Surviving the Recession: Ditch the Job Search; Start a Problem Search

During a recent appearance on CNN, I was posed the following question: "Most companies have called for hiring freezes until January, but millions out there are desperate and can't wait. What can these people do to solve their problem?"

It is a reasonable question. Bills begin to pile up. Frustration and fear grows. There is a sense of urgency to right the situation, to get back on track, to solve your problem.

But wait! Employers NEVER hire people out of sympathy. Employers hire people to fix their own problems.

The fact is that in a recession (particularly this one), employers themselves face significant challenges. It is safe to say that most of the people you will come in to contact with during your employment search have very real fears about the security of their own jobs.

While the end goal should always be to find lucrative and fulfilling work, your approach in the job market must be outwardly facing, not inward. Look for problems that you can solve for others, and that's where the job offers will be waiting.

In an expansionary period, the problems that companies often face relate to keeping up with growth, building production capacity and their bench of talent to meet future demand. In a recession, the major issues are re-energizing sales and improving efficiency (often through cutting costs).

In a "problem search", the first step is self-assessment. Where have you successfully increased revenue (through sales or marketing) for a product or division? How have you creatively found ways to cut operational costs, or redesigned a process to make it more efficient? What are the problems that you are confident you can solve for others? Write down specifics. Arm yourself with facts.

Next, do your research. Identify industries, companies, and then divisions or even specific managers where you know there is a problem they are trying to fix. Gather as much information as possible - from articles, the internet and even discussions with others who work at the company. The goal is to understand as thoroughly as you can the problem an employer is dealing with, and then to be able to confidently articulate how you have solved similar problems before, and how you can help right now.

Fewer jobs in the marketplace are a byproduct of any recession. But there are no shortage of problems companies are desperately trying to overcome. Identifying and solving an employer's problem is, in the end, the best way to resolve your own.

Comments

[Sundialsvc4]

I have seen an -explosion- of demand for what I do, by approaching companies ... (a) as a contractor, which is not on their "payroll expense" ... and (b) to help them find ways to get the same amount of work done with, now, 2/3 of their staff. One company that I now work with did a 25% downsize, and the number of employees who subsequently left citing overwork is approaching another 20%. While making sure that I myself do not get sucked-in to the resulting vacuum, it seems that the question for them is soon going to become, "what lines of business should we get out of because we can no longer keep the staff needed to run them?"

If you are pursuing the "problem search" angle, bear in mind that you're going to have to switch yourself to a different column on their ledger-sheet. And, you're going to have to charge enough to pay your own benefits to yourself. You're going to have to look rather ruthlessly at what is the potential-client's C-O-R-E business, and also strive to make an educated guess as to how much of that business depends on financing.

Basically, lots of companies are "plugging their hoses into the 'emergency reserve tank' and discovering that it is bone-dry."

[Haditup2here]

The argument seems plausible. However, I don't think it applies to all cases. For instance, I am doing a PhD in Energy and Mineral Engineering and I am interning with the government (DOE). You would think that there would be some jobs out there with some of the energy companies especially in the race for carbon sequestration and improving the Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (which is the only method for the removal of sulfur from coal). However, at least from my perspective, most energy companies are not making too many of those type of jobs available as they are relying on the government and universities to pilot the research and take on most of the risk in terms of cost. Yes, companies and institutions often build their operations for profit and solving their unique problems. However, they are not always built on logic as in the case of Wall Street. Until there are some real plans for a sound economy for steady growth as oppose to one that is susceptible to bubbles and recessions, I think most forms of advice for surviving in the job market need to be taken with a grain of salt.

[Sundialsvc4]

However, "Hadit," you ARE going to come out with a PhD... And if you have experience in "the only method for removing sulfur from coal," your only concern is weathering the short-term. "Knowledge is power" even if you find yourself momentarily scrambling to re-position your thoughts of how to apply it and sell it. You're one of the fortunate ones.

[Haditup2here]

The argument seems plausible. However, I don't think it applies to all cases. For instance, I am doing a PhD in Energy and Mineral Engineering and I am interning with the government (DOE). You would think that there would be some jobs out there with some of the energy companies especially in the race for carbon sequestration and improving the Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (which is the only method for the removal of sulfur from coal). However, at least from my perspective, companies such as Southern and GE are not making too many of those type of jobs available as they are relying on the government and universities to pilot the research and take on most of the risk in terms of cost. Yes, companies and institutions often build their operations for profit and solving their unique problems. However, they are not always built on logic as in the case of Wall Street. Until there are some real plans for a sound economy for steady growth as oppose to one that is susceptible to bubbles and recessions, I think most forms of advice for surviving in the job market need to be taken with a grain of salt.

[tailgateshirts]

Iv'e been saying this for a while now. If you can save someone money or fix a problem (saving money still fits in here) you will have a job.

[Poppyman]

Right on Rick. Change always brings opportunity with it. All we need do is look for it.

[jayme]

While darthdarcy may be right that things will get worse, I never feel it's a bad reminder to try to look on the bright side of things- ESPECIALLY in the midst of a good bit of darkness. I appreciate your insight Richard, and your reminder that there are things we can be doing better to really show companies we're worth what's in their ever-dwindling wallets. Keep the positivity coming! God knows we need more of it.

[darthdarcy]

It's not a recession Rich, It's a depression and it's gonna get worse...

[Sundialsvc4]

We have been in this depression for quite some time. And one of the reasons why we are in it is, unfortunately, "high crime" by an awful lot of people. Lies, intentional deceit, deliberate fraud, usury ... the list goes on and on and on.

But let us also remind ourselves that we are a nation of 300 million people with immense resources, and industrial infrastructure that is "merely padlocked." Our first priority must be to seize and punish the high-criminals ... "impeachment is not off the table," and if you are no longer in office, we no longer have to go through that additional step. What you must do with HIGH crime is to take a BIG bite out of it; nothing less will do. This IS crime, and all 300 million of us ARE Plaintiffs now.