"The more qualified you are today, the harder it is to get hired. This is not a guess. It's a documented, scientific reality. A recent study published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology found that when job candidates were perceived as "high-capability," highly experienced, highly credentialed, or simply more advanced than what a role required, they were less likely to be hired than lower-capability applicants, even when all other factors were equal."
"candidates who appear "too good" for a job are viewed with suspicion. Not because of any specific flaw, but because of what they might do. They might leave too soon. They might expect too much compensation. They might act superior. They might disrupt the hierarchy. Or, they might just get bored and leave. So, employers hedge. They take the path of least resistance. They pass on the most capable candidates, not because they doubt their skills, but because they fear the candidates' motives."
"If you've been in the job market for a while and you have a long résumé, seniority, and lots of education behind you, you've felt this firsthand. You've applied to roles that match your background perfectly and heard nothing. It's not in your head. The system is flagging you as a problem. Fortunately, this bias can be overcome. Rewriting the story"
Highly qualified job applicants often face a hiring penalty because employers perceive them as risks and are less likely to hire them. Employers fear overqualified hires will leave early, demand higher pay, behave superiorly, disrupt hierarchy, or become bored. The "overqualified" label increasingly masks bias related to age, education, or perceived cultural fit. Experienced candidates with long résumés and seniority can be systematically flagged and overlooked by hiring systems. The hiring penalty is rooted in emotion and fear, but it can be countered by reframing employer perceptions and demonstrating commitment and fit.
Read at Fast Company
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]