LIBRARY
DIRECTOR
WILLIAM
JEANES MEMORIAL LIBRARY,
LAFAYETTE HILL, PA
Are you a developing library leader looking for the excitement and growth potential of your next challenge? If so, the William Jeanes Memorial Library of Whitemarsh Township (PA), may have what you want—an opportunity to serve as its next Library Director. The Board is looking for a dynamic professional who, in addition to managing overall library operations, will work closely with the seven-member Board of Directors to open the renovated and expanded library to be completed early in 2011.
The William Jeanes Memorial Library, a nonprofit corporation, serves the 17,000 residents of Whitemarsh Township (Montgomery County). Guided by a seven-member appointed Board, the Library staff (currently 10FTE), with an annual budget of $600,000, operates a single, 11,000-square-foot 1971 facility circulating 100,000 items per year. A substantial portion of the library’s budget is funded by the Township, with additional contributions from the Friends of the Library, individual gifts, grants and an annual allocation of Commonwealth Library funds. Whitemarsh Township (14.53 square miles) is home to excellent public and private schools, preserved open space, historic sites, and beautiful public recreation facilities including the Schuylkill River. It is immediately adjacent to Philadelphia and linked by a network of roads and public transit routes.The
successful candidate
must have excellent communication skills that inspire, motivate and
engage the
community, Board, staff, elected officials and potential donors in
developing
and implementing a shared vision for enhanced library service. Desired
skills
and experience will include: strategic planning, budget preparation,
facilities
and space planning, library technology, fundraising and grant writing,
and
working with library staff and volunteers. Additional information on
the
William Jeanes Memorial Library and the community is available at William
Jeanes Memorial Library
Links.
Minimum
qualifications for
the position include an MLS or MLIS from an ALA-accredited school, a
minimum of
five years of progressively responsible public library experience
including a
least three years supervising a public library department or directing a
smaller public library, and a strong knowledge of library administration
with
financial experience, knowledge of library technologies, and significant
staff
development and management experience desired.
Compensation: Hiring salary range $60,000-$70,000 with a competitive benefits package.
For further information: Contact Jobeth Bradbury at [log in to unmask]. This opportunity will close May 31, 2010. To apply, please send a cover letter and current resume as Word attachments via email to: [log in to unmask].
Jobeth Bradbury Reporting to the National Digital Heritage Archive (NDHA) Manager you
will be responsible for developing and implementing digital
preservation solutions for the digital material held within the NDHA.
The goal is to prevent and/or mitigate risk to ensure that the Library's
digital collections remain accessible over time and available for
researchers, students and other users in the future.
You will undertake risk management of the National Digital Heritage
Archive (NDHA) and research, test and implement appropriate solutions
for preservation strategies and actions in line with accepted best
practice and international standards.
You should possess a demonstrated commitment to the long-term
archiving and preservation of digital objects and be able to show vision
and skill in developing strategies to achieve permanent accessibility.
You will undertake regular surveys of the digital preservation
environment and emerging technologies as well as impact analysis and
cost/benefit analysis to determine the best strategies for any given
preservation activity.
You will have demonstrable experience in digital preservation
including ingest, validation tools, format libraries etc and be able to
work with a range of people involved in the digital preservation process
including creators, appraisal, ingest, technical analysis etc staff.
It is expected that you have a Masters or Doctorate in a relevant
discipline and have an advanced understanding of computer technology and
research methodologies. Academic qualifications in another discipline
with demonstrable experience and knowledge of the digital preservation
environment, may also be considered.
For more information about this position see - http://www.natlib.govt.nz/about-us/working-here/current-job-opportunities/digital-preservation-analyst
Applications close 5pm Friday 7 May 2010.
For more information about the Digital Preservation programme at the
Library contact:
Steve Knight, Programme Director Preservation, Research &
Consultancy, [log in to unmask]
Lynn Benson, Manager of the National Digital Heritage Archive, [log in to unmask]
Regards,
Visiting Special Collections Cataloger
The University of Miami Libraries seeks a Visiting Special Collections Cataloger to provide original and complex copy cataloging, retrospective conversion, and authority work for materials in the library’s Special Collections Division and the Cuban Heritage Collection, and to coordinate the special collections cataloging activity of staff within Cataloging &Metadata Services following prescribed national standards. Incumbent also serves as the primary Spanish/Latin American cataloger for the general collections. This is a temporary (1-year), full-time position with the possibility of renewal.
UNIVERSITY: The University of Miami is one of the nation’s leading research universities in a community of extraordinary diversity and international vitality. The University is privately supported, non-sectarian institution, located in Coral Gables, Florida, on a 260-acre subtropical campus. The University comprises 11 degree granting schools and colleges, including Architecture, Arts and Sciences, Business Administration, Communication, Education, Engineering, Law, Medicine, Music, Nursing, and Marine and Atmospheric Science (www.miami.edu).
THE LIBRARY: The University of Miami Libraries (www.library.miami.edu) rank among the top 50 research libraries in North America with a collection of over 3 million volumes, 74,000 current serials, and over 64,000 E-journal titles. The Otto G. Richter Library lies in the heart of the Coral Gables campus and serves as the central library for the University. Other University of Miami libraries include the Paul Buisson Architecture Library, the Judi Prokop Newman Business Information Resource Center, and the Marta & Austin Weeks Music Library, and the Marine and Atmospheric Science Library. The campus also has independent medical and law libraries. The Libraries provide support and services for approximately 10,100 undergraduates, 5,100 graduate students, and 10,000 full and part time faculty and staff. The Libraries have a staff of 37 Librarians and 86 support staff and are a member of ARL, ASERL, CLIR, NERL, RLG, and Lyrasis.
POSITION: Reporting to the Head of Cataloging & Metadata Services, the Visiting Special Collections Cataloging provides original and complex copy cataloging of published materials in the Special Collections Division and the Cuban Heritage Collections, including rare books, artists’ books, serials, and audiovisual materials in multiple languages and formats, and from a variety of time periods, according to national & local standards for rare book description; provides training and guidance to cataloging staff performing special collections cataloging and retrospective conversion; May supervise special collections cataloging project teams and/or student assistants ; works with the Head of CMS and collection curators to establish cataloging priorities for special collections material and to set priorities for processing collections in the backlog, including determining appropriate levels of treatment for groups of materials; Serves as liaison between CMS, Special Collections, and the Cuban Heritage Collection for problem solving, changes in policies and procedures and other cataloging and metadata issues; actively participates in the development and implementation of metadata standards in the Libraries as they apply to the processing, description, and cataloging of manuscripts and special collections materials and serves on the Metadata Working Group; reviews EAD-encoded finding aids prepared by special collections staff as needed for the purpose of assigning name, subject, form/genre, and title headings, and may assign headings to finding aids and related catalog records ; provides original and complex copy cataloging of Spanish language materials for the general collections; maintains awareness of special collections and general cataloging issues and standards, metadata standards, and librarianship; serves on/participates in Libraries and University organizations, committees, task forces, and teams as appropriate.
QUALIFICATIONS: Required: Master’s degree from an ALA accredited library science program or foreign equivalent; Two years cataloging experience, including archival and/or special collections materials; Knowledge of DCRM(B), AACR2, LCSH, LC Classification, and MARC21 Familiarity with AAPM , DACS, EAD, and Dublin Core; Fluent knowledge of Spanish; Experience working with integrated library systems (Innovative Interfaces preferred); Understanding of the scholarly research environment; Demonstrated project management, organizational, analytical, and problem solving skills; Ability to work independently, collaboratively, and in teams within the Library and University; Demonstrated effective oral, written, and interpersonal communication skills; Demonstrated commitment to user-centered library service and the ability to work flexibly and creatively in a changing and fast-paced environment with a culturally diverse population; Evidence of continued professional development, involvement, and contribution.
SALARY AND BENEFITS: Compensation will be competitive and commensurate with experience and qualifications. This is a visiting one-year non-tenure track twelve-month faculty appointment at the Librarian Assistant rank. The position offers a comprehensive benefits package including: TIAA-CREF; medical and dental insurance; life, disability, and long-term care insurance available; tuition remission; 13 paid holidays; and 22 days annual vacation. Additional employment benefits available include credit union; Employee Assistance Program; bookstore, and sporting event discounts; optional fee-based membership in a state-of-the-art wellness center, and no state or local income taxes. More information on benefits can be found at: http://www.miami.edu/benefits/pdf/bensum-faculty06.pdf.
APPLICATIONS AND NOMINATIONS: Review of applications will begin immediately and continue until the position is filled. Applications and nominations will be accepted until a suitable candidate is selected. Applications should be submitted electronically and must include a letter of interest, curriculum vitae and the names of three references. The references will not be contacted before the appropriate time. Send nominations and applications to:
Marylen
Exposito, Human Resources Manager
Otto G. Richter Library
University of Miami
P.O. Box 248214
Coral Gables, FL 33124-0320
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
fax: 305-284-3913
The University of Miami is an Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action
Employer.
The University has a strong commitment to diversity and encourages
applications
from candidates of diverse cultural backgrounds.
-------------------------------------------------------------
| Subject: | [MLA-L] Answers to my questions about recruiting and hiring of new library employees |
|---|---|
| Date: | Mon, 5 Apr 2010 14:41:12 -0500 |
| From: | Michael Duffy <[log in to unmask]> |
Greetings, MLA-L colleagues.
Last month, during the Career Development & Services Committee session entitled "Putting Your Best Foot Forward" at the
2010 MLA meeting, I said that I would post the answers to the questions I asked on MLA-L on 2/9/2010 regarding recruiting
and hiring new library employees. Only answers from those who have agreed to my sharing their comments on MLA-L
are included. Names and institutions of those who responded have been removed.
Thanks again, to all who took the time to respond!
Michael Duffy
Music Librarian/Head of Branch Libraries
Northern Illinois University
Question 1: Have you ever actively recruited a particular individual for a job in your institution?
*If you mean, have I myself encouraged someone to apply for a particular position, rather than waiting for people to apply
and then considering that list of candidates, then no. I do know that this often happens, though, of course.
*No.
*Yes
*NO
*Yes, but only if a person currently doesn't have a job (fresh out of school or unemployed). I think it's really bad form
to recruit someone who is already holding a position.
*I have *suggested* with the idea that our Dean has final say, and that I wouldn't want to promise a job and have the person
go through search process and then not be offered.
*No.
*I don't think so. We have had people apply and go through the process who were interim in the job or who were internal
candidates. At times, that person has gotten the job and at times they have not. They still have to compete against a
national pool.
*Yes.
Question 2: If so, how effective was this strategy in helping you secure the best person for the job?*Not applicable.
*N/A, but I feel it can be useful.
*Excellent, largely because we often recruited former student staff into support staff positions and so knew their work
and personalities.
*[no response]
*Very effective. I frequently call music librarian mentors/internship hosts to see if they have had a recent intern or
student that would fit the qualifications for my open position. If they don't end up applying for my open position, I will
contact them via e-mail to see if they are interested and to explain more about the position. If there is an upcoming MLA
meeting, I may try to talk with them about the position.
*Honestly, there are always individuals out there one didn't know before the interview process who turned out to be perfect,
so soliciting only goes so far.
*[no response]
*See above. When the person competes against a national pool and still gets the job then you know you had the right person
all along.
*It improved the applicant pool.
Question 3: Do you have any expectations from people you invite to apply? If so, what are your expectations?
*I've never done this.
*This is a broad question--not sure what you mean exactly. I expect that the cover letter will specifically address all of the qualifications
listed in the job ad and that the cover letter and CV will be error-free.
*The same as for any other candidate: Provide a current, accurate, typo-free resume. Show up on time and properly dressed for a profesisonal
interview. Have a few relevant questions of their own to ask. However, if they decide not to apply, I would expect them to respond promptly,
hopefully (though not of course required) about why. For example, "salary too low" would be a very useful response.
*[no response]
*No, just the same expectations I would have for all the candidates.
*That they won't embarrass me. Actually, one person I didn't know personally found out from something I said at an MLA session that we were hiring,
so applied with news that he met me at MLA, etc. (with assumption that I had blessed his application), was hired, and turned out to be a
horrible fit. -- He was not applying for a music library job, and was not a member of MLA, I might add.
*[no response]
*See above. We even have internal candidates participate in telephone interviews. We do not give them any special treatment.
*I expect them to let me know if they decide to not apply.
Question 4: Do you feel on-site candidates have an obligation to write thank-you notes after an interview? If so, to whom do you feel these
notes should be sent?
*I absolutely do NOT think they have an obligation to do so, no. Again, though, I've noticed that it's often done over here.
*Yes, to the search committee.
* I think it is a good idea to write a thank you these days, at least via the chair of the committee, though I know some have sent notes
to everyone on the committee.
*Yes -- to the interviewer
*No, there is really no obligation. I do have to say that it shows that the candidate cares about the position and really demonstrates interest.
I think it's a good idea in general. Thank you notes should go to people on the search committee since they have spent the most amount of time
with the candidate. E-mail thank you notes are not as effective IMO. I think it's really about effort and demonstrating interest.
*I do not feel this is an obligation. It does show some social acumen, however. We have had notes sent to the arranging secretary, who is very
pleased to forward them on to committee members. I would suggest that the Chair of the Search Committee be the one addressed. If secretary,
that's OK, too, but not as cognizant of who is actually recommending hire (Chair and committee).
*A thank you note or email is always a nice touch. I'd expect it to be sent to the chair of the committee. A lot of times the other members
are introduced but the candidate has no written record of their names, and there can be quite a few people. I did a presentation for my
last interview, and sent the electronic copy with a thank-you email to the University Librarian, and asked her to please forward it on to the
other members of the committee.
*Yes, I do. Often the committee needs to make a decision before a
handwritten note would make it, so email (to the whole committee or to
the
chair) is fine. We had one candidate who made her own envelopes out of
pages from a magazine. I have to admit, they looked weird and I thought
it was a solicitation postcard and almost threw it away. Don't be
quirky!
*It doesn't hurt. They should be sent to the search committee chair.
Question 5: Has there ever been a situation when a candidate’s
consideration status has been changed because of a thank-you note that
was (or was not) sent?
*Absolutely not. Such a small thing would not change my view of a
candidate, if I'd already decided to accept or reject them. After all,
we have Library HR procedures -- interviews, presentations, etc. -- that
are meant to give us a rounded view of the candidate. It would be a bit
insulting to the rest of the search committee for a particular position
if I suddenly decided to hire/not hire based on a small thing like a
"thank you" postcard.
*No.
*I think the note either added to or detracted from whatever the
consideration status already was, but never made a
significant difference. Perhaps this means that good people
write notes.
*no
*No, but I've heard search committee members affirm that the person
must be interested in the position since they went to the trouble of
sending print thank you notes.
*No, actually. Like I said, it's a nicety and mightily appreciated,
but if based on resume and interview, you're a good fit, whether or not
you wrote a thank-you note is inconsequential. However, *should* there
be a dead heat (sometimes happens), the person going that extra courtesy
step could very well win out. Shows follow up, communication,
collegiality, all those good things. Let's put it this way, no one has
ever *lost* a job because of writing a thank-you note.
*Yes, one person also took it as a chance to emphasize her
qualifications
and skills, and mentioned a couple of things that were not
completely covered in the questions we asked. We were trying to choose
between her and another person who was equally qualified, but this
tipped the
balance in her favour.
*Probably not. We did think that the thing above was odd, but she got
the
job.
*No.
Question 6: In your experience, have candidates’ post-interview actions
(such as thank you notes, e-mails, phone calls, etc.) been helpful,
harmful, or inconsequential to their chances of being offered the
position? Why?
*Completely inconsequential, for the reasons I've given above. In my
view, it gives no one candidate any sort of advantage over any other if
they send, or don't send, me a "thank you". After all, what are they
thanking me for? For making them prepare a presentation, have some
harrowing interviews, and travel often hundreds of miles? :-)
*Mostly inconsequential--but it's nice to see when people do remember
the
standards of writing thank yous and correctly formatting letters and
CVs. It makes me think they'd pay attention to these details in their
work too.
*Same as answer to 6. I think a short simple thank you note is
appropriate but I wouldn't make a big fuss about it.
*Post-interview actions generally have reinforced positive impressions
of
candidates
*This is a hard one to answer, it largely depends on the candidate's
approach. I would not advise bugging the chair of the search committee
for constant updates on the search process. Once or twice would be OK.
There is fine line between demonstrating continued interest in the
position and really bothering someone. I think employers assume that how
someone acts during the interview process is a good indicator of how
they would act on the job. My pet peeve is pre-interview actions or
actions by people who don't get interviews and feel they are entitled to
an interview for one reason or the other. Lately, I've had parents call
me about their child's reasons for not getting interviewed or
considered. IMO, this is a really bad thing. If you are applying for a
librarian position, you should be old enough to advocate or speak for
yourself. Besides, potential employers cannot share this information
with parents, only the candidate. This seems to be a new development and
I've heard it from other libraries/employers. I would always eliminate a
candidate from the pool if their parent(s) contacted me about an open
position or the search process.
*I think the only time when it has been harmful has been when we have
been harassed for a decision too soon. Sometimes things take longer
than a few weeks, or campus protocols and procedures (outside of our
hands) take longer. I would suggest against phone calls. That just
puts the person in on the other end unprepared and on the spot. If need
to follow up, e-mails are best.
*Mostly inconsequential, except for the one person I mentioned above. I
haven't had a lot of people calling or emailing me after their
interviews to ask questions, but that's because I have worked in
environments where the decision-making process was relatively fast.
I think that it's appropriate to call and see how the competition is
going, especially if you have been given a timeline and expect to
have been contacted by a certain date. If we've had a delay in making a
decision I always try to contact the candidates and let
them know what's happening, but sometimes that is difficult. I have
only had one person show up in person to harrass me about why
she didn't get an interview, but we wouldn't have considered her
anyways....she had lied on her resume and didn't realize how easy it
was for me to figure that out.
*I think if someone continues to contact the committee, it's not
particularly useful. When you have more candidates or you can't meet
for a
few days, there isn't anything you can do to make a decision more
quickly.
As long as you've been clear about your timeline, the candidate should
be
patient.
*Inconsequential. I have not experienced any post-interview actions
that
influence the decision one way or the other.
Question 7: Do you think it is appropriate for a candidate who has not
been offered a position at your institution to contact you to find out
why he/she was not selected or to ask what he/she could do to improve
his/her chances of being offered a job in the future?
*I personally don't think it's appropriate, and I'd never give such
information (I mean, I'd reply to the candidate, but just say that we
don't get involved in this sort of thing). You're laying yourself open
for a grievance. For example, if we say "you didn't demonstrate x..."
they might then say "well, you didn't give me a chance to...". Or if we
say "your presentation was weak", then it will be "well, *how* exactly
was it weak?", etc. etc. And, frankly, it's very time-consuming to
supply this kind of feedback. You're too busy dealing with the candidate
who *has* been successful -- writing search narratives, etc. -- to get
into long correspondence with all the candidates who *weren't*
successful.
*I think so, if they are not too pushy. Usually we can't say too much,
but depending on whether I knew the person individually (or if they
were
fresh out of school and clueless) I might try to give some guidance
within reason.
* This can be awkward and perhaps not helpful, and employers have to be
very careful
about what they say these days for legal reasons. I think
if it is an in-house candidate the chair of the committee
might want to offer some sort of explanation to maintain
good staff relations.
*I always discuss the reasons with the candidate
*Yes, it's appropriate but only if they really, truly do want to hear
the answers. It's not advisable to make contact to complain about the
process or the search committee or anything else really. I think the
candidate should be sincere and indicate that the purpose of making
contact is because they want to sharpen their interviewing skills or do
a better job of interviewing. I would certainly be open to giving a
gentle critique of their interviewing skills. Sometimes the reason for
not offering the person a position has nothing at all to do with their
interviewing skills. Some of that I can share and sometimes it's
confidential.
* I don't see a problem with that at all. We are, really, a collegial
profession, and anything we can do to help a person in their career is
good for everyone. That being said, sometimes the reason for a non-hire
is something as simple as time-line (someone is able to start earlier).
I would suggest *not* following up on a non-hiring decision as an
opportunity to argue or defend or to lambast the institution for not
hiring them. Just close your mouth and listen and take away whatever
info. you can gain in order to do better the next time.
*Sometimes I wish that they would, although it can be difficult to know
what to say. Many times I've wanted to tell someone to dress more
appropriately, not to be too familiar even if you know people on the
panel, and make sure that you can answer the basic questions that you
are
sure to be asked. One thing that really helps is if the chair of the
committee phones the unsuccessful
candidates and tells them why the person who got the job was
successful.
An email or brief call from an HR person is so
cold that I've always been too intimidated to call anyone else to ask
why I didn't get the position. It's not easy to make those calls, but
the institution and the candidates have put a lot of time and effort
into the process, so it just seems like good practice to take a
few minutes to talk about it and offer some advice and encouragement if
that seems like it's needed.
*I think it's okay. Sometimes it's hard to quantify - if two candidates
are
fairly equal and it was really about fit, then that's harder to
discuss.
But if they didn't make the first cut, there are usually concrete
reasons
why they didn't. A candidate who was active on MLA-L once contacted me
to
find out why he didn't get even a phone interview. I explained to him
that
we *required* knowledge of at least one foreign language and he had not
addressed that in any way in his materials. If you don't address a
requirement, you'll get dropped.
*It is appropriate for them to ask once, but not to keep asking after
they
receive an answer.
Question 8: What are your thoughts on candidates negotiating salary or
benefits? Is it appropriate? How should such negotiations be handled?
Are they ever not appropriate?
*I think it's fine. I don't have a problem with it. The candidate has a
right to try to get as much salary/benefits as he/she can, and the
institution has a right to try to keep to its original offer. It's a
negotiation. No problem. Negotiations need to be handled by the person
who is responsible for making the original offer. I wouldn't expect the
rest of a search committee to have to be involved. Once they have chosen
the candidate, their work is done.
*This is such a hard one--I never feel prepared for this part of it.
Part
of me thinks you (the candidate) should ask for what you want as
politely as possible and all they can do is say no. But, the logistics
are complicated. I think one should try to read the
situation/institution as carefully as possible (...don't ask for $20K
from a school that's announced huge budget deficits, etc.).
*I think this is appropriate but needs to be done carefully.
Usually these negotations take place at a higher level than
the search committee (e.g., the hiring official, which may
be the director or even HR). The candidate needs to have a
solid case for negotiating and know in advance what he/she
will and will not accept. And he/she should never burn
their bridges because you never know how things may change
at the institution, with the person you're negotiating with,
or when a future position becomes available.
*Because there is little wiggle room with salaries
at my institution and they are comparatively on the low side, I always
communicated the salary range before the interview. If the candidate
is
not able to live with that salary, there's no sense wasting either
parties time with an interview.
*Good question but hard to answer. Most candidates are not good at
negotiating salary. I think this is the most uncomfortable part of the
process. Benefits are hard to negotiate since they are almost always
pre-determined, there is just not that much flexibility (at least at my
institution). It helps to do some research on average salaries for the
position in the geographical area. It helps to share previous salary
figures so I know what to expect. This may in some cases, disqualify you
from the pool though if your salary requirements are way out of the
salary range for the open position. Negotiations should be handled
directly with the person that has the authority to make these decisions
at the time of the job offer. I think negotiating is always appropriate.
Candidates often fail to ask about raises in future years and how
promotions would impact salary.
*Most certainly appropriate, if necessary. We have our Admin. Services
director talk in detail to each candidate about benefits and so forth.
I would suggest asking at that time, what wiggle room there may be.
Some things are bound due to fairness practices. Be aware of a prickly
situation called salary compression. If you go into an institution
asking for the moon, when good folks who have been there for years, been
promoted, etc., aren't making that high, you might be asking for
trouble. Many state institutions (ours included) have salaries
publically available (usually in print form). Find out salary range
where you're going before making assumptions. However, negotiating a
salary or start time OK, if not seeming arbitrary (what are your
reasons?). If benefits explained well enough, should make it clear that
some things are not negotiable due to campus faculty Rule and
Regulations or union. Ask if salary and benefits are negotiable, *then*
if feel strongly, negotiate. Don't start making demands if we are
powerless to do something about it.
*I think that they can always be negotiated, especially salary.
Benefits
can be trickier because they are often
more standard. I can't think of a time when it would be appropriate to
just accept what is offered, and if the candidate
can't get the salary he/she expects maybe there are moving costs, a
research grant, etc. that could be thrown in.
*I do think it's appropriate to negotiate salary. In most cases, there
are
equity issues with benefits and they are non-negotiable. In our case,
those negotiations take place with the dean.
*It is appropriate if those are negotiable aspects of the position.
Question 9: When you offer a job to a candidate, do you consider it to
be an ethical obligation of the candidate to inform you if they are
being considered by another employer?
*No, not particularly. I'll usually ask them at the end of the
interview process "are you still interested in this position?", and "do
you have any other job interviews lined up at the moment?". After all,
if we really, really want a particular candidate, then we might be
prepared to make a higher offer just so that they *don't* go to these
other interviews.
*If it impacts the timeline of their decision making.
*No. That might be assumed, just as the institution is likely
interviewing other candidates.
*I always ask.
*No, but this could help in salary negotiations especially if the
candidate has already been offered a position and a salary has been
established for that position.
*Ethically, yes, I do. Obviously not required. We would very much
like to have our pick confirm one way or another within the week,
otherwise, we very much need to go with our second choice. We have
needs, too, and to reopen a search is very expensive and time-consuming.
However, sometimes unforeseen circumstances come up (our choice then
counter-offered with much higher salary at own institution - which was a
surprise to her). Everyone be fair to each other. Think how you would
feel? I did have a director suggest all of us go out and interview for
other jobs to show our "marketability" to then come back with our higher
salary suggestions - somehow documenting our worth (too horrid to
contemplate), but I could absolutely not do that to my friends in the
music library community. That's an old-fashioned "corporate" technique,
I think, to go out and get a better offer in order to raise your
salary/benefits at your own job. BTW, that director is no longer at our
library. That’s the thing, our music library (and even wider library)
community is pretty much a close-knit group. I would never want to poop
on my friends.
*Yes, it's part of being honest. If you are involved in two
competitions
that came up at the same time, that's ok...
but I want to know about it. If the candidate doesn't tell me and I
find
out about it, I feel like the person has been
dishonest even if it was another motive that caused him/her not to say
anything.
*I guess it's the polite thing to do. If they ask for more time, and
say
they have another interview in a few days, then you'd be more
understanding than if they left you hanging. You might also offer to
answer any concerns or questions they have.
*Not an ethical obligation, but a courtesy, especially if it delays
their
decision.
Question 10: Do you think that a candidate is ethically bound to begin
a job if
they have accepted an offer of employment, or conversely, is it
unethical to withdraw from a position after it has been accepted if the
candidate has been offered a more attractive position by another
employer?
*Ethically I'd say that once an offer has been accepted, the candidate
should turn up for work on the agreed starting date. *However*, no-one
wants an unhappy employee. So if this happened I'd be disappointed, but
it's all in the game, and we'd have to re-consider our second choice
candidate. Subconsciously I'd probably think carefully about considering
the successful (first) candidate for a position in the future, but I
hope I'm professional enough that I could put these concerns aside if I
found myself interviewing that candidate for another position in the
future. accept a job elsewhere. It's not good practice, though!
*I guess it depends on whether the contract has been signed yet.
Personally I'd feel really uncomfortable withdrawing after accepting a
position, but if there were extenuating circumstances (like spousal
jobs, etc) I could see doing it. This is why I think the candidate
needs
to let the institution know if they are waiting to hear about other
offers, etc in a best effort to get all offers on the table before
making a decision,
*Likely unethical (and perhaps illegal if a contract has been
signed?). Still, if this happens fairly early on after
accepting a position it is understandable, but not if more
than a week or so goes by. Still it would be awkward
(burning bridges and all that) and the institution might
already have turned down the other candidates, who now know
they weren't the first choice. After all, the candidate
could call the other institution and explain that they've
had a job offer but are very interested in this other
position, and do they know when they will be able to make a
hiring decision. That would also show this second employer
that the candidate has ethical standards. And it could
allow the candidate to ask the first employer for more money
or at least for a couple of weeks to decide.
*As long as my institution has not invested any money in
training or moving a candidate, I do not see any ethical issue if a
candidate withdraws from a position.
*Yes, this is a horrible situation for an employer and has the
potential to follow a candidate around for a long time. Our profession
is really pretty small and word would get around. "Everybody kinda knows
everybody" I would advise not accepting a job until you are completely
sure that you want the job and have turned down other offers or have
heard from all other potential employers.
*Yep. Searches are long and expensive. You will leave a bad taste in
the mouth (and word-of-mouth) if you have committed then pulled out
later without a good reason. We all know where you'll end up and will
hear why.
*Yes, but if someone really wants to go somewhere else it's probably
best
to let them go. Otherwise they'll
probably be unhappy and go looking for another position anyways.
Someone
did this to me recently and
it left me feeling that I had been taken advantage of...the person was
playing us off against each other. I'm
not going to think very favourably of that person in the future. If the
other position is a better fit (for example,
ours is part-time or temporary and the other is a permanent or
tenure-track position) I would understand.
*That would be pretty bad, in my estimation. Once you accept the job,
you
should take it. On the other hand, if you've accepted a job and regret
it,
then it's better to withdraw than be miserable. It's expensive to bring
in
and train a new person. Don't waste everyone's time if you won't stay.
*Yes, absolutely.