February 2013 Archives

I've often written about mentorship and coaching. This is a topic that is very close to me. Melissa Stanger writes in Business Insider about the three types of mentors everyone should have. She lists these:

1. A mentor about the same age as you: This is known as the peer mentorship relationship. A mentor your own age is someone you connect with and learn from, and who probably learns from you as well.
2. A mentor two to four years older than you: Someone who's been through the same thing you're currently going through can give you valuable advice -- especially if they went through it only a few years before.
3. A mentor much more senior than you: A mentor who is much older than you will have had a lot more time to reflect on issues they've seen when they were your age. If the problem you face is heated or tied to some emotion, a senior mentor has had time to distance themselves from the problem and can offer you objective advice.

It's an interesting article, and I agree that having these three types of mentors will benefit you. However, I don't prefer to specify what mentors you should have … at least, not in that way. For me, it's more important to have coaches and mentors who bring a different perspective. For example, I recommend you establish coaching relationships with mentors outside your unit—preferably, outside your organization. When you have a problem or a question, these mentors can provide a fresh perspective, unhindered by whatever is happening locally.

Around this time of year, students begin applying for internships during the summer. And as we get closer to graduation in Spring, seniors will start sending out resumes, looking for their first jobs. Over the years, I've provided resume, cover letter, and interview coaching for many students—I started doing this career coaching during my role as adviser to Triangle Fraternity and ΑΣΚ Sorority, but I've also enjoyed helping students at Morris take that next big step. It's one more way I can serve the campus.

Having been a hiring manager for many years, I've seen some great resumes, and some that are not so great. This perspective helps me suggest what other hiring managers are likely to look for in a resume. Last year, I shared recommendations to make your resume stand out, but I'd like to address common mistakes most people make on their first resume, and ways to make your resume even better.

First, let's start with an example student: Jane Q. Student is a physics major, math minor, with a 3.355 GPA. She worked at an internship during her junior-senior break, where she did research in the field of photo-voltaic (solar) cells. During her time at Morris, she found student employment writing web pages in Computing Services. And she has some additional background in the R statistical program.

Many students write very plain resumes with very little formatting. Along those lines, here's how Jane might write her first resume: (apologies if you are reading this on a mobile device—the limited screen size might make the resume hard to read)

Let's look at this resume from the perspective of a hiring manager. In this economy, the reality is that when an organization posts an open position, many qualified candidates apply for that position. Your resume not only has to communicate your skills and qualifications, but it has to do so in a way that makes it easy for the hiring manager to find the important information. In the above example, very few visual cues call out interesting information, everything has equal weight, so hiring managers will have a hard time reading the resume.

Many candidates instead organize their resume in the form of of a table (section headings down the left column and content on the right) with the goal of making information easier to find. But it doesn't really help. Here is how the same resume might be formatted as a table:

That's still pretty hard to read.

A better way is to apply selective formatting, to emphasize the important information. For example, by organizing the resume linearly instead of in a table, you can allow for extra spacing so things don't feel so squished. Using a border around headings makes it easy for a hiring manager to skim the resume for relevant skills and background. Bold, italics, and indenting help to identify where Jane worked and what she did. Here's the same resume with the new formatting

In resumes, style matters just as much as content. Simply re-formatting the resume makes it really easy to pick out important details. Any hiring manager can quickly skim the resume to see where Jane attended university and where she worked previously. Granted, styling the resume in this way may add length, but it doesn't feel padded.

Also note that the "References available upon request" has been dropped. Hiring managers assume that if they need references, you will provide them if asked. And Jane's GPA has been shortened to simply "3.3" to make it easier to parse, instead of the longer "3.355" (hiring managers don't make much distinction between a 3.355 GPA versus a 3.3 GPA). This isn't rounding the number like you usually do in math class. (On a resume, rounding up is considered dishonest.) Rather, simply drop the portion after the first decimal place. You can talk about the slightly higher GPA during the interview.

Missing from this resume is a short description of each job in the work history, so Jane should add that. When describing your work history, use short incomplete sentences, not full prose. Hiring managers understand that you are the person described in the resume; you don't have to write full sentences such as "I did this thing" or "I wrote this program." You are assumed to be the subject.

Jane might also add some extra formatting to her resume to make it look sharp. Perhaps Jane prefers a sans serif font for the body—but for readability, my preference is to use the opposite font style for the headings (sans serif instead of serif, or vice versa). Jane might also prefer a single bottom border or uppercase text in the headings. Also, consider moving dates worked to the same line as the place worked.

Some candidates prefer to use color for the headings, but for most resumes, I advise against using colors. Remember that many hiring managers will opt to print your resume instead of viewing it online—and of those who print, many will print to black & white printers. If you choose to use colors, make sure they look okay in black & white.

Also, I'll add that if you have the option to upload a resume, and you can do it in either Word or PDF, always choose PDF. Word might change formatting very slightly in different versions of Word, leading to some things spilling to another page when you don't want them to. But PDF will always look the way you want it to, no matter the platform.

Finally: before you submit your resume, proof-read it. Then proof-read it again. And ask someone else to proof-read it for you. After they are done, proof-read it one more time before you send it in. (As a hiring manager, I can't tell you the number of times I've seen huge mistakes on resumes, spelling errors, etc … your resume is an important introduction to a new employer, make it a good one.)

You may have been following the drama unfolding at Gustavus Adolphus College. First, many faculty, students and alumni became disgruntled with the president, calling for President Jack Ohle's resignation following years of similar complaints about his leadership. Reports that the president was under fire spread quickly, with the president facing revolt from his constituency. Recently, the Board of Trustees wrote to alumni expressing their support for the president, saying in part:

In these challenging times in higher education, technology and online learning are confronting the traditional methods of teaching at a residential, liberal arts college. Concerns have also been raised about rising costs in private education as it relates to the challenges being faced nationally. Despite these challenges, Gustavus continues to thrive and remains one of the top private liberal arts colleges in the United States.

By its very nature, a college campus is a diverse mix of individuals and opinions and Gustavus is no exception. It is a natural process to openly engage in civil discourse about divergent opinions in the way in which an institution of higher education is governed. The Board of Trustees, through the governance model we developed over the past few years, has been seeking more input from faculty, staff, and students to make sure the appropriate conversations and discussions are held so that the institution will continue to move forward.

As a Board, we have listened and are hearing the concerns expressed on and off campus and will continue to do so. While we know there is work to be done, we are excited about the progress of the institution under the President's leadership. Be assured that the Board and President Ohle are committed to continuing to work with all of the College's stakeholders.

While I do not claim to be intimately familiar with what's been going on at Gustavus since the president assumed office, I understand they face shrinking budgets, as has all of higher education. President Ohle appears to have initiated programs around strategic positioning, in an attempt to restructure for operational excellence at Gustavus. In these economic times, without knowing their details, that seems the right thing to do.

And Ohle also seems to have the support of the Board of Trustees, who clearly communicated that support in their letter to alumni. Bringing institutional change is difficult, and it's important to have the "air cover" from the Board. So the president has the political support from above.

But based on the reaction, it's obvious that the president did not have the support of his campus. From the Star Tribune article:

Results of a faculty survey posted on the site show that many faculty members question Ohle's priorities: investing in new buildings and public relations while cutting departments' budgets. Responses describe Ohle as a "dictator" whose "top-down leadership style drips with contempt and arrogance."

The phrase "top-down leadership style" implies that Ohle made decisions independently, and did not seek buy-in from his campus. Maybe he didn't view that as necessary. Or maybe the decisions about buildings and public relations didn't involve faculty—although department budgets certainly do. In any case, the comment about his "top-down leadership style" is a clear indicator that Ohle ignored the culture of shared campus governance. And that certainly appears to be the case, from my reading of the news coverage.

So what can other campus leaders learn from Gustavus? This is a perfect case example of the three lenses of leading through change:

1. Strategic
2. Political
3. Cultural

I try to use the three lens approach as my benchmark in bringing any change to my campus. This method has helped to shape how I communicate about a change, serving as a reminder to consider how the change addresses the strategies, politics, and culture of my audience. Of the three, the most important lens is "Cultural." You can be doing the right thing (Strategic) and have the right people behind it (Political) but if you don't respect how people think and act (Cultural) then your change will be sunk. Every. Single. Time.

In this case, Ohle seems to have been working to reposition the campus for the right reasons (Strategic) and had the full support of the Board of Trustees (Political) but then ignored the campus governance process and failed to get buy-in for his change efforts (Cultural). And "Cultural" wins no matter what.

You may remember my post from a few months ago, about the King's Toaster. I related a funny story that made the rounds on an early Internet discussion board in the 1990s, about a powerful king and his two advisors. The king asked the advisors how they would add a computer to a toaster.

The first advisor, an engineer, provided a fairly straightforward design that read a darkness knob "from snow white to coal black," then set a timer as the program turned on the toaster. The engineer advised the king to "Come back next week, and I'll show you a working prototype."

The second advisor, a computer scientist, theorized that the toaster was today just a toaster, but soon would be a "breakfast food cooker that can also cook sausage, fry bacon, and make scrambled eggs. A toaster that only makes toast will soon be obsolete." The design became increasingly complex the longer the advisor thought about the problem, requiring the same technology as a high-end desktop computer … so the king had the second advisor tossed into the moat, and they all lived happily ever after.

That may be a silly story, and we all laughed 20 years ago. But I point you to two "breakfast food cookers" that you can find today in stores:

The Back·to·Basics Egg 'N Muffin 4-Slice Toaster/2 Egg Cooker has four slots that let you toast your bread, English muffins, bagels or croissants at the same time you steam-poach an egg or warm up precooked meat.

But that's not enough for the king's second advisor. I ask you, what good is a breakfast food cooker that can only make toast and eggs if it doesn't also provide a hot beverage? The king's advisor will tell you that the Back·to·Basics device will soon become useless!

The Sunpentown 3-in-1 Breakfast Maker improves on that design, combining a toaster oven, a coffeemaker and a frying pan. Finally, you can brew a fresh cup of coffee, toast a croissant and fry up an egg—all at once! The king's people will rejoice at their deliverance from breakfast drudgery!

(Incidentally, the Sunpentown is cheaper.)

In the 1990s we laughed at the King's Toaster story as just a silly joke that made it around the message boards of the time—like cat videos on YouTube today. But now the market has shifted, such that you can find not one but two of these breakfast food cookers. Despite being an odd idea 20 years ago, the market is now receptive to this innovation, enough so that multiple manufacturers are competing in this space.

The toaster story is a great example of how innovation happens in almost any product category. The technology that we rely on today will look quite different in only 10 years. In 20 or 30 years, we may no longer recognize that technology. I don't believe that we can satisfy ourselves with incremental progress. Instead, look for what we should be doing. We always need to look forward to what is coming, to what's next. With IT at a higher ed institution, ask yourself: "Are we simply supporting the campus of today, or preparing our students and faculty for the world of tomorrow?