utility is a powerful concept. imho, its the most important concept in economics.

at this point in my life, my main goal is to maximize my financial security. that doesn't mean i wont sacrifice my happiness. i wont take a higher paying job over a lower paying job if i like the latter better. however, i will always try to maximize finances. i live frugally. when i go out with my friends we go to $ drafts, etc. i plan on moving to a cheaper apartment when my lease is up in july. every penny i have right now is in the stock market. i almost live purely on credit. if at some point in the next year when the rental yield equation screams buy, i will probably put myself into some serious debt-- even if that means saving $500/mo. $500/mo goes a LONG way (think about compounded interest, etc).

at some level, im pretty emotionally detached. i don't look at financial losses and cringe. i like math and im as numbers oriented as they come. however, i live this way for a reason (granted the economy also sucks). my greatest fear in life is that i will not be able to provide the same quality of life for my family as my parents have provided for me. im extremely lucky. ive had a great life, realistically, i think ill probably make $7-10m in my lifetime. with a family, after taxes and living expenses im not quite sure where that leaves me. certainly that is more than enough for a great life and maybe leaves me 500k-$1m net worth to retire on.

thats my logic for living the way i do, right now. i need to save to reach that goal. however, i think that will change. if i reach my goals, i think i will probably want to own a home when the equation says rent. sure, there will be external factors that lead to this decision (maybe my wife kicks my ass and that pleases her as well). but for me, it symbolizes the fact that i can provide for others in the way i was provided for. i wont mind being tied down by financial assets, etc. i want my kids to play little league and go k-12 with the same friends as i did. why? because that made me happy and i want to give someone else that same opportunity. life is too short not to maximize your happiness. im willing to sacrifice myself when im young and hate life so to speak. ill *say* i hate life because ill work 18 hour days to get where i want to go. that might not be fun, but it still makes me happy based on my future utility potential.

so yeah, i think it holds true for BOTH groups-- our parents and us. of course, this is just me. i know many of my friends feel the same way but utility is a strange thing. utility is what got us into this mess (too many people tried to maximize what made them happy). utility is why markets aren't efficient (think greed and fear). people tend to act on emotion first. clearly my lifestyle is a result of my emotions. am i doing things the right way? im not sure. utility inhibits our ability to learn in the short term and this holds true for just about every results based environment. ultimately, learning comes down to luck. i guess ill have to wait and see.

The American Dream has always included buying a house.  Saving up enough for a down payment on your own house was something to aim for and be proud of.  Renting, conventional wisdom held, was throwing money away. 

In fact, our whole tax structure was setup in such a way to significantly incentivize people to take out a mortgage and buy a house.  Would we be in the financial position we are now if you didn't get to deduct mortgage interest off your taxes?  Less people would have purchased homes and the government wouldn't have had to return all that cash after mortgage interest deductions--maybe the deficit would have been a little smaller.  Maybe our own deficits would have been a little smaller, too, since buying a house tends to come with lots of little (and big) unforseen expenses.

Put aside the market crash for the moment.  I think it might be worth reexamining our lemming-like participation in this asset class as a society.

Moreover, owning a home tends to keep you geographically anchored.  Think about what society  and the working world is placing a premium on these days--flexibility.  People with an expertise--be it consulting, languages, engineering, etc.--go where the work is and get highly compensated for the "inconvenience".  At the same time, people who can be flexible about their own cash outflows can take more entrepreneurial risks, whereas lots of people with good ideas or passions can't join startups because they have a mortgage to pay. 

Your average Detroit autoworker, on the other hand, is not only in danger of losing his job, if he hasn't already, but, his family they can't even move.  So forget the pie in the sky notion of getting retrained to take a cleantech job working on building and repairing windmills in the Great Plains, because they can't sell their house.

When I was at GM, we took part in the leveraged buyout of AMF, the bowling company.  One of the first thing the buyout fund that led the deal did was to do a sale-leaseback.  In other words, they decided that owning a bunch of real estate wasn't a good way to capitalize this business, so they sold it, put the cash towards higher ROI investments in the company as well as a dividend to the shareholders, and just paid rent as an expense. 

Historically, bubble aside, owning real estate is a lower risk, higher cashflow investment--certainly meant to return less than the equity markets.  So why do we push so many young people and young families to try and buy a home?  Shouldn't they be putting their capital into potentially higher returning investments?

You might provide examples of real estate transactions that have worked for people in rising markets... and I'm sure there are lots--but the historical, long term performance of the asset class isn't that high.  Excess returns from individual transactions not only incur a boatload of unsystematic risk (like that you accidently built the house on a sinkhole), but require alpha on the part of the manager.  Like most illiquid/private asset classes, the diversity of returns among managers is very high.  In other words...  You can make a killing in real estate if you know what you're doing and you wind up getting lucky enough to bet on a good property, but don't be so quick to assume everyone can be better than average. 

What are some of the other things young people might invest in.  Well, think about my specific case?  In order to buy an apartment (you know, since I did the silly thing of buying something I could afford), I moved out to Bay Ridge, Brooklyn, a 45 minute commute into the city.  On average, I go into the city six days a week.  That's about an extra 4 hours of time compared to if I was living in the city per week.  Multiplied over a whole year, at a rate of $100 an hour (let's say I chose to do consulting with that time), you're talking about $20,000 a year.  I never factored that cost in.  Nor did I factor the social cost.  Who am I not building better relationships with because I live further away?  Isn't investing in my social network at this point a higher potential return than real estate as an asset class--especially given that I'm an entrepreneur? 

So what would the issue be if we just rented our whole lives?  People might say that you wouldn't have anything to leave to your kids--but we tax the hell out of inheretences anyway--not to mention the fact that you shouldn't need to buy a house to save money.  Personally, I think if we de-anchored ourselves from one spot for a big chunk of our lives, we might be better suited to take advantage of career opportunites, meet new people, and experience new things.  Tell me where the flaw in this argument is. 

12 team league, $260 salary cap and I had reserved 5 players from last year at $5 more than I was carrying them: McCann, Pedroia, Span, Galarraga and Morrow.

C    $15    McCann, Brian (C ATL)    C · DH
1B    $10    Delgado, Carlos (1B NYM)    1B · CI · DH
2B    $16    Pedroia, Dustin (2B BOS)    2B · DH · MI
3B    $15    Jones, Chipper (3B ATL)    3B · CI · DH
SS    $8    Aviles, Mike (SS KC)    2B · DH · MI · SS
MI    $1    Getz, Chris (2B CHW)    2B · DH · MI
CI    $1    Konerko, Paul (1B CHW)    1B · CI · DH
OF    $24    Holliday, Matt (OF OAK)    DH · OF
OF    $15    Young, Chris B. (OF ARI)    DH · OF
OF    $6    Choo, Shin-Soo (OF CLE)    DH · OF
OF    $23    Hart, Corey C. (OF MIL)    DH · OF
OF    $6    Span, Denard (OF MIN)    DH · OF
DH    $2    Francoeur, Jeff (OF ATL)    DH · OF
P    $3    Pettitte, Andy (P NYY)    P
P    $6    Galarraga, Armando (P DET)    P
P    $9    Ziegler, Brad (P OAK)    P
P    $13    Greinke, Zack (P KC)    P
P    $10    Lilly, Ted (P CHC)    P
P    $22    Matsuzaka, Daisuke (P BOS)    P
P    $37    Santana, Johan (P NYM)    P
P    $7    Capps, Matt (P PIT)    P
P    $6    Morrow, Brandon (P SEA)    P
P    $2    Cook, Aaron (P COL)    P
RES    $0    Sheffield, Gary (DH DET)    DH
RES    $0    Sanchez, Anibal (P FLA)    P
RES    $0    Wood, Brandon (3B ANA)    3B · CI · DH · MI · SS
RES    $0    Crede, Joe (3B MIN)    3B · CI · DH
RES    $0    Perkins, Glen (P MIN)    P

Here's my assessment:

Pros:  I'd definitely going to get a lot of wins behind Santana, Dice-K, Lilly, Greinke, Pettitte, Cook and Galarraga.   Whether or not guys like Pettitte and Cook can keep their ERAs and WHIP at reasonable levels is a question.  I could definitely win the saves category if Morrow and Ziegler pan out.   Also, almost everyone's got some pop.  Choo could be a sleeper.  Who knows...   Maybe Shef may get some burn down the stretch too.  I hope Brandon Wood comes up soon.

Cons: No real big, unquestionable boppers.  Chipper is older and an injury risk... and who knows what to expect out of Delgado.  Let's of guys I can count on for 25/80, but not a lot guaranteed for 30/100.  If Morrow and Ziegler don't pan out, I may need to find saves elsewhere.

Whenever I ask anyone for innovative ways to reach reporters, PR professionals point me to Peter Shankman's Help a Report Out (HARO) list. It comes out three times a day and gets sent to over 50,000 people. Reporters can post requests for everything from housewives who've discovered tantric sex to people who've turned down CEO positions (not *those* kinds of positions).

This is the bleeding edge of media relations, folks--a mailing list.

And thank God for this list--lest we all depend on these hand edited media databases selling for thousands of dollars. These sites make me feel like I'm searching Proquest back at my college library in 1999--cumbersome to search though and lacking the metadata I need to find what I'm looking for. 

At least HARO gives me a sense of what a journalist as actually looking for *today*.

Do you know why there are half a dozen of these things out there?  Most of the data is public!  Media winds up on the web, so all the data is already out there.  So far, I haven't seen anything that provides really specific insight into the current topics of interest of a reporter, nor any real analysis into how much traffic, buzz, and influence a journalist really has.  The blogger information is quite rough, too.

And @microPR?   I track it on Twitter... and it seems to be mostly people suggesting other people follow it for #followfriday or talking about its usefulness.  Fail.  

PR is a marketplace--an exchange of relevant, interesting information for attention and audience. So why doesn't it have the tools of a marketplace?  PR tools shouldn't look like databases... they should look like financial trading platforms, with asks and bids on a ticker--filtered for what I'm looking for or need.  This is trading: I give a reporter information (and an angle to work with) about my company and he gives me his audience's attention--at least to the extent he influences it. Real marketplaces have transparency, quantifiability, uniform elements of exchange, and the information systems that enable both sides to make informed decisions.

Imagine if you bought and sold stocks the same way PR works today.  You'd maybe list your name (or have someone else list you with questionable accuracy) in a database.   Instead of really detailed information related to your risk tolerance, prior stocks purchased, key financial criteria like cashflow, all people could see was a general description that you were interested in "Tech Stocks".  Nevermind that you're specifically interested in bigger name plays like MSFT, GOOG, and AMZN, you now get tons of requests for you to buy tiny little biotech companies with no profits that you've never heard of.  You get these requests in your inbox...and they just keep coming.  You don't have time to answer them and there's really no good way to inform the investor relations world about your interests.

PR,specifically pitching, is just like Wall St.--in the 1780's: Manual, opaque, and lacking the tools to create real actionable information flow and analysis. 

Getting PR is all about recreating the work that lots of other people have done to find good contact lists, which will always be incomplete and never really that accurate, crafting good pitch letters, which is totally not scalable, after hours schmoozing, and brokering exclusives in a world where information just wants to be free. This is why the startup geeks can't hack it and need to hire firms to do the social dirtywork.  They're too frustrated by the archaic process, lack of feedback and randomness of success to count on it as a good way to spend their time--especially when most media drives a seriously underwhelming amount of traffic.

Here's an idea for a better system--one that treats PR like the information marketplace that it really is:

First, index all of the reporters.  A good web crawler should be able to recreate the best online media databases in a very short amount of time. Match them up with feeds for their stories, twitter accounts, del.icio.us tags, etc., and analyze the topics and keywords they talk about in real time.  Also analyze the words that other people use when tagging, tweeting, and reblogging their stories.  I don't just want a list of career columnists who give resume tips. I want to know who is reviewing career websites and who isn't--and specifically ones focused on data and analytics or who have an interest in startups and innovation.  Computers can figure that out a lot faster than people can.

Media outlets need the same thing.  They need more information to sort through the pitches in their inbox.  Who are these people?  Are they backed by the right people?  If I were a reporter, I'd want to know that Path 101 is funded by folks like Fred Wilson, Brad Burnham, Scott Heiferman, Jeff Jarvis, etc., and has recently appeared in CNN/Money, VentureBeat, and Mashable.  Moreover, the fact that I was #61 on the SA 100, or that Hilary is a regular FooCamper might be of interest, too.   I'm not bragging...  I'm saying that if I was a journalist and thought of the PR process as an exchange, I would certainly equate some value the networks of the companies I choose to write about, all other things being equal.  I know I certainly go out of my way to try to connect up reporters who've helped me out with other people I know, like angels and VCs involved with us, their portfolio companies, etc.  If nothing else, reporters undoubtedly need some kind of filter, short of a background check, to figure out who's even legitimate.  I know I needed this when I was on the venture capital side getting inbound biz plan pitches.  Just because someone has the money to hire a PR firm doesn't necessarily make them the kind of people I might want to get involved with--but the interwebs can tell me a lot about "counterparty risk"--who I'm getting into this trade with?

Create a filterable, searchable open market for requests and pitches, with APIs, like Twitter, so I can have it on the web, desktop, e-mail, etc.  Mailing lists and Twitter accounts are archaic... and force people to sift through a whole bunch of irrelevant stuff.  When a reporter asks for new resources for career guidance, not only does that person get our Path 101 info, but so does anyone else writing something similar. Give reporters the analytics around how much coverage a company is getting, how recent, etc--make the whole process transparent.

With historical analytics, I should be able to go back in time and say "Show me all of the reporters that wrote about NotchUp and sort by rating and by most recent date of relevant stories."

At the same time, reporters should be able to create saved searches for "career resource", "career guidance", etc. so that they can see a running ticker of what's being pitched.  Why should they have to wait to be pitched?  When investors want companies that have Low P/E's, they can screen for that.  Why can't reporters screen the universe of pitches?

Allow for ratings on both sides. Some reporters write really thoughtful pieces, even when negative, and others are obviously mailing it in.  Let PR folks and companies rate the reporters. Undoubtedly, some startups are a total PITA.  If you get spammed by the same startup everyday, as a reporter you should be able to ding them.  It should be easy for a reporter to find out who is generally useful to talk about a particular topic regardless if they have something to pitch. Rating expertise on both sides would be great.

The other thing about ratings on pitches would be to allow specific feedback.  If I pitch a reporter, they should be able to easily click something to move on to the next one, but at the same time give me some feedback.   A stock set of responses to choose from would be great: 

"Interesting, but I have enough for this request already."

"My mandate has changed."

"Too early."

"Not relevant."

On top of that, they could suggest future contact with another click:

"Let's talk in the future."

"Please don't contact me anymore."

"Let's talk right now.  Call me."

Otherwise, your pitches will probably go into a black hole.  Who has time to respond to every single pitch they get by e-mail?

Also, let's come up with some objective ratings on traffic and influence. Did the story drive any traffic? How much? Was it reblogged, tweeted by others?   Did the users convert?  This is really what companies care about.  It's great that a site gets a ton of traffic, but if the users from that site never convert, what's the point?

What would this do to PR firms?  The general availability of great financial research tools to the public hasn't made the mutual fund and investment manager industry go away, has it?  No.  So there's no reason to think that PR firms need to go away.  Great tools should be able to cater to PR firms and individuals at companies who want to do their own PR alike, the same as in investing.  We're far from great tools at the moment and what's out there costs entirely too much for the amount of work it still leaves you with. 

The most recent tracks I've been listening to on last.fm:

I got an e-mail from Slideshare this morning:

Hi ceonyc,
We've noticed that your slideshow on SlideShare has been getting a LOT of views in the last 24 hours. Great job ... you must be doing something right. ;-)
Why don't you tweet or blog this? Use the hashtag #bestofslideshare so we can track the conversation.
Congratulations,
-SlideShare Team

I assumed it was because of my Educational Outcomes presentation... that maybe some group of educational administrators finally decided they wanted to know what happened to their students after they graduated and whether school was worth all that money.

I checked and suddenly it had over 100,000 views.  It was around 500 the last time I checked it.  Something was odd.  I went searching bit.ly, Google inbound links, Twitter search... couldn't figure out where the traffic was coming from and spent a fair bit of time trying to track it down.  Someone else asked on the nextNY list and then I realized it was a joke.

I responded "I think it's a joke" and the guy wrote back:

"If by "joke" you mean "obnoxious social media d-baggery joke of an effort at guerrilla marketing" then yes, I agree."

I can't say my own opinion is far off from that, which is a shame, because I really like Slideshare.  It's an awesome service that I recommend all the time. 

The problem with the joke is that they asked me to tweet the presentation out using their hashtag--which meant that all of the people who fell for the joke would be easily findable.  Not only that, but what they really wanted to see was for me to tweet out to my network that I thought my presentation got 100k views, only to have to retract it later and look like an idiot. 

The people who put things on Slideshare are professionals.  These aren't videos of two 14 year old girls lipdubbing Lady GaGa.  These are pretty serious presentations, often given at conferences, and those people who are using Slideshare are undoubted connected on Twitter to their professional networks.  To try to coax them into looking foolish in front of those people just isn't cool.

April Fool's Jokes are best done when everyone knows it's a joke, they're done a little tongue-in-cheek, and they poke people a little bit, but not at their own expense.  The Smellr site was hilarious...  and at worst, it may have bruised the egos of some already wildly successful people--not rank and file users who are actually trying to get their presentations seen and would be disappointed when the views turn out not to be real.  That's not who you should be picking on today.

Links I've recently tagged on del.icio.us:

Links I've recently tagged on del.icio.us:

In any given week, I meet with two or three entrepreneurs who want to talk with me about their business--just to get some feedback.  They know that I used to be on the venture capital side and vet business plans and ideas on a regular business.  I'm happy to do it when I take some interest in the idea, mostly when I feel like I can add some value.  Plus, I feel like it's actually useful for my own business--to see what technologies and processes other people are using and to help generate new ideas.  I've been very fortunate to learn from folks like the guys at Union Square Ventures, to see successful companies get launched and grown, and to have the opportunity to run a business on my own, so I do feel like I have something to add.  That's why I'm teaching entrepreneurship at Fordham University.

However, I'd imagine finding me as an up and coming entrepreneur must feel a little bit like finding the A-Team--especially if you weren't in established innovation networks.  You can't even go see Mr. Lee at the Chinese laundry first.  (If you don't get it, you didn't grow up in the 80's.)  I don't put myself out there as an expert for hire or have a fancy nickname for myself like Dr. Startup.  In fact, a lot of really good people in NYC to talk to about your startup idea are totally under the radar--just helping give feedback to whoever just happens to stumble into their network.

On the other hand, a lot of the people most above the radar on this kind of thing aren't exactly people I'd recommend to go see.  I have to assume every city has this, but I like to call them the "Venture Vultures"--various startup strategy folks with murky resumes who will promise to connect you to capital, technology help, strategy help who simply don't have a lot of there there.  In the Web 2.0 boom, tons of people hung up shingles offering to up startup businesses, and I'm hoping the recession will weed out most of these folks, because I think a lot of them do more harm than good.  When entrepreneurs with real potential run into these pseudo-virtual incubator strategy consulting types and get bad advice or no real results, and that's who they see trumpeting themselves in the community, it gives the community a bad name. 

The reason why these folks can self-promote their way to noteriety, however, is because of an educational vacuum for new businesses in NYC.  If you had an idea for a new business, or you had already built a product, service, or technology and you needed business strategy help, where would you go?  What about if you were a student?

If we really wanted to improve NYC's ability to support innovation, more so than money or space, I think putting more effort into educating students about entrepreneurship would be worthwhile.  The bottleneck for creating new companies in NYC isn't desks or angel capital--we have plenty of both--it's the fact that there just aren't enough entrepreneurs with good ideas who know how to execute on a business.  We need more students learning the technologies that allow innovation and more students taught how to turn their passions into ideas--and then into businesses (or just find their passions in the first place).

EDIT: Let's be clear on what I'm saying.  I think NYC is a great place to start a business--I just think that not enough of the best local minds are in the mindset that such an endeavor is possible or worthwhile.  On top of that, those that really want to learn need more access to the experienced people who can teach them best practices.  I actually think the infrastructure for a startup here in NYC is pretty good--we're just not getting enough new entrepreneurs at the top of the funnel.  New York City schools don't exactly pump out lots of students with the business or tech wherewithal (or interest) in starting a new company (athough perhaps that might change now that they can't just assume they'll get hired by big banks anymore).  NYC students are taught how to work for big companies, not to start small ones. 

I'm specificially interested in programs for students.  It's an entirely different thing to take someone who has already established themselves in a career and help them with a new business idea.  They at least have networks.  They know people in their industry and they have a sense of how to create value. 

I want to meet whoever is working with local students.   In fact, Fordham has generously donated space for about 100 people during the day from 9-5 at their Lincoln Center Campus on Tuesday, April 28th to bring everyone educating local students interested in entrepreneurship together.  I'd like to hold a small conference to share ideas, solutions, best practices, and step one is figuring out who is out there.

If you are involved with a university incubator, tech transfer office, entrepreneurship program, degree, or certificate, or if you just teach students in programs and subjects likely to create innovators, please get in touch with me.

I've created a form to gather all the interested parties.  Even if you can't make it on that day, please let me know who you are and what you do.

You can find the form by clicking this link.

He's familiar with "management management". ^{link »}

tags: mar 09, unemploymentality.com

unemploymentality.com/2009/03/recession-job-hunti · Original page

Links I've recently tagged on del.icio.us:

Links I've recently tagged on del.icio.us:

The most recent tracks I've been listening to on last.fm:

Links I've recently tagged on del.icio.us:

I can stay on my feet like nobody's business. I don't mean in terms of taking a punch. I mean that I never slip and fall to the ground. There have been too many times to count, like with dress shoes on ice or misstepping up a flight of stairs, where I say to myself "Wow, I can't believe I didn't fall flat on my face there." In particular, when something causes one of my feet to just completely wipe out, I'm incredibly good at shifting my weight and recovering without a fall. In fact, I sometimes think that I'm so good at it that I might be the best person in the world at doing that one tiny insigificant thing--not falling when a foot that I'm planting on loses traction.

Do you ever have that? Where you do something totally random so incredibly well over and over again where you think that you may very well be the best person in the entire world at it?

Fifty People, One Question: Brooklyn from Fifty People, One Question on Vimeo.

I hadn't seen this before.  It's really amazing.  The woman in the blue scarf pictured above gives my favorite answer--a world where every closet connects to someone else's closet and you can use it to travel to meet someone new and have breakfast with them.

That's kind of how I think of Twitter.  I wonder if she Twitters.  Probably.

"I sent a cover letter. It should be getting me that job now."

"No, Lieutenant, your job search is already dead."

Alison Doyle defended cover letters today and was rather dismissive about the idea of finding your job by connecting to someone using social media.  I won't take up the social media debate now, but I will put to bed the idea that you should spend any time whatsoever on a cover letter.

What gets read first, a resume or a cover letter?  Ask anyone who has ever hired anybody in the last twenty years.  The answer is a resume.

Here's the short version of the proof, then:

Is your resume awesome? 

If no, then I'm throwing it right in the trash, along with the cover letter, which I didn't read, because your resume isn't awesome.

If yes, and it does not come with a cover letter, will I contact you?  Of course!  Half the resumes I got were from resume databases or LinkedIn, so much of the time, a resume or profile is all I have anyway.

Once you get contacted, then it's up to you and who you are... and that's what you were trying to do with the cover letter in the first place--get a response.  No hiring manager has ever contacted someone with a mediocre resume who wrote a really nice cover letter.  They never get to the cover letter of a mediocre resume--they don't have time!  If they say they did, they're lying to make it seem like they do extra work like read all the cover letters than come in.  I'm sure they don't rip the tags off their pillows either. 

More important than a cover letter, if a resume contains a link to a site, I am going to visit it.  If this site is a blog, and you write about your passion for the industry you're looking to get into or your insights, I'm going to be pretty damn impressed.  I certainly won't ask for a cover letter after that.  Think of this like rock, paper, scissor.  Resume beats cover letter.  Awesome blog beats resume and obviously also beats cover letter. 

No, you can't submit the link to your blog on the front end of a company website, but would Alison suggest that if I was hiring someone to run the career guidence office at a school, that being the About.com job search guide since 1998 wouldn't be enough?  Why would you even ask for a resume at that point?  When I left Oddcast a year and a half ago, no one asked for my resume, but I got 25 job leads from people who had been reading my blog for years.  Cover letters?  What's a cover letter?

Well, Alison defines a cover letter as "...a document sent with your resume to provide additional information on your skills and experience."

She suggests the following format:

1. First Paragraph - Why you are writing
2. Middle Paragraphs - What you have to offer
3. Concluding Paragraph - How you will follow-up

You know, because that's the "basic format of a typical business letter."

A typical business letter?

Has anyone actually received a "business letter" in the last five years?  (Besides ones from daughters of Nigerian generals looking to deposit money in your bank account or official looking solicitations for credit cards.)

Today, professionals are sending one line e-mails from their Blackberries that affect millions of dollars.  Have you ever seen what three paragraphes looks like on a Blackberry?  It might as well be Paul's Letter to the Corinthians.  People want just the facts, as quickly as possible.  Three paragraphes of prose and I'm either on to the next e-mail or I'm asleep.

It's funny, because, today, she expanded her definition of a cover letter to include "via email or a LinkedIn message".   Can you even type three paragraphs into a LinkedIn message?  I'm pretty sure there's a character limit, and if there wasn't, I'd think the person was just trying too hard or didn't really understand normal behavior on that site.

Twenty years ago, cover letters served a purpose.  They introduced who you were and how you found the position--because before widespread use of the internet, how you found anything was actually interesting.  Now, asking how you even know someone is becoming a joke, because we're hyperconnected.  As for who you are, we all know that your cover letter is your marketing pitch--no hiring manager takes that seriously.  They'll do their homework to figure out who you are.  They'll ask Google, Facebook, and LinkedIn who you are, who you're connected to, etc... and if they can't find you there, for a growing percent of the few available jobs, you might as well be persona non grata.

In today's world, if you're contacting someone you don't already know to get a job, you've essentially already failed.  It's too easy to find people and use your network to reach them that coming in without a recommendation reflects pretty poorly on the candidate.  If I was going to hire you to do sales for me, I certainly wouldn't expect you to just cold call all your leads.  I'd hope you'd at least figure out how to be innovative and networking savvy enough to find your say to a warm intro.

And yes, I know, not everyone uses the internet, and not everone can afford a computer, and three quarters of the world lives under the poverty line--I get it.  It's a terrible situation, but we're talking about job advice written on blogs.  There's a clear target audience here of people who have some amount of advanced education, socioeconomic mobility, etc.  For *those* people--if you're thinking a cover letter is going to get you anywhere, you're wasting your time.

There are also some jobs out there where your digital presence just doesn't matter at all because you're basically talking mass hiring of a certain particular skill.  Take nursing jobs.  Hospital systems need to hire 1000's of registered nurses a year.  So long as they have the right certifications and whatever references are needed check out, you're basically in, or at least in line.  Many civil services positions are like that as well.  However, not only does a digital presence not matter to be a police officer or a firefighter (Good thing for my dad, a 20 year FDNY vet), you also don't need a cover letter.

So let's focus on jobs that supposedly need a cover letter--jobs that are sought after enough where the candidate is looking to stand out from the crowd.  So we're assuming a crowd here.  Now put yourself in the position of the hiring manager.  Not only do you get 100's of not 1000's of resumes for each position that you have an opening for, but you're searching resume databases to find candidates, too.  It's physically impossible for anyone to read more than a handful of cover letters. 

Even resume expert Louise Fletcher says that "back when I worked as an HR manager, I never read cover letters".  Louise worked as an HR manager back in 1995.  She did say that her boss liked to read them, but assuming her boss was probably at least 5-10 years older than her, if not more, you're talking about a guy who started his career in the early 80's--almost 30 years ago.  Are we really giving advice to people on how to get hired by dinosaurs are should be dispensing advice on how to be the most innovative candidates out there and to try to get hired by the most innovative companies.

But Alison says "Innovation works for a lot of people/industries. Not others."

Everyone who wants to get hired into an industry that doesn't value innovation, raise your hand.

Ok, everyone with your hands raised, finish up working on those cover letters!

Links I've recently tagged on del.icio.us:

The most recent tracks I've been listening to on last.fm: