Are employers flexible with experience requirements (if you have advanced training)? (employee, application)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have posted on here before and am a career changer going into accounting. I am in the process of starting a business but need interim income and would like to get a job in basic QuickBooks accounting work.
Every job I see posted requires a minimum of one years experience and most start at two years experience. As far as QuickBooks, I have earned the pro advisor certification for 2010 & 2011 in QuickBooks as well as the QB's Enterprise edition and Point of Sale pro advisor certification. These were not easy certification courses and demonstrate advanced knowledge of how the software works.
I have other acquired skills that would give me an advantage including advanced reporting ability using Crystal reports. I bought a copy and trained myself in its use to the point where I can create reports and formulas for reporting.
Very few entry level people, even with one to two years experience would have either QuickBooks pro advisor certification or Crystal experience.
The problem is I do not have experience showing on my resume. I have a feeling people only look at previous employment in evaluating my resume.
So my questions
1) Are employers flexible with experience or do they have set rules?
2) Would it be appropriate to change the sections of my resume indicating these skills to a bold font in order to draw attention to them?
3) How would you highlight the fact that your lack of experience might be overcome by advanced training?
I am talking 12 dollar an hour accounting clerk positions and I am not picky about anything except wanting to work with the QuickBooks system.
Your problem might be that you are over-qualified and looking for any job you can find, with plans to continue looking even after you are hired.
Knowing the software is only one part of the package, you also need to know the companies systems. If I were looking at resumes, I'd be afraid that you'd leave just as you were getting familiar with our systems and we were getting value out of you.
I'd add the certifications but wouldn't bold them.
And I'd have some sort of plan as to how to address being overqualified.
Your problem might be that you are over-qualified and looking for any job you can find, with plans to continue looking even after you are hired.
Knowing the software is only one part of the package, you also need to know the companies systems. If I were looking at resumes, I'd be afraid that you'd leave just as you were getting familiar with our systems and we were getting value out of you.
I'd add the certifications but wouldn't bold them.
And I'd have some sort of plan as to how to address being overqualified.
Any new hire would have to learn company systems so I do not see that as a handicap. Knowing some of the more advanced areas would probably compensate for the learning curve in other areas. To have a pro advisor on staff would be of great benefit to a company that would probably be of value from day one.
I have been primarily trying through temporary services which would indicate no long term commitments by either party. ( it seems that very few direct hire positions are advertised right now) The problem is that these temporary recruiters do not know what QB's pro advisor certification means, all they see is someone with no experience. They also do not understand the value of Crystal reporting and how rare it is to have an entry level person come into their office who knows it.
If I could approach the hiring manager directly I think I would have a much better chance.
Any new hire would have to learn company systems so I do not see that as a handicap. Knowing some of the more advanced areas would probably compensate for the learning curve in other areas. To have a pro advisor on staff would be of great benefit to a company that would probably be of value from day one.
I have been primarily trying through temporary services which would indicate no long term commitments by either party. ( it seems that very few direct hire positions are advertised right now) The problem is that these temporary recruiters do not know what QB's pro advisor certification means, all they see is someone with no experience. They also do not understand the value of Crystal reporting and how rare it is to have an entry level person come into their office who knows it.
If I could approach the hiring manager directly I think I would have a much better chance.
You missed my point, or perhaps I wasn't clear. When someone obviously overqualified applies, an employer generally feels that they are looking for "anything" and will ditch as soon as they find something else. A new hire who wasn't overqualified will probably stay around a lot longer. By the way, we use Quickbooks and don't have a "Pro Advisor" in our company, it's never been a problem.
Approaching hiring managers isn't as difficult as you think. That's where NETWORKING comes in. I was approached by a guy I know in my industry a few weeks ago who knows a guy in my area who is looking for a job. The guy who called me was wondering if I was hiring, and if so if I'd consider his friend for the position.
I'm not hiring for the type of work he's experienced in, but I told the person who called me that if that changed, I'd be in touch. If I had been hiring, he'd have a leg up in getting his resume directly to me.
I understand the overqualified problem but that is why I am looking through temporary agencies. I understand a lot of companies use temp services to try out new employees but I would hope a few of them just have a need for temporary help they do not intend to keep long term.
I understand the having a pro advisor on staff is not a business need but it does demonstrate competency in the program. It could be considered a "bonus" for the employer.
I understand the having a pro advisor on staff is not a business need but it does demonstrate competency in the program. It could be considered a "bonus" for the employer.
Not if we have to pay more for them because of a competency they have that we don't need. That's another reason employers shy away from over-qualified employees, they expect more money.
The only time I would consider an over-qualified employee would be when they can really give me a compelling reason to hire them. A good example would be if I had a p/t general office job that required a couple years experience as a receptionist, and I got an application from someone who had spent the last 10 years as an executive assistant. In the cover letter they explained that they had decided that they would rather have a job where they could put their kids on the bus in the morning and be home for them in the afternoon, even though it meant lower pay and being at the bottom of the corporate food chain.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
