“Relevant experience” – the Linkybrain conundrum
Two seemingly innocuous words, separately they are defined as follows,
Now those don’t seem to harmful on their own do they…
Even when combined they don’t appear too harmful until you add just one more word. “Lacking”
In the right hands and when combined they can mean a closed door, a denied opportunity, a return to searching and a crushing reminder that the type of experience you have is not valued or even understood.
In our continued discussion of the Linkybrain phenomenon I’m curious to explore how those who create and build connections where others see voids do what they do but one thing keeps frustrating my exploration:
Recruitment and the commercial ignorance toward the generalist.
I have yet to meet up with a number of fellow Linkybrains but I have a strong suspicion that these early meetings will involve a lot of swapping “war stories” of the ones that got away and the missed professional opportunities that resulted from it. I suspect this because I’ve been in that particular position myself more times than I care to think about.
Ive seen a thousand (literally not figuratively) variants of that phrase and I’ve come to admire the way that some in the recruitment space dance around it but what it all boils down to is,
“I dont know what to do with you”
I cant blame recruiters and I don’t doubt their intention is to perform their role to the highest level of excellence. Companies large enough to secure the services of a dedicated recruiter or those who contract agencies to locate candidates rely (for the most part) in locating a specific cog (forgive the clumsy analogy) to meet a specific need. We have created systems of industry now so complex that they have begun to mimic mechanical systems, rigid and incapable of redesign without significant overhaul.
To carry the analogy to its clumsy but relevant conclusion, you cant have a 32 tooth cog that suddenly decides its better suited to being a 40 tooth cog or even worse deciding that cogs are antiquated and sets about redesigning the whole mechanism.
I have been that cog and I have naively attempted to redesign the system because a job description asked for “creative” approaches and “innovative” solutions.
But I digress, can we re-invent corporate structure within the next year? Probably not… Can we get recruiters to see the value of Linkybrain in the short term? Maybe but doubtful… Can we find a way to communicate our value in a format that recruiters can get behind? I think we can.
I’m not talking about lying or tricking people into thinking we are cogs (of any shape and size) I’m certainly not talking about joining up with the corporate monoliths for a pay check whilst hating every moment of it. What I’m proposing (if this rambling stream of consciousness can be called a proposal) is to make a concerted effort to educate those in recruitment, advocate for better understanding of our abilities and illuminate the topic of linkybrain in as many ways as possible.
If you’ve made it to the end of this rambling rant then perhaps you too long for a better approach, a more informed recruitment space and a desire from those in a position of power to seek new ways of solving old problems.
Do what you can, talk about this outside of the growing linkybrain community and lets start to think about a new way to communicate our value.
