Any career transition strategy must include evidence that the job seeker or job changer is involved in continuous learning. With competition for jobs tighter than ever, it creates a buyer market for hiring managers and recruiters. They can select from among the best in the talent pool and part of being the best is for the professional to be engaged in their field through a never-ending process of learning and refinement. 

I would recommend to any client going into a job interview that they make sure the interviewer knows that they are enthused and energized by their line of work or chosen profession and that they are constantly seeking ways to grow and learn more deeply and broadly about it. 

Now this does not have to mean just taking formal classes or matriculating into degree programs, although doing so can certainly count as concrete evidence. Additional continuous learning techniques can be accomplished through on-the-job-training, networking with those possessing expertise, joining and following relevant LinkedIn groups, getting involved with professional association activities and resources, and the one I would like to focus on today, the informational interview. 

This method is great for targeted learning about types of jobs. It is all about information gathering and when done well can leave you much more knowledgeable about where you want and do not want to go with your career. As an added benefit, informational interviewing can expand your network and serve as a self-promotion or marketing tactic that may pay off with learning about interesting and new opportunities down the road.  

The first thing to know about informational interviews is that they are not job interviews. The purpose is to ask proven professionals for advice and insight. They can help the job seeker learn more about specific careers, industries, and companies, resulting in you knowing much more about each than you did before. 

To do this well, however, you need to be someone who can reach out to these people in the know and make a request for an informational interview. In many cases this may mean making a cold contact — everybody’s favorite thing to do! But with practice, even the most introverted among us can get into the outreach zone. 

Keep this in mind, most people like to be asked about what they know and are good at. Who does not like to talk about themselves? Many current pros probably did some informational interviewing when they were considering transitions and feel it is appropriate to give back.   

Finding people to interview will require some homework. LinkedIn and Twitter along with other face-to-face networking through professional associations, Chambers of Commerce, alumni associations, professional journals or other publications, workshops, conferences, and social events can all turn up interesting people with whom to speak. 

Once you identify some potential contacts, approach them first in writing by explaining who you are and provide some professional background along with a specific purpose of your contact and your contact information. Request a twenty-minute time slot. (If lucky, it will go longer). Determine with them if face-to-face, phone, or Skype is the best way to talk. 

Never go into one of these ill prepared. Get as much background information together by visiting the organization’s or industry’s web sites beforehand along with pre-determined questions ready to use. 

You are asking them about things like: 

a typical day 

workplace environment and conditions 

necessary training and education requirements 

anticipated job prospects 

company and industry culture 

earnings potential 

typical company and industry career paths 

what their recommendations and warnings are 

best practices 

how they stack up with the competition 

I am sure that you can think of others. Hopefully, the conversation will begin to flow and take on a life of its own. 

As you conclude, ask if there is anyone else they can recommend for you to interview. After all, this is part of your continuous learning plan. There is always more to read and someone else to meet. 

The recent mass firing of an entire high school staff in Central Falls, RI is remarkable on several levels. And one of these is that there were many teachers fired who had not only a history of loyalty to the school and community but had years’ worth of positive evaluations or performance reviews. 

No one can argue that an organization, whether a school or business, should have a fair and effective means of determining whether employees are working to capacity and serving as a valued resource. A solid employee appraisal process gives management an opportunity to present positive feedback and to point out ways in which employee performance may need strengthening. 

It is a time when organizational and worker goals can be reviewed and aligned, and if relevant, obstacles to optimal performance can be identified and remediated. Through continuous refinement, the performance review process can add potency to organizational operations. 

But what happens when performance reviews are just an empty meaningless management tactic that really holds no operational value or legitimacy? That appears to have been the case in Central Falls.  

I had an opportunity lately to speak with some of the current and soon to be former staff of Central Falls High School and as would be expected they were disgruntled with what occurred. But the one single complaint that was heard most often was the one concerning the apparent lack of weight given to performance reviews. How can it be, they rightly ask, that teachers who had proven their merit through a negotiated performance review process did not have that process factor into their dismissal decision? All the effort placed by administrators into evaluating staff was wasted, since their assessment work had no bearing when it came to a mass firing. 

So why did the school district bother with performance reviews? One of the reasons why they occur is to identify employee training needs. Given that this school had a history of low-functioning students from low-income homes, it seems reasonable to assume that staff training needed to be better concentrated on improving student achievement with a challenging population such as this one. 

One wonders to what extent this training happened. Is it reasonable to assume that all the teachers were so incompetent that they were incapable of addressing the serious educational needs of an admittedly difficult student body? I think it was easier to just fire everybody, rather than to try building an effective training program. 

Another important function of performance reviews is to diagnose weaknesses to better address organizational inefficiencies. When an organization deteriorates to the point that its shortcomings are overwhelming, the question arises as to whether the blame lies more with the workforce or the leadership. 

It is difficult to see how this school was well administered. Education is difficult, but it is not particle physics. A more strategic attempt to use performance reviews as part of a plan to better target and mitigate organizational imperfections could have been a more humane and intelligent approach to strengthen the school. 

Perhaps the most important reason for having performance reviews is that they provide opportunities for employees and management to have frank and solution-oriented discussions of workplace issues. People do not go into teaching for money and prestige, but to try making a difference in their communities and to the lives of youth. It is one of those jobs that combines art, science, and passion to produce competence and effectiveness… not unlike many jobs out there. 

Members of an organization need to be able to collaborate forcefully on making quality decisions and solving problems. Institutionalizing improvement measures internally is paramount for an organization in crisis. 

Can you imagine the lack of cooperation and trust between management and rank and file that results in the firing of every employee? This is a case study of organizational failure.