Designing a successful failure
Being out of work can, ironically, be a lot of work. It can feel a lot like Labor Day, but, instead of it being just one day where we can recognize the importance of our jobs while not performing them, it’s over and over like some kind of Groundhog Day situation that we want to get through as fast as possible. The job hunt is a grind—I definitely don’t recommend it (0 out of 5 stars). However, it could be better and that is what this entry is about. I want to talk a bit about my general experiences over the past few months looking for work and hopefully give anyone reading this with any influence over hiring practices some items that you can take to your studios or employers to help make your hiring processes a better experience—even for those that you are rejecting.
A note before we begin: this list really goes for any kind of design job, but I’m going to explain later on why I think these sentiments are extremely important for climate-conscious, environmentally-focused corporations to take heed of.
Resources vs. Assets
The first sentiment that I want to express is that job applicants are not an inexhaustible resource that you can just pull from whenever you need one; if you take one thing from this entry, let it be that. Job descriptions these days look less and less like a request for help from a potential asset and more like an employer custom-ordering a very specific person. It doesn’t matter that the note at the bottom of the application contains your diversity pledge and commitment to inclusion if your request is asking for 5-7 years of experience in a start-up environment; expert knowledge of Figma, Creative Cloud, FontLab, and Sketch; a Bachelor’s degree (Master’s is a plus); and a working knowledge of video production, podcasting, and the ability to code in C++, Javascript, and PHP—all for a salary of $60,000 in NYC.
I have looked at so many job boards and have seen so many listings like these, and I don’t care if you can technically find someone who fits that description, you are not going to convince me that you have a desire to have an open and diverse workforce. Not only that but listings like this are going to deprive you of so many potentially good designers that can add their own experiences and understanding of the world to your company’s missions and goals. I understand the need—and it can certainly be a need—to have someone hit the ground running after they fill out their tax paperwork with HR, but this kind of listing is practically legion now and the result is that I feel less like a potential asset to a company and more like a crop that no one wants to harvest anymore.
My suggestion: Make sure that you prioritize what the job needs most for you to get going, and put the nice-to-haves in a separate list, or keep them in mind when reviewing candidates, but leave them out of the “required qualifications.” Remember that many who can code might not necessarily be able to take good photos, or those who have excellent animation skills may not know the difference between Arial and Helvetica. We’re people, not unicorns.
I have spoken on this before, so I won’t labor (pun intended) the point here, but it is worth pointing out once again: educational requirements—especially for a job like “Junior Graphic Designer” will necessarily gatekeep otherwise qualified designers out of a role they could potentially flourish in. For many positions in our various design niches, a college degree is just more of a sign of which applicants can comfortably take on debt rather than which ones can be an important member of the team, so throw the degree requests in when absolutely necessary, but favor portfolios and work ethic over the piece of paper with fancy letters.
Designing for all outcomes vs. only acceptances
The second sentiment I want to share is simply that you tell us when you’ve moved on in the application process without us. Please. An automated email is really all it takes and I’ll even provide the boilerplate:
“Hello, we’ve reviewed your application and have decided to move forward with other candidates. Thank you so much for your consideration of us as a potential employer and hope that you’ll apply again in the future!”
Or something like that. It’s a good start, at least. And, if that is too much—even automated emails aren’t free, so for a small company, it very well may be—then tell applicants the window in which they can expect a reply in the original “we’ve received your application” confirmation email. Take some of the mystery out of the process and you’ll do everyone a favor, especially if your office was previously getting inquiries about the status of an applicant’s current place as a candidate.
We all know what happens when we don’t design with everyone in mind: people fall through the cracks. And it hurts. Specifically, I’ll recount an instance that happened to me, though, in this case, it was for an educational/fellowship-type experience rather than a job (and I will not be naming names, before anyone asks).
So, recently, I applied to this experience knowing that many others would as well and that only a few could get in. A few weeks after applying I was told that I would be moving to the next stage of the application process and that I had to answer a few more questions as this group determined who would be the final choices to be a part of the program. A few weeks after that, I was extremely gratified to learn that I had been accepted into the program and that the only thing left to do was to pay for the tuition. This experience had financial aid involved and if an applicant couldn’t pay the full price, all they had to do was put down a deposit and begin the process of asking for a scholarship. We had to fill out how much we thought that we could pay and the people in charge of the program would see what they could do in terms of aid. A few days later, we were emailed our award package with a link to an invoice where we could pay our first installment. The email noted that if we couldn’t accept the award that we should let them know so someone else could take our spot.
Now, for some people this was bound to be an easy process: get your award, click the link, put in your credit info, and get ready to be a part of the experience. However, this is where it becomes important to make sure that we design processes that can account for all outcomes. I couldn’t accept my award (it was still too much and as someone out of work I couldn’t risk that much money on an experience like this) and I decided to let them know that I couldn’t be a part of the program. Within a couple of days, something surprising happened: I was sent a reminder email about accepting my reward and that if I could not that I should let them know as soon as possible. I proceeded to respond again to tell them that I was disappointed that I couldn’t join.
I then got another email a few days later and the language was pretty much the same, but slightly more urgent. I responded again. And, for good measure, I reached out on social media and sent another email to a different, publicly available email for the organization.
Eventually, someone responded to me and stated that they hadn’t received any previous emails from me, but that the email that the awards were sent from was automated and that the inbox was not monitored by anyone. Do you see what they seem to have missed when designing this process? It seems like it wasn’t checked against a negative outcome. By that, I mean, if you could join the program all you had to do was pay. But if you had to decline, there was no avenue that was included that actually allowed you to let them know. This resulted in me having to tell them again and again the information that was still devastating for me to continually type out—” I’m sorry, I can’t be a part of this program, I cannot afford it.” Failure to account for a negative outcome resulted in me (and maybe others?) having to continually relive a moment that made me feel like a failure.
What does this mean for job creators? Remember that us applicants can experience more emotions than just gratitude at getting accepted for a job; we can be hurt by a system that seemed like it asked for our help. Take a minute to make sure that your application process accounts for as many outcomes as possible, not just the desired ones. This could be summed up by remembering American philosopher John Rawls’s idea of the veil of ignorance. Mike Monteiro writes about it in his book Ruined by Design, but I’ll sum it up here by saying that the veil of ignorance is a way of thinking about the ethics of a designed system by imagining that your relationship to the system is only made clear to you after that system is designed. In other words, when deciding to look for candidates to hire, imagine a scenario in which you might be a rejected candidate and design your system accordingly. That extra effort goes a long way, it really does.
And if I could add this before we conclude this entry: if you can expect me to write a cover letter as part of my application process, I should be able to expect that you’ll do the bare minimum to let me know when I am not being considered any longer. (Also, cover letters should definitely be a stage two application requirement—I know you aren’t reading them to determine my skills or experience; that’s why you asked for a resume. Ask for a cover letter so that you can tailor your interview to cover whatever else you need to know about me. I promise that if you want to interview me, I’ll write you a letter.)
Why this matters especially for climate-oriented employers
Okay, time to land this plane—why does this matter for employers who are in the climate space more than others? It’s simple: embedded in your mission is a promise (overt or not) to build a better future for everyone.
I’ve read so many company About pages that go on about how we can’t continue to do “business-as-usual” or have descriptions that highlight your organization’s commitment to diversity, inclusion, multiculturalism, fighting unjust polluting practices, or establishing ways of doing business more cleanly or equitably. If you are interested in climate justice but you let potential employees wonder if they will ever hear back from you, it undercuts your promises of being different and looking out for everyone. If I’m a job seeker (and I am) I’m, at the least, under the impression that I’m applying to a place that I am willing to add my voice to and, hopefully, see eye-to-eye with; if I get to the job description and find out that you are only interested in the experience of someone with a Bachelor’s who has also worked 3 to 5 years specifically on political campaigns, then you’ll miss out on a chance to hear from someone who has had 3 decades being affected by the policies that came as a result of those campaigns.
You state that your mission is to make a difference.
So, do something different. It doesn’t require you to lower your standards in meaningful ways, and it doesn’t mean hiring everyone who applies. It just means that if you respect our time enough to work for a better future for all of us, then respect our time enough to design a more successful way to tell us that our future won’t be with you (or for right now, at least).
So, call-to-action time
What do you think? Are there any other job seekers out there that have other suggestions? Employers, does any of this resonate, or is anything off-base? Sound off in the comments section over on our Mighty Networks site!
Be part the conversation
Perspective is a gift and with each new perspective the Field Guides get better.
Whether you are a prospective writer/contributor, a commenter, or a reader: new experiences, new connections, and ways of seeing the world leave us richer than before.
This entry was written by
Matt McGillvray
Matt is a designer and illustrator living near Portland, Maine, and has been working for more than a decade doing branding, illustration, web design, print design, social media posts, and even a little SEO.
When not designing he’s usually reading, writing, or running. His current big writing project is a book about design and climate change. He is a chronic teller of puns and will not apologize for that.