Why waiting for a job is like waiting for Prince Charming

Do you know that feeling - you've written job applications or query letters and you're just waiting for someone (anyone!) to get back to you? Well, truth be told - if people are interested, they will get back sooner rather than later. So if you're still waiting after, let's say, a month, then something went wrong.

But instead of reflecting on what we could improve, we often either keep waiting or keep applying the same way, with the same strategy. I wonder what turns us into that electric toy that has reached the wall but still keeps running full speed ahead, walking in place? Is it because we are used to one method of doing something and feel secure doing it? Even though it may not return results? Or is it the process itself, the black abyss that applications and query letters seem to be falling into, never to be heard of again?

I was just thinking about that when an analogy struck me - waiting for a job is like waiting for Prince Charming! Destructive because it ain't gonna happen. But the question is why would we engage in as silly a behavior well into our careers? I mean, waiting for Prince Charming could be excused with inexperience. But waiting for a job? What makes us so hopeful? And why do we sometimes forget that unless we cause it, nothing is going to happen.

Not that we shouldn't be hopeful. Hope is a wonderful thing. After all, it keeps us going. But there should be some basis to it. Sure, we've written those applications and query letters, which is great. But if after the 20th letter, no response (not even a 'no') is forthcoming, then we should look at our strategy:

• Am I to the point? Are potential clients or employers turned off by a long letter or resume?


• Is my approach working? Am I putting my best foot forward? Or could I advocate myself better?


• Are my samples up to the mark? Do I need to do more research?


• Are my rates in line with market expectations? Am I competitive?


• Am I applying for the right kind of jobs? Maybe I need to scale down or gain more experience.


• Are my references up-to-date?


• And what about grammar, spelling, etc.? Should I give my resume one more person to read before it goes out? For an important job, the cover letter too. (If you're not sending cover letters - forget it! Why deprive yourself of that extra selling tool?)

Well, whatever it is, there are plenty of reasons to check and double check one's approach. So that the Prince-Charming job can be captured - hook, line and sinker!

What are you waiting for?

Advantage No. 3: Article Requests

Has it happened to you that a friend or colleague said: "I wish there was an article on XYZ topic" and you were actually able to help them out by writing it?

This is easy to do if you have a writing outlet (i.e., the web site, blog or print publication you write for) that lets you publish in a variety of areas.

Though it rarely happens that one is an expert on the topic requested, it is all the more rewarding when it happens. Because a) you are helping a friend and b) you are filling a gap by answering a request, and c) you don’t have to search for a useful topic.

My article on how to type special German letters like the umlauts and ß fast by using keyboard shortcuts elicited the response: “I wish that was available for Spanish!” Well, that was one request I could fulfill easily. Here’s the article link for anyone interested.

Happy writing!

Another Avantage: Instant Feedback

Probably one of the most rewarding aspects of writing is feedback. Positive feedback but also constructive negative feedback. Especially when writing for the Web, feedback often follows instantly in the form of comments.

I just love it when I check on the articles I have published and see that they have received comments. Often, a discussion about an aspect of the article gets going, which can be very productive. Or someone adds an aspects that I had not thought of. Or adds something based on their own experience. Or points me to a connection I was not aware of. Or just complements me on a good article, which makes my day. But I am also grateful for constructive criticism, maybe a viewpoint or resource I missed.

What I can't stand is purely negative feedback that serves no purpose. For example, I got slammed by an anonymous commenter for one typo I had made in a 600-word article. Needless to say, that person's post was riddled with typos. What is the point of such a post? Is it frustration with not being able to publish? Or was that poster just having a bad day? I don't know, but I usually don't give it much thought. And wherever I have the choice, don't post criticism that slams without being constructive.

On the other hand, when I see an article that sheds light on a topic in a new way or brings an important topic to the foreground, I can't stop myself from giving feedback immediately. Either by recommending the writing, passing it on, or leaving a comment for the author.

So, we are indeed lucky that we don't write into a black abyss any more or have to wait weeks or months for feedback (as it was in print days). What do you think, was feedback more constructive when people were forced to send their comments as a well thought-out letter or do you think the spontaneity of comments is preferrable?

Appreciating your comments!