaurant’s opening week. He figured if he was tired, his employees were also tired, so the Sunday rest day was born. Of course, he could do that back in 1946, because the US wasn’t quite yet the commercial, money-hungry, work-till-you-drop society that it is today. Chick-Fil-A was also just a local fast-food joint back then, a business model that had yet to ingrain itself into American Society. It would be hard to imagine the executives of a modern, corporate, fast food chain entertaining the notion of Sunday closings.

I’m not  about to quit my current gig to go fry chicken parts just so I can get Sundays off to watch football, but the practice of closing on Sunday is intriguing in today’s commercial environment. Sundays are often a retailer’s most profitable day, and those of us accepting retail employment know that Sunday shifts are part of the deal.

If you know me, and you are reading this, you probably also work on Sunday, and have experienced the Sunday madness I speak of. If you don’t know me and are reading this, you probably are one the many who don’t work on Sunday and head to the mall or other shopping centers for your material needs. Please don’t misunderstand me. I love having a job, and I am passionate about what I do at the store I work at. My company is forward thinking, and my position is about as good a retail position as any currently available.

But, a guaranteed day off sure would be a nice perk.

Oh, the amount of ink and pixel devoted to conquering the hated job interview. A search on Amazon produces 60,000 results. Need some web advice? Just google “job interview tips,” and you’ll find thousands more articles. I stopped skimming after the first 50 pages of results. What about video advice? You can easily check out any of You Tube’s 30,000 videos on the topic, you’re sure to find some good advice there.

Bloggers are also not shy about sharing interview advice; Brazen Careerist’s Penelope Trunk devotes several entries to the topic, and we won’t even discuss the amounts of magazine editorial devoted to getting you through one of life’s most uncomfortable experiences.

So, we get the picture. Job interviews are a necessary evil, and lots of people offer advice in all different media forms.  In short, interviews suck. But maybe, just maybe, interviews are unnecessary.

Fast Company magazine contributors Chip and Dan Heath (also authors of Made to Stick) recently published an interesting article regarding the ancient tradition of the job interview. Acknowledging that the power of personality can often rule a hiring decision, the article chronicles several business and pop culture examples of seemingly wonderful interviews gone bad. Their conclusions? A 30-minute interview based on a resume review is a poor indicator of whether a person is qualified for a job.

Because of the face-to-face nature of the interview format, many qualified persons have been giving the standard “not a good fit” treatment, and never see the inside of that office again. It’s sad, because there might be a more qualified person that doesn’t quite have that winning personality. The two-page article cites a real-life story about an HR type who was ready to hire someone whose interview and resume were so spectacular, she could conceivably become a new best friend. Only after testing the person on required job tasks did the interviewer find the candidate’s work subpar.

My own interview experiences mirror the Heath’s conclusions. I’ve had a few interviews, and they were horrid experiences. What made matters worse, I had a prepared portfolio of award winning work . . . . . and nothing. No call back, no second interview, maybe a form letter saying “thanks but no thanks,” in corporate speak.

So I’ll agree with the brothers Heath on their assessment. The interview is overrated, and is not a good indicator of a potential employee’s “fit” with a company. If you can find the story on the Fast Company web site (I can’t for some ungodly reason) it’s a great read.

Postlouge:

My last interview did produce a personal letter from a vice-president of HR. It contained the typical verbiage; something about finding a candidate that was a “better fit,” something about wishing me luck on my job search, official company letterhead, all the normal stuff. For our purposes here we’ll call the VP Frank Upchurch. It’s not his real name, but the initials are accurate.

Appropriately, the rejection letter sent to me didn’t require a signature, but instead was initialed. It appears though that Frank wasn’t initialing his documents that day, because it was obvious that the letters were printed by a child. At the end of the letter were a large and very unstable F and U, separated by large dots, more like globs of ink. I guess vice-president F.U. was having his kid sit on his lap when my rejection letter crossed his desk, and that child needed some practice with his/her printing technique.

Observing this on the paper, I bristled at the message being sublimly delivered to me, then chuckled a bit at the humor of it all. Oddly enough, I haven’t been on an interview since.

So, for all of you facing interviews, good luck to you all. Lets hope some of those HR types read Fast Company magazine.