The trouble with job titles is the functions that go with them often vary by company and industry. Candidates who don’t take this into consideration may have a bumpy ride with their job search efforts. For example, the Human Resource Manager of a 50 employee company who applies to be the Human Resource Manager of a 1,000+ employee company probably has a skill gap to overcome. That’s not to say he wasn’t really a Human Resource Manager in his last role, but that his experience may be more in line with what a Human Resource Assistant or Specialist handles in the larger organization. Does this mean he shouldn’t apply for the Human Resource Manager role at the 1,000+ employee company? It’s hard to say. If he has relevant experience and is capable of bridging any gaps, he should definitely go for it.  He needs to recognize the job is likely different than the one he had previously so he can sell himself effectively. The focus has to be on making a case for promotion versus carrying on as if it’s a lateral move. His credibility could be compromised, otherwise.

I’ll share a story on the subject. As a recruiter in Accounting and Finance, I was very aware of variances in job functions. When I interviewed candidates I always wanted to know the organizational chart, revenue size and transaction volume of the companies they worked in. One gentleman came to me, we’ll call him Chris,  looking to be placed as a Chief Financial Officer. That was the title he’d held for the past 5 years at a family owned printing company. The trouble was, his experience wasn’t in line with a traditional CFO. He had an Associates Degree. His company was a $2M a year business. The staff under him consisted of an Administrative Assistant and an Accounts Payable Clerk. He closed out each month, but relied on an external accounting firm for quarter and year end close. In any other environment he would not be considered a Chief Financial Officer. I wasn’t even sure he would fit as a Full-Charge Bookkeeper considering his dependence on the company’s accounting firm for financial statements. When I raised the point that I felt he needed to focus on a different level of position he became upset. His ego wanted the title he’d become accustomed to. Never mind his physical person was unlikely to succeed in landing a job with that title elsewhere. I pointed out I wasn’t convinced he had a solid grasp of GAAP. His response was, and the financial folks out there should appreciate this, “I’m good at computers and can learn new software easily!” Well, GAAP isn’t software. GAAP stands for Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. Oops.

I don’t mean to paint Chris as a bad candidate. He was professional, had a great work ethic, knew what was required of him in his previous job well and was eager to learn new things. All of those pluses couldn’t save his credibility from the ding it took every time he attempted to sell himself into a role he was severely unqualified for. When he left my office, he wasn’t willing to consider opportunities with titles he felt were “below him.” This was several years ago, so I’m sure he’s working now. I imagine time eventually convinced him the job was more important than the title.

At the end of the day it’s fine if  you are applying for something more involved than what you’ve done in the past. Just know employers are more likely to consider you as an option if you can show you understand you may have some development to do on your end and don’t think a title automatically qualifies you for a job. Potential employees who recognized they had things to learn were a much better option for me than those with skill gaps who were unable/unwilling to see them.

Bookmark It