What are the best criteria to select a job by?

[TopHatFox]

In the early accumulation stage (a.k.a. right out of college), is it:

1. the starting salary? (including benefits)
2. the potential for moving up in the company?
3. the company culture?
4. the city, town, culture, and location in which the company is in?
5. How much you like the work to be done
6. Any other criteria you think should be added?

I think how much I like the work and potential for moving up are most important, because if I like the work it means it's more likely that I'll work really hard, which means I will more likely move up in the company and raise my salary exponentially. Runners up are probably the company culture and location, because I want to have an agreeable time at work and an enjoyable life outside of work.

[SimpleLife]

These days, it's the most amount of money for the least amount of work. I'd rather take a job that pays 110K where I work maybe 5 hours a year (kidding) and lasts forever over a job that pays 135K a year but is balls to the wall and could end randomly.

[Dragline]

The best criteria is the job that you can get. You get one offer, you take that job. You get more than one, you get to pick. No point in thinking about offers you don't have.

Everything else is just a balancing act.

But its not that bad, actually, because you can always change jobs. And you will know more about your personal preferences for the balancing act after you have worked somewhere full time for a year or so.

[TopHatFox]

The best criteria is the job that you can get. You get one offer, you take that job. You get more than one, you get to pick. No point in thinking about offers you don't have.

Good point. Well, I picked out a good 30 positions to apply to. I'm planning on tailoring the resume/CL to each one...hopefully at least one pans out!

It is possible though that I'm wasting my time applying via the resume/CL route. Maybe I should simply call current professional networks and ask if they have any personal leads. (Or do that in addition to the above)

[BRUTE]

7. how much zalo can improve his career/income potential, for example by learning valuable skills or acquiring a reputation.

this is very helpful when switching companies later. for this it's important that the work at zalos first company teach him skills not limited to that company, which would be worthless to other companies.

reputation might be personal, but it might just having "McKinsey & Co." on zalos resume.

these calculations are pretty useful at the beginning of zalos ERE career. if zalo were 1 year from retirement, fuck learning on the job - just get it over with the most painless way.

but since zalo seems to just start out his ERE career, brute thinks it makes sense to increate income potential early on, even if the career will just take 5 or 7 years.

[Dragline]

The best criteria is the job that you can get. You get one offer, you take that job. You get more than one, you get to pick. No point in thinking about offers you don't have.

Good point. Well, I picked out a good 30 positions to apply to. I'm planning on tailoring the resume/CL to each one...hopefully at least one pans out!

It is possible though that I'm wasting my time applying via the resume/CL route. Maybe I should simply call current professional networks and ask if they have any personal leads. (Or do that in addition to the above)

You should do both/all of the above. If you really want choices, you need to apply to 100 places. Expect a yield rate of less than 10%. I would guess more like 5%.

Yes, its a lot of work and extremely inefficient and a source of frustration. But I'm afraid that just the way it works for most people. And its not personal -- your potential employers just don't know you exist and have no really good way to find you. They are also expecting to look at 100 resumes, interview 5-10 and hire one or two.of those.

[jacob]

In Soviet Russia, you do not select job. Job selects you!

Seriously, unless, you're a rock star, for which the odds are low coming right out of undergraduate, you're competing with 500+ other people for every application you make.

For the first job, grab what you can. For the second job, you can choose because you're getting paid to wait.

[BlueNote]

I went looking for my first job out of University in Nov 2008 (height of the great recession) and eventually got hired in May 2009.

I put out about 100 resume's and did a bunch of interviews. I kept a spreadsheet of my 'pipeline' showing where I was in the job hunt process with each company. It turned out that I could get interviews at about 10% of the companies that I applied to and received job offers from about 20% of the company's I interviewed with. Keep in mind these were low level dime a dozen 'clerk' jobs. Each time I applied I must have been up against hundreds, maybe thousands of applicants. For example I went to one government job interview and there were hundreds of people there to take an aptitude test with me. I used all avenues at my disposal to find work. One place told me they were going to hire me and then promptly went bankrupt before they could sign me on. I took the first job I could get and I still work for that company. Therefore I'd say take the first job related to your field and then if you don't like it look for another job that better meets your needs.

Employed people find it easier to find a new job anyways, it's analogous to how people who don't need money find it much easier to get a loan.

Also when it comes to tailoring resumes to job descriptions I found that I got more interviews when I outright copy/pasted their job description points into my resume, made slight modifications, and then bold underlined those points for good measure. If you've ever been on the other side of the process then you know that most employers make their interviewers do interviews on top of regular duties so they tend to take the safest, fastest route so they can keep up with day-to-day duties.

[Tyler9000]

I 100% agree that right out of school, take the opportunities presented to you and don't over-think it. You have a whole life to build upon the early foundation.

That said, when faced with a choice there's an alternative criteria I like. It was shared to me by an old boss giving me advice on how to select the right candidate to hire, but I sometimes use it when interviewing my interviewers as well. Would you enjoy being stuck in an airport with this person for six hours? Regardless of their fit on paper, your answer will tell you a lot about whether the work relationship will be easy or difficult.

[BlueNote]

Would you enjoy being stuck in an airport with this person for six hours?

That's a good question to ask yourself after getting to know the candidate during a probationary work period..

I have seen candidates with Oscar winning interview performances who ended up failing miserably at their work and end up being hard to get along with. I have also seen some of the best workers barely sweat through an interview but end up becoming some of the best and brightest people who are also easy to get along with.

Also people tend to get along with people who are most like them. That question may help to perpetuate that bad bias. Therefore I try to pick a bunch of candidates who look really good on paper and then use the interview to test the integrity of the resume and to make sure they are baseline acceptable (don't smell like bo, don't swear all the time, practise basic hygiene, Understandable english etc.). I then simply stack rank everyone and attempt to hire from the top of the list down. Years of relevant experience and credentials generally win the day.

[poleo]

Simple: The one that pays best.

Everything else that's awesome in life is at best loosely connected with one's job.

[thrifty++]

Something which maximises income and minimises stress and use of time.

[Lucky C]

When interviewing, does it feel like a friendly conversation or an oral examination?

All else being equal, choose the job where you feel like you could be friends with the people who interviewed you, most importantly the person who would be your direct supervisor. Having a boss with a similar personality as you is immensely valuable, and being able to joke around with colleagues can make tough days a lot better.

[Scott 2]

Zalo is coming out of an elite university. I haven't paid attention, but I assume the grades are there. If so, the rules are different.

I'd look for an employer that feeds on the output of your university, with proven track record of developing grads. This hunt starts with your internships, or failing that, at the start of your senior year.

My company targets a very specific profession, there are a few schools in our state we have relationships with. Students get in as interns, making like 20 bucks an hour. There's a career path taking them into their early 30's as well paid professionals, with a strong skill set that is easily portable. The kids are smart and earn it, but the company is providing the opportunity.

[JamesR]

If you wanted to maximize your salary, you probably would strategically hop from company to company, getting better job titles & salaries each time.

So a criteria for the first company would likely be to consider the job title & responsibilities/roles you get from it.