Rants
Questions
Soapbox
Best Practices
Apply today for a FREE subscription to CIO Magazine!
Fri, Jun 27, 2008 16:19 EDT

|
Posted by: Mark Cummuta in Best Practices Topic: Personal ManagementBlog: CIO Job Search: A Real Life Chronicle
Current Rating: |
I've had three people in a month comment their concern about my blogging's impact on my job search. Now I'm concerned and looking to CIO Magazine's readers and fellow bloggers for your thoughts.
When I started this blog, my wife and I discussed my open style of management and communication, and agreed to apply my same style to this more public forum.
I then discussed this approach with CIO Magazine's senior editors, Meridith Levinson and Esther Schindler. They both agreed that an open and honest dialogue from a CIO in a job search was what readers of this blog wanted. And in fact, the highest reader counts have occurred when I have detailed how my job search has personally impacted my family and me.
However, I've made one concession since starting this blog. That is, after only a few weeks of writing I decided to stop listing the name of the companies I was interviewing with. I did this specifically to preserve the anonymity of these firms and the hiring managers.
Concerns:
The first instance of concern was brought by a hiring manager in a face-to-face interview. After 3 rounds of prior interviews, in which either positive or zero comments were made about my posts, the hiring manager noted a concern that perhaps I was interviewing with them in order to get an angle or "scoop" for a new post.
I was floored by the question, and more so by the directness of the assumption of my character. When I asked if the manager had read my articles, the reply was "a few". I reassured them that in fact this firm was a company that I was targeting as one of my top choices in the area, and listed several reasons why. I also assured them that I do not ever shop for interviews solely to write about the experience. Ultimately, a few days later, I was declined as "over qualified". The irony is that I remain very interested in this company for lots of reasons, but I fear my writing, as a concept, is seen there as a negative rather than as a potential for positive marketing opportunities.
The second instance was someone I'd recently met, who was certain that we had actually met before. Afterwards I realized that he was confusing my writings with my more well known cousin, John Cummuta, who writes and speaks extensively on personal finances. He obviously didn't like my cousin's financial advice, because he laid into me. At the time, though, since he was deriding articles and blog posts, with only a rare reference to finances, I assumed he was referring to my posts where I talk about the finances of a job search. It didn't accur to me until later that I wasn't his intended target. But, even then, the point I took away from this onslaught was how name recognition can be a two-edged sword.
The third instance was from a networking contact whose opinions I have come to trust and value. Further, he is a fellow blogger within the IT blogosphere. He commented to me recently that perhaps my open communication in these posts might be scaring prospective employers away. This could be like the hiring manager above who did not want to be the subject of a pre-directed article, or perhaps from a cultural perspective that does not see or value such openness in its executive ranks.
My immediate reaction was that I write with the same openness as my management style. The vast majority of my
I get it. My style is also to be open. I have never considered it a hinderence to be open and to publish lessons learnt or difficulties encountered. I guess there are paranoidals everywhere and certainly within our industry. Keep on blogging and keep it real.
Stratetect,
Thank you for your comment, and for reading these posts!
Since I accepted this role to act as a mentor-at-large and CIO-market-winds-tester, I realized that an open diary, at least to some degree, was what I signed up. And I certainly understood that some people would be put off by that openness, just as some opposing management styles can create team friction. But understanding differences in management styles and anticipating in theory how this might play out, are very different from having someone question your authenticity at best, and at worst, your integrity. Maybe I was too naive, but I didn't expect that.
Then again, now that I saw that happen, by sharing it, we are now all the wiser to the potential and can prepare for it for next time. And that's really the point of these articles!
So again, thank you for your positive comment!!! I'm still planning on blogging about my experiences, about what works and what doesn't work in the current market, and ultimately, when I find my next great team opportunity.
Mark Cummuta
Mark...I think the difference is the distinction between verbal and written communication. I'm nauturally very direct and to the point. When in verbal communciation I can modify this approach based on the intended audiance. With my written communication I have to be somewhat more guarded as I'm never sure who will read my writing. I'm only 34 but learned long ago that I need to better manage perceptions based on my communication style. Not that I'm changing who I am or the message, I'm just communicating with others in a fashion that is more comfortable to them. Overall I like your posts.
ZooCrew,
Very good point! And in fact, I do the same time. As a presenter I have to take into account who my audience is, and modify my presentation accordingly. This happened just a few weeks ago when I was asked to be a speaker to the International Society of Six Sigma Professionals (ISSSP.com), at their annual leadership conference in Phoenix.
I had prepared my presentation based on who I understood the audience to be. But the night of my flight to the conference, and less than 24 hours before my presentation, I spoke with a prior speaker to this same group. I learned that a critical assumption of mine was wrong, and I ended up rewriting the entire presentation.
I apply the same audience evaluation and presentation techniques to these articles. Further, I then review my posts with my toughest critics first - my family. And then, to doubly make sure I'm not swinging at the wrong pitch, CIO.com's wonderful editors make sure I stay focused on the intended audience.
Like you, my message and I remain the same, although I strive to communicate that message in the easiest and best medium possible for my audience.
Thank you very much for your thoughts and for taking the time to share them with me!
Mark Cummuta
There are two possible intentions for being an open communicator. The first is to do so as a general strategy, as a way of expressing who you are. The second is to do so because it best achieves a goal in a given situation.
The first is an expression of self; it suits those who want to be perceived in a certain way; it is a style that works for writing columns especially with female editors, although that is a probabilistic likelihood and not a certainty.
The second is what employers are probably looking for in interviews: (a) because they are often men and more conservative (again, a probabilistic generalization) (b) because that is more appropriate in a workplace because you want a manager who can use a style to suit a situation rather than apply a general style to all situations.
The other problem in writing columns with such an open style is 'letting it all hang out'. But interviewing--and business in general--is a competitive sport in which the standard has long been defined to be that you volunteer only your best side and leave it to the employer to winkle out, as best they can, any weaknesses. Bringing bald honesty into the picture is like putting hurdles in your own lane of the hundred meters when nobody else has them.
It's admirable on a personal level but daft on a professional one.