Where do you see yourself in five years?

Following my previous article, someone asked me "Where do you see yourself in five years?” This reminded me of my first interviews as a candidate when other recruiters have asked me exactly the same thing. It was one of the questions I hated the most and I have always tried to do my best in giving answers as general as possible.

Later I understood that the intention behind it was to see if I had a career plan and how the job I was applying for would fit in my plan.

Whoever started asking this question didn't realize that mentioning an exact time frame forces candidates either to give answers out of the blue or general answers that were well prepared prior to the interview. Not everybody has a 5 years plan but that doesn't mean that they don’t have a plan at all.

How can this phrase be avoided and still find out what one’s career plans are? There are many other questions that can be asked around this topic. I believe that questions like "What is the next step in your career?" or "How do you see yourself evolving professionally?" are much more efficient. This way the other person has the comfort of not having to think at an exact time frame.
There are lots of people saying that this question makes no sense, that it’s a stupid question to ask and it forces people to say what they think the recruiters want to hear.

However, most interviewers ask this question one way or another. If you find yourself in the situation of answering the famous “Where do you see yourself in five years?” always have in mind that the real question is “What is the next step in your career and how the job you are applying for will help you get there?”. The answer will then be easier. What we should always have in mind is that we must emphasize how the job that we are interviewing for is integrating in our career plan. This is also a good opportunity to ask back the recruiter or the manager about the career potential in the company. It’s always a good idea to show your interest in developing your career in the company.  

Discrimination in the recruitment process

You don’t really realize how bad discrimination is until you experience it. At least I didn't...  The feeling you have when you are told up front that you might not get a job because of your nationality is far worse than I imagined.

When talking about the recruitment process there are always two parties involved: the candidates and the hiring company. Who is actually the company? Is it the general manager, the entity described at the section -”About us”, the managers? “The company” is every person that works for an employer and acts as representative of its interests. So we are talking about people who try to apply some rules and principles, to make the right decision according to their experience and knowledge. Therefore, in the recruitment process, maybe more than in other areas, there is always a great deal of subjectivism involved. Along with the job descriptions, the personality match plays a very important role in the hiring decisions.  Depending on the job, there are situations where the personality match is even more important than the technical skills which, unlike the personality, can be taught and learned in time.

How do the managers decide if a candidate has a matching personality or not? The process starts way before the first interview. It starts with the discussion between the hiring manager and the recruiter. 

The official issues discussed are the personality features desired from the future employee that are not specified in the job description. Some of the frequently requested personality traits are: honesty, responsibility, adaptability, patience, decisiveness but not only. So far so good. 

But what happens when the hiring manager says”…and I would like, if possible, someone not older than 35, single and male.”? These requirements are always said more or less with lower voice, in confidence and they are of course unofficial. Why? Because this behavior is not just unethical, it is also a breach of discrimination legislation. 

What are the options of the recruiter at this point? 

1. To tell the manager up front that this is called discrimination and this is both immoral and illegal. 

2. To write down the extra requirements and to start searching for the right candidate. 

3. To convince the manager to consider also people that don’t match exactly his last requirements but who meet all the other requirements regarding knowledge, experience, skills and competences- these criteria being essential for the job. 

What recruiters choose to do in this situation can have a great impact on the final decision. While it is almost impossible to change someone’s prejudices, way of seeing things and preferences, presenting candidates whose selection was based on knowledge, experience and skills, can sometimes avoid discrimination. 

However, discrimination in the recruitment process is not always generated by the managers. Recruiters earn their living through placing an applicant in the advertised position as efficiently as possible. How every recruiter understands to do that depends very much on their ethics, background, education, social environment and experience. Recruiters can as well have prejudices, positive or negative experiences with some category of people and this can and will most of the times influence the selection process.  

Despite all anti-discrimination legislation, this phenomenon is everywhere and will continue to be a problem especially because it is very hard to be proved. 

s and principles, to make the right decision according to their experience and knowledge. Therefore, in the recruitment process, maybe more than in other areas, there is always a great deal of subjectivism involved. Along with the job descriptions, the personality match plays a very important role in the hiring decisions.  Depending on the job, there are situations where the personality match is even more important than the technical skills which, unlike the personality, can be taught and learned in time.

How do the managers decide if a candidate has a matching personality or not? The process starts way before the first interview. It starts with the discussion between the hiring manager and the recruiter. 

The official issues discussed are the personality features desired from the future employee that are not specified in the job description. Some of the frequently requested personality traits are: honesty, responsibility, adaptability, patience, decisiveness but not only. So far so good. 

But what happens when the hiring manager says”…and I would like, if possible, someone not older than 35, single and male.”? These requirements are always said more or less with lower voice, in confidence and they are of course unofficial. Why? Because this behaviour is not just unethical, it is also a breach of discrimination legislation. 

What are the options of the recruiter at this point? 

1. To tell the manager up front that this is called discrimination and this is both immoral and illegal. 

2. To write down the extra requirements and to start searching for the right candidate. 

3. To convince the manager to consider also people that don’t match exactly his last requirements but who meet all the other requirements regarding knowledge, experience, skills and competences- these criteria being essential for the job. 

What recruiters choose to do in this situation can have a great impact on the final decision. While it is almost impossible to change someone’s prejudices, way of seeing things and preferences, presenting candidates whose selection was based on knowledge, experience and skills, can sometimes avoid discrimination. 

However, discrimination in the recruitment process is not always generated by the managers. Recruiters earn their living through placing an applicant in the advertised position as efficiently as possible. How every recruiter understands to do that depends very much on their ethics, background, education, social environment and experience. Recruiters can as well have prejudices, positive or negative experiences with some category of people and this can and will most of the times influence the selection process. 

 Despite all anti-discrimination legislation, this phenomenon is everywhere and will continue to be a problem especially because it is very hard to be proved.