Too good to hire? Highly experienced applicants often get screened out right away, but they shouldn't be dismissed out of hand

HR Magazine, Oct, 2004 by Susan J. Wells

Three years ago, Mike Genebach, a technology executive in Northern Virginia, left the company he had founded to take a lower-paying job as managing partner at a software consulting company. For Genebach, the slight step back was a calculated risk that he hoped would pay off with greater career advancement down the road.

"The job had less responsibility" than his previous positions, he says, "but I knew and respected the company and had expected growth--my aim was to advance to a higher-level role in the firm."

But the job was more limited in scope than he expected and did not offer the advancement opportunities he had hoped for. After only three months, Genebach left to take a position that better suited his career goals--senior vice president of professional services at a $400 million technology information services company, where he has since advanced to senior vice president of mergers and acquisitions integration and head of information systems.

Genebach's short-lived job change taught him a lesson: Without documented expectations and responsibilities between both parties, it's easy to unintentionally create a less-than-perfect match of skills and goals.

"If specific objectives aren't set and fully described," says Genebach, "you're at great risk for being unhappy and unsatisfied."

Genebach's story illustrates perhaps the biggest fear shared by HR professionals, recruiters and hiring managers about overqualified candidates: The job won't meet expectations, the overqualified applicant will be unchallenged, and the employee will leave as soon as something better comes along.

Despite the fear of turnover, experts suggest it's time to give overqualified applicants a closer look. New jobs may be slowly cropping up in greater numbers, but demand still exceeds supply in the employment market. And with significant ranks of so-called underemployed workers--those who have settled for "survival" jobs at levels below what their backgrounds could demand--evidence is mounting that HR professionals will be fielding applicants with higher qualifications more often.

"There are some pressures in the economy--demand for workers, shifting demographics and decelerating careers in retirement, among them--that are making this a real issue," says Scott Erker, vice president of selection solutions at Development Dimensions International Inc. (DDI), an HR consulting firm in Bridgeville, Pa. "People tend to pass over candidates who don't appear to fit right away, but there can be enormous benefits in hiring highly qualified applicants."

The Pros and Cons

On the upside, overqualified applicants present several potential advantages:

* They can be quick studies. They can get up to speed and contribute quickly. Plus, employers can save on training time and costs.

* They can help others develop. They can help mentor other employees, which can bolster succession planning. They, and their proteges, can help fill future leadership needs.

* They can be a hiring bargain. Smart employers may be able to pick up tomorrow's leaders today at below-market prices. "If I'm a hiring manager, I'd consider that hiring the overqualified can make you look good, help you meet your goals sooner and potentially contribute a lot more to your company," says Peter LeVine, president of Peter LeVine Associates Inc., a professional reference checking and consulting firm in Boca Raton, Fla. "In essence, you're getting a Cadillac for the price of a Buick."

Yet overqualified applicants still complain that they are seen as a poor fit and dismissed out of hand by employers. Among the biggest disadvantages they are perceived to have:

* They're a flight risk. Employers are reluctant to take a chance on an employee who may get bored with a lesser job and quit once they find a better opportunity.

* They're too expensive. An overqualified candidate's salary requirements may price them out of the budget for the job.

* They're likely to intimidate others. Hiring a person who is far more experienced than her peers or immediate supervisor can create upside-down reporting relationships and authority tensions. Others in the organization may feel threatened by her experience.

Not all employers and HR professionals, however, get mired in these potential downsides.

Tim Biscaye, PHR, an HR consultant and contractor with Composite Technology Development Inc., an engineered materials solutions company in Lafayette, Colo., is among those with a positive view of candidates who appear overqualified on paper.

"My practice has been to qualify such individuals through screening to determine the reasons for interest in a position that is seemingly beneath their expertise level," he says. "I've found some gems over the past 15 years."

Case in point: His firm's last two hires both appeared overqualified and above salary ranges. "But in both cases, they volunteered a willingness for decreased salaries," he says. "What both were looking for were those 'other' benefits--a stable and growing company, future growth opportunities, the advantages of working in a great work environment and the challenge of learning new applications," he says.