Translate

2014/06/04

10 secrets about how employers really screen you


10 secrets about how employers are screening you


Peter Harris| 

We recently hired a new team member here at Workopolis, and she is awesome. However we almost lost out on her because of a red flag that came up when we were screening her. The professional references that she gave us all spoke very highly of her.
However, checking your professional references is only the very beginning of the investigating that employers do into a candidate’s background, reputation, and conduct.
Here are just some of the ways that employers secretly screening you:
    They’ll talk to anyone they might now at your former workplaces. This is the one that nearly tripped up our new hire. Someone in HR had a friend who worked at one of the companies on her resume. So of course she asked what the former coworker thought of her, and the response wasn’t great. (We hired her anyway, because that job had been several years ago, and we actually knew other people who had worked with her since who didn’t corroborate the negative review. But it could have been a deal breaker.)
    This is why it is important to be professional at all times on the job, make clean exits when changing jobs, and manage your working relationships carefully. You never know who is connected to a place you may want to work in the future.
    They Google you. Employers will be looking you up online. So if you have a website or a blog, make sure that you’re not publishing any images or information that you wouldn’t want potential new bosses to see. Similarly, you might want to tone down any aggressive or foul-mouthed commenting or posting you’d otherwise be tempted do on other websites.
    They will check your social media profiles. More and more people are on Twitter, Facebook, or LinkedIn (or all three) as well many other social networking sites. Got a YouTube channel? Your interviewer will be watching your recent videos. They’re going to check out your updates and tweets. Make sure that the content you post and share doesn’t cast you in an unfavourable light.
    Your phone manners and voicemail. Did you speak on the phone with the employer? Did you sound friendly and upbeat? How did you answer the phone? The small details matter when someone is getting to know you for the first time. And be sure to have a professional-sounding voicemail message if you’re applying for jobs.
    I once called a potential hire, and his recorded voice (in an imitation of Yoda) said, “Not home am I. Patient you must be. Call you back I will.” I didn’t leave a message.
    Also, I think everyone knows this by now, but have a professional looking email address for your resume.PimpDaddy69@email.com is going to be judged by his address.
    They’ll talk to the receptionist. Were you polite and friendly when you came into the office for your job interview? How was your demeanour while waiting? Everyone you interact with at the company (and not just the interviewer) is part of the screening process.
    They’ll judge you by what you’re wearing. We had a candidate once come in for an interview in shorts. That’s just ridiculous. You have to dress professionally to show respect for the interviewer and appropriately for the industry and the role.
    How you wear it matters. Employers will also notice if your clothes are clean, pressed or wrinkled, if your hair is unkempt or out-dated, if your shoes are polished or ragged. All of these can be indicators of your personality and of how much attention you pay to detail.
    Body language and posture. Employers will be watching how you move and act to see if you appear to be honest, confident and friendly. Slouching, avoiding eye-contact or shuffling around in your seat can all give them the wrong impression.
    Your in-person manners. Similarly, do you have a good handshake? Did you thank the interviewer for their time? How did you act when offered water or a coffee? Did you send a thank-you note after the interviewer. Employers want to see that you know the social conventions of polite professional interactions.
    In the case of a lunch interview, your table manners. Interviews over a meal create a whole new source of potential pitfalls. Those table manners that your mother used to stress will come in handy. Place your napkin on your lap. Reach for the glass on your right. Order food that you can eat with a knife and fork. (Finger foods can be messy.) Take small bites, so that you don’t get caught being asked a question when your mouth is full. Don’t talk with your mouth full. Don’t fight for the cheque. It’s an interview, not a social occasion; the employer will pay for lunch.
When you’re looking for a job, the last thing you want to do is give a potential employer a reason not to like you. They’ll be looking at more than just your resume and job interview answers, so (unlike Shorts Guy and Yoda Boy) make sure that you pay attention to detail at every step along the way.
_______

2014/04/29

How to outguess passwords, secutirty is the weakest link


By William Poundstone
Have you ever wasted a few moments with a sketchy website that promises to reveal your Klingon name (wizard name, ghetto name, porn star name, etc.)? Some of these sites are fronts for password-harvesting operations. They’ll ask you for some personal data—mixed in with Trekkie trivia —and prompt you to make up a password. Scammers know that the password you supply is likely to be similar or identical to ones you use elsewhere. They may sell collected passwords on the black market for about $20 each. A password is like the key to your home. There are weak locks and strong locks, but neither does any good when a pickpocket swipes your key. Security is always about the weakest link. Most identity thieves don’t bother with trickery. They pick the low-hanging fruit—the passwords easiest to guess. One recent study found that nearly 1 percent of passwords can be guessed in four tries. How is that possible? Simple—you try the four most common passwords. A typical list would run password, 123456, 12345678, and qwerty. That opens 1 percent of all sesames. Okay, you’re in the 99 percent not using an insanely bad password. You still have to consider the speed of today’s hacking software. John the Ripper, a free hacking program, can test millions of passwords a second. One commercial software recovery program intended for forensic use (on seized computers of child pornographers and terrorists) claims it can check 2.8 billion passwords a second. Initially, cracking software runs through an exhaustive, frequently updated list of thousands of the most popular passwords and then segues to a full dictionary search. It tries every single word in the dictionary, as well as all common proper names, nicknames, and pet names. Most of us have been shamed and browbeaten into adding numbers, punctuation marks, and odd capitalization to our passwords. This is known as mangling. In theory, mangling makes it a lot harder to guess a password. In practice, not so much. Almost everyone’s mind follows the same well-worn mental grooves. When a site insists on having a number, password becomes password1 or password123 with alarming regularity. A requirement to mix capitals and lowercase elicits Password or PaSsWoRd. Mandatory punctuation marks gets you password! and p@ssword. A password that might look secure, like $pider_Man1, isn’t. Everybody is oh-so‑devious in the same ways. There is reason to fear that site-enforced mangling rules cause users to pick simpler, easier‑to‑guess base passwords. Mangling can create a false sense of security. News features on password security invariably cut to the cynical expert who belittles every common or realistic password practice. Many pros subscribe to the “write it down” philosophy. “Simply, people can no longer remember passwords good enough to reliably defend against dictionary attacks, and are much more secure if they choose a password too complicated to remember and then write it down,” wrote consultant Bruce Schneier in 2005, eons ago in the digital world. “We’re all good at securing small pieces of paper. I recommend that people write their passwords down on a small piece of paper, and keep it with their other valuable small pieces of paper: in their wallet.” Even with the paper in hand, it’s a chore to peck out a long, hard‑to‑remember password. Good luck with a mobile device’s virtual keyboard. The gulf between experts and reality is illustrated by my father’s system. He writes his password on a Post‑it note and sticks it to his desktop monitor. The password is nothing fancy, just a two- word phrase with no digits or funny characters. Not only do real people choose insecure passwords, they have a heck of a time remembering them. In their digital wanderings, many users leave behind a snail trail of similar passwords. They try to use the same password for every site, damn the risk. But some sites play nanny, enforcing ad hoc rules about length and types of characters required. Users are forced to customize their usual password and then, when they try to log back in, they can’t remember how they customized it. A lot of what’s known about dumb passwords comes from the December 4, 2009, security breach of RockYou.com, a publisher of Facebook games. A hacker posted the site’s 32,603,388 user names and plaintext passwords. There have been many breaches before and since, but the scope of this one has made it a key dataset for the good guys and the bad guys. The most popular RockYou password was 123456. A reported 290,731 were using that one. There were many differences by age and gender. For men under thirty, sex and scatology supplied popular passwords: pussy, fuck, fucking, 696969, asshole, fucker, horny, hooters, bigdick, tits, boobs, and the like were high up on the list. Elders of both genders leaned toward dated pop-culture references. Epsilon793 might not be such a terrible password, were it not the password of Captain Picard on Star Trek: The Next Generation. The seven-digit 8675309, an inscrutably common choice, was a phone number in a pop tune way back when. Boomers, the eighties called, and they want their passwords back. It’s the easiest thing in the world to create a secure password. Use a random string of characters. You can’t achieve perfect randomness mentally, but you don’t have to do so. Websites and applets aplenty will give you random passwords generated from atmospheric noise. Here are some examples I just pulled from random.org: mvAWzbvf 83cpzBgA tn6kDB4T 2T9UPPd4 BLJbsf6r Problem solved? Sure, for the paranoid mnemonist—or those who use a password manager app secured by a fingerprint reader. Everyone else balks at the prospect of memorizing character soup. It doesn’t help that we’ve been told we need a different password for every account. Most users care more about convenience and less about security than the experts do. I’m not so sure the crowd is wrong. Do you have a panic room in your home? Probably not, though the people who install panic rooms will tell you that you need one. Before you spring for the panic room, maybe it would be better to make sure you always lock your front door. Realistic password threats fall into three categories. Call them casual, mass attack, and targeted. • Casual means people you know. A snoopy coworker or family member may want to log into your accounts. He will be trying to guess your password based on personal knowledge of you (without the benefit of password-cracking software). The casual snoop might know your high school team was the Wildcats and try that. He might be completely defeated by wildCatz1. • Mass attack is like spam, nothing personal. The pro identity thief isn’t trying to break into your account per se, and she knows nothing about you personally. She’s trying to assemble a list of cracked passwords, typically for resale. Password thieves use software and begin by trying to crack the least secure sites, those that permit many guesses. This could be a game site where the password has no financial value. When the software guesses correctly, it tries the same password and variants on more secure accounts like banking. • Targeted means a private or public detective plus software. Should an informed person want to hack into your accounts, and should that someone have money and time (and the law?) on his side, he’s likely to succeed. The only countermeasure is using a random password long enough to guarantee search times of your life expectancy or greater. Don’t be too sure you couldn’t be a target. A small business’s competitors may be willing to steal a laptop and expend the needed resources. So may a high-net-worth spouse in a divorce case. Hackers may take a disliking to someone’s business or politics. Twitter, meaning the whole site, was once compromised because an administrator unwisely chose the password happiness. In 2009 a hacker learned the Twitter password in a dictionary attack and posted it on the Digital Gangster site, leading to hijackings of the Twitter feeds of Barack Obama, Britney Spears, Facebook, and Fox News. Like everything else in life, passwords involve trade-offs. You can’t have maximal security and maximal ease of use at the same time. One of the best of the commonly advised tactics is to convert a phrase or sentence to a password. You pick a sentence, phrase, or song lyric and use the first letter of each word as your password. May the force be with you would become Mtfbwy. You wouldn’t want to use that one, though, and that’s the problem. You’re going to think of a well-known phrase from a movie, a college fight song, or South Park. How many eight-word-or-so phrases do you know verbatim? It’s not even clear that a randomly chosen phrase is harder to guess than a randomly chosen word. Few bother to mangle their pass-phrase acronym. It looks so random! An ideal password scheme would work even if everyone used it. Should the pass-phrase scheme become popular, acronyms of all the pop-culture catch phrases would enter the lists of popular passwords, and cracking software would try these passwords first. Normally, acronyms are all letters and thus less secure than an any-character string of the same length. Some of these drawbacks can be addressed. Never use a “famous quote.” One alternative is to use private jokes. Remember the funny comment the waiter said to Brenda in Cozumel? You do, Brenda does, maybe the waiter does, and that’s it. Should you pick that as your pass- phrase, the odds are high that you’ll be the only one on the planet using that phrase. It’s less certain that the password itself will be unique. Different phrases can begin with the same letters, producing the same acronym. Some letters are more likely to begin words than others, and hacking software could potentially exploit this. The best way to use the pass-phrase idea is to turn the conventional advice on its head. Instead of thinking of a phrase and converting it to a password (that won’t be all that random), get a truly random password and convert it to an easy‑to-remember phrase. I used to use simple, stupid passwords. After one of my accounts was hacked, the site assigned me a temporary password. It was a random string of characters. I was going to change it until I realized that I didn’t need to do so. I could remember a random password. The mind is good at seeing patterns in random data. This is how we remember phone numbers and Social Security numbers. It also works for random-character passwords like RPM8t4ka. I just now got that one from random.org. Though it’s authentically random, the eye and mind instantly spot patterns. In this case the first three letters happen to be all capital, and the last three are lowercase. The number 8 is twice 4. You can easily translate a random password to a nonsense phrase. RPM8t4ka might become revolutions per minute, 8 track for Kathy. I don’t know what that means but I do know that it’s fairly easy to remember. A password, a pass-phrase, a mnemonic—what’s the big deal? The difference is that a random-character password is the gold standard of security. It’s better than any human-chosen password could be. It will still be good even if everyone in the world adopts this scheme. A random-character password of reasonable length is, for practical purposes, unguessable with today’s technology. It won’t appear in a list of popular passwords. A mass attacker could guess a random password only in a brute-force search. With upper- and lowercase letters and numbers, there are sixty-two possible characters. (I won’t count punctuation marks, as not all sites allow them.) That means it would take 62^8 guesses to be certain of hitting an eight-character password. That’s over 218 trillion guesses. That effectively rules out an Internet mass attack and would slow down a targeted attack. Accepting the claim that some forensic software can spit out 2.8 billion guesses a second, it would take about twenty-two hours to make that many guesses. That’s secure enough for most people—should you disagree, you’re welcome to add a few more characters. This doesn’t mean that a random password is invincible. It can’t be guessed, but it can be stolen. The Klingon name scam is one example. Careful folks fall for cons like that all the time. There is high-tech malware that records your every keystroke, and there are snoops using the low-tech method of watching over your shoulder as you type. Hackers may exploit a site’s lax internal security to get its passwords, through no fault of the users and their choices of passwords. I use the “one strong password” philosophy. In view of the importance that passwords have assumed in our lives, it’s worth committing one random-character password to memory. You memorize your phone number, why not a password? Once you’ve got that strong password, “protect the hell out of it,” says security consultant Nick Berry. Do everything you can to keep your computer free of malware, and use the password only for sites you know to be important and trustworthy. For games and unimportant sites, I use a simpler password that is nothing like my strong password. There are so many ways that passwords get stolen that it’s not unreasonable to want a different password for each site. One customization formula is to take the last letter of the site name and tack it onto the beginning of the standard password. For Facebook, you’d add k onto your standard strong password, getting kRPM8t4ka. Though this customization isn’t secure in any absolute sense, it may get the job done. A snoop who sees you enter kRPM8t4ka to access your Facebook account is not going to have a clue how to generate your banking password. A mass attacker will collect thousands of passwords and find that a decent proportion of them work, unmodified, on other sites. He may not care about those that don’t. I don’t have a punctuation mark or non-ASCII character in my strong password. In the rare cases where a site demands one, I add an easy‑to‑remember mark onto the end. Some identity thieves skip passwords entirely. They pretend to be a user who has forgotten a password, and answer the security questions. Should they guess right, they can change the password to one of their choosing. Not only does the crook gain an identity to sell, but the legitimate user is locked out. In 2008 someone hacked into Sarah Palin’s e‑mail account by guessing where she met her husband (Wasilla High). Four years later Mitt Romney’s accounts were breached by someone who guessed his favorite pet. It’s not just public figures who have to worry. Anyone who knows you well will be able to guess many of your answers to security questions. Hackers who don’t know you from Adam or Eve can use lists of the most popular pet names, used cars, team nicknames, etc. Lately, news features have touted the counterstrategy of giving nonsense answers. The idea is that you answer every question in pig Latin, or give the same nonsense answer to every question. Your mother’s maiden name was Jimbob. Your high school mascot was Jimbob. This probably works for the time being. That could change, should enough people adopt this strategy. Nonsense answers are probably as stereotyped as any other kind. I always use honest answers. You don’t encounter security questions much. Years after you first answer security questions, when you have to prove who you are, you definitely don’t want to be in the position of not remembering your answers. Many sites let you choose security questions. I pick questions where my honest answer isn’t a common one or easy to guess. Personal identification numbers (PINs) are the dime-store locks on our personal money machines. Nobody knocks himself out trying to invent a secure PIN. Most automated tellers limit them to four decimal digits anyway. I’m sure you can guess the most common PIN. Would you care to guess how many people use it? Nick Berry estimates that 11 percent of the population uses 1234. There haven’t been many mass exposures of PINs. Hackers aren’t that interested because PINs are useless without the physical card. So Berry took lists of exposed passwords and filtered them to include only four-digit numbers with no letters. He figured that someone who uses 1967 as a password has some special connection to that number and is likely to use it when prompted for a four-digit PIN. The second-most-popular PIN on Berry’s list is 1111 (chosen by 6 percent), and third is 0000 (picked by nearly 2 percent). Taken at face value, that means that a well-informed crook who finds your ATM card stands a 19 percent chance of guessing your PIN in the permitted three tries. After a third wrong guess the machine usually eats the card. Here are Berry’s twenty most common PINs: 1234, 1111, 0000, 1212, 7777, 1004, 2000, 4444, 2222, 6969, 9999, 3333, 5555, 6666, 1313, 8888, 4321, 2001, 1010. All the four-identical-digit choices appear. This isn’t a randomness experiment, it’s an I’m‑afraid‑I’ll‑forget-this-number-and-better-pick-something-really-easy experiment. Berry found these less obvious patterns: • Years. All recent years and a few from history (1492, 1776) are high up on the list. • Couplets. Many pick a two-digit number and clone it to get the needed four (1212, 8787, etc.) Digits in couplets most often differ by 1. • 2580. Some figure they’ll generate a random code by playing tic-tac-toe on the keypad. The only way to get the required four digits is to go straight down the middle: 2580. It’s the twenty-second-most- popular choice in Berry’s list. (For that you can thank the designer of the keypad, Alphonse Chapanis.) • 1004. In Korean the numbers sound like the word for angel. This inspired a pop tune, “Be My 1004.” There are enough Koreans who figure that non-Koreans don’t know this to make it a popular choice. It’s important to pick a PIN that’s not on the popular list. The least popular PIN was 8068, but you don’t necessarily want to use that, either. I would pick a number that begins with 6, 7, 8, 9, or 0 (as all of Berry’s least popular choices do) and has no evident pattern. Don’t use digits from a personal number like a MM/DD or YYYY birthday, driver’s license, or credit card. Those numbers are in your wallet, and losing your wallet is the commonest way to lose an ATM card. Recap: How to Outguess Passwords • Be prepared to memorize one good, strong password. It’s worth the effort. • Go to a website that generates truly random passwords (like random.org). Create a list of five or ten candidate passwords. • Pick a random password that you can convert into a memorable nonsense phrase. Use the phrase to remember the password. Excerpted from Rock Breaks Scissors: A Practical Guide to Outguessing & Outwitting Almost Everybody by William Poundstone, published by Little, Brown and Company. Copyright © William Poundstone. Rock Breaks Scissors will be available in stores on June 3, 2014 (Amazon / B&N / Indiebound / iBooks). Recommend   Published by Little, Brown and Co One of the U.S.’s oldest and most distinguished publishing houses, Little, Brown publishes James Patterson, David Sedaris, Anita Shreve, Malcolm Gladwell & more Follow Updated April 21, 2014 Cover photo: Photo: Florian Klauer via Unsplash Published in

7 Ways You're Unconsciously Undermining Yourself You're crushing it everyday at your job. But are you ruining your chances for a promotion by tapping your pen, checking your phone, and being buddies with your cubemate?

By Gwen Moran
People are judging you. It’s not fair, but when you start to progress in your career, your moves come under scrutiny. And you could be undermining yourself without even realizing it. “There are definitely things that people do that can make others think they’re ineffective leaders and they’re not always aware of them,” says Halley Bock, the president and CEO of Fierce, Inc., a leadership development and training firm based in Seattle. So, even if you think you're doing everything right, check yourself for these seven areas that can be harming your well-crafted image. 1. You Look Like You're Not Listening. Being a poor listener can manifest in a number of different ways, including checking your phone while someone else is speaking, staring off into the distance, or just clearly not following along with the conversation, Bock says. People resent when their thoughts or input is treated as unimportant, which erodes your influence--plus, you’re possibly missing valuable information that can help you lead more effectively. 2. You Don't Follow Through on Promises. If you say you’re going to do something, do it or risk losing your credibility as a leader, says Jené Kapela, founder of Fort Lauderdale-based Jené Kapela Leadership Solutions, LLC. Leaders need to be trustworthy, and “people won’t trust you if you don’t follow through,” she says. 3. You Use the Wrong Tone of Voice. Once you open your mouth, people are forming opinions about your trustworthiness, dominance, attractiveness and warmth in half a second. In a March 2014 study published on online journal PLoS One, researchers at the University of Glasgow and Princeton University found that in the time it takes you to say “hello,” many have already sized up key aspects of your leadership quotient--often in as little as 300 to 500 milliseconds. 4. You Fidget Too Much. Wiggling your foot, tapping your pen, drumming your fingers all seem like minor transgressions, but being fidgety can indicate you’re nervous or uncomfortable and not suited to the role of a leader, Bock says. If you notice yourself doing these things, work on controlling them--at least in settings when you’re trying to exude confidence and competence, she says. 5. You Make Too Little (Or Too Much) Eye Contact. Whether it’s a one-on-one conversation or a presentation to 100 people, we know it’s essential to make eye contact to establish trust and exude confidence. But don’t go overboard, Bock says. Too much eye contact can range from seeming mildly creepy to downright aggressive. 6. You Are Too Self-Confident. While some narcissistic traits can help you command respect and influence for your bold vision and self-esteem, too much has the opposite effect. In a 2013 study published in the journal Personnel Psychology, researchers at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and the University of Nebraska found that narcissists often emerged as leaders, but if they couldn’t keep their feelings of self-importance and lack of empathy in check, they eventually lost their influence and were seen as exploitative and arrogant--the antithesis of good leadership. 7. You're Everybody's Friend. Effective leaders are often warm and accessible, but beware of becoming too friendly or accommodating, Kapela warns. Leaders need boundaries, especially in the workplace. People are going to have trouble trusting you or looking to you for guidance if you exhibit poor judgment yourself, such as engaging in office gossip or drinking to excess at company functions, she says. “It goes back to professional behavior. Be consistent and authentic and people will respond to you for that and have respect for you as opposed to, if you’re being a friend to someone and then making poor decisions as an employee,” she says. [Image: Flickr user Quinn Dombrowski]

 1 Comments  Email  0  28  437  75  153  Print Gwen Moran Gwen Moran writes about business, money and assorted other topics for leading publications and web sites. She was named a Small Business Influencer Awards Top 100 Champion in 2012 and is the co-author of The Complete Idiot's Guide to Business Plans (Alpha, 2010). She is currently creating Biziversity.com, an information resource for micro-businesses, from her office near the Jersey shore--the beautiful place, not the horrible television show.

2014/04/16

TRUEngine LLP | TRUEngine Program | Aviation Services | GE Aviation

TRUEngine LLP | TRUEngine Program | Aviation Services | GE Aviation



TRUEngine™ LLP

A proactive answer to customer requests for a reliable means of identifying life-limited parts (LLPs) that have always operated in OEM configuration, this extension of the well-established TRUEngine program is designed to help operators support the value of their assets and assure optimized OEM technical support.

How it Works

To earn the TRUEngine LLP designation, LLP are subjected to a rigorous back-to-birth records audit and engineering review to evaluate their configuration and maintenance history relative to airworthiness limitations substantiated by GE and documented in the engine manual. LLP will be qualified at the part level and at a specific time-since-new and cycles-since-new.

Why are LLPs so Important?

LLPs are the most critical engine parts and include rotating components such as disks, spools and shafts. Life limits are established using a rigorous methodology that is applied to both individual parts as well as the engine system. Systems-level analysis is critical because some non-life-limited “influencing parts” like turbine blades and seals can significantly impact durability of LLP.
TRUEngine LLP will be rolled out in stages and ultimately will cover the CFM56, CF34, CF6, GE90, and GEnx engine families. TRUEngine LLP documentation will accompany future LLP sold through GE Aviation’s materials business, the largest source of used serviceable material for GE Aviation engines.
Come speak to a GE representative about TRUEngine LLP at the MRO America

2014/03/24

Six Secrets to Successful Interviewing

by Louise Kursmark


Your efforts have finally paid off—you’re scheduled to meet with an executive recruiter or hiring manager to discuss a job that’s a good fit for your experience, expertise, and career interests. Congratulations! But don’t relax yet. You can increase your chances of earning a second interview and, ultimately, a job offer by spending some time preparing for that interview.

Keep in mind, interviews are all about assessing the fit of your talents, knowledge, experience, strengths, leadership style, and much more with the specific opportunity and unique culture of the hiring organization. To succeed, you must demonstrate that you are a perfect fit in as many areas as possible.

Don’t spend your preparation time memorizing answers to questions you think you’ll hear—that approach will make you sound less than genuine and will leave you flat-footed when, inevitably, you’re asked a question for which you haven’t practiced an answer. Instead, invest your time working on six key areas of interview study that will leave you prepared for any question you’re asked and give you an edge over your competition.

1. Elucidate your core values.

What is the greatest value you offer? What makes you unique? What sets you apart from others? Spend some time thinking about these questions, then jot down five or ten core value statements—phrased in terms of value to the company. For example:

If your greatest strength is leadership, rather than stating “I have great leadership skills,” expand on that in a meaningful way: “I am able to deliver exceptional results—such as double-digit profit increases and 10% revenue growth in a down market—by inspiring and leading people to put forth extraordinary effort and do it with joy and passion.”

If your technical expertise is a great asset, bear in mind that knowledge and expertise in and of themselves are not valuable; it’s what you do with those assets that counts: “I’ve repeatedly gained competitive advantage for the company by introducing industry-leading technology that works right the first time and is consistently months or even years ahead of competitors.”

When choosing your core value statements, consider either of these simple formats to be sure you’re including both pieces—the skill or expertise and the benefit:

1) “I am able to [do something for the company] through [ability / expertise / knowledge / experience / talent].”

2) “I have [ability / expertise / knowledge / experience / talent] that results in [benefit to the company].”


These core value statements collectively paint the picture of “who you are,” so for the most part they will be consistent from interview to interview. But you can emphasize some over others, depending on the situation. For instance, if you’re a senior financial executive seeking either a CFO or CEO role, in interviews for financial positions you’d stress those core capabilities, while your big-picture executive talents will be more important in a CEO interview.

By crystallizing your value into half a dozen areas of strength, you create a template of the key points
to make during an interview—to be sure you’re clearly communicating the total picture of what you
have to offer.

2. Develop CAR stories.

The CAR (Challenge-Action-Result) story-telling format is highly effective in communicating concrete examples to support general statements. Rather than simply telling the interviewer that you have excellent communications skills, tell a CAR story that illustrates the point. When asked how you “would” handle a situation, present your theory, then back it up with a CAR story that drives home the point.

CAR stories provide insight into your leadership and problem-solving style and often elucidate the “how” behind the “what” that’s on your resume. Using this format, you’ll find that you can tell your story naturally, without sounding rehearsed, and will often be able to quickly call to mind a story that illustrates a key point in the interview, even if you haven’t prepared it in advance.

3. Bone up on “standard” questions.

Don’t talk yourself out of the position before you’re five minutes into the interview! There’s no excuse for “fluffing” such common interview questions as “tell me about yourself,” “why are you leaving your current position,” “why do you want to work here,” “what is your greatest weakness,” and so on. Bookstores and libraries abound with interviewing guides that present a long list of common questions and offer advice on how to answer them. When possible, incorporate one of your core value statements into your answer.

4. Prepare for different interview scenarios.

No longer are one-on-one interviews the only way candidates are assessed. Group interviews, role-play scenarios, behavioral interviews, problem-solving tests, and other methods are commonly used to find out as much as possible about you, your work style, how you handle stress, how you prioritize tasks, how you relate to teams, and other insights that are hard to convey on paper or in a simple Q&A interview. Be sure to ask the recruiter, HR person, or senior executive about what you can expect from the interview process. And make certain you’re at your physical best—well rested, well fed, well exercised—before a long, grueling day during which you’ll want to perform at your peak.

5. Do some homework.

You’ll give yourself a solid advantage in any interview if you take the time to research the company—its challenges, growth opportunities, recent news events, strategic growth plans—and the industry. Then use that information in your interview, relating your achievements and capabilities to the company’s current situation rather than simply stating them without context.


6. Prepare to overcome objections.

Seldom is a candidate a “perfect 10”—an exact match for everything the company’s looking for. Inevitably during an interview you’ll be asked about areas where your qualifications aren’t as strong as others’. Keep in mind, you can’t possibly know how important that trait is to the company, so don’t assume your honest answer will kill your candidacy. But do try to bring the discussion back to an area of strength, and if at all possible refer to one of your core values in addressing the issue. Here’s an example:

“You’re right, the largest organization I’ve headed was about 200 people. But if you look at all the areas where I was involved, I think you’ll agree it was kind of a microcosm of your current situation. I repeatedly was able to deliver results through a variety of leadership activities—restructuring the organization, developing leadership talent from within, communicating the vision, and in some cases leading the execution of key initiatives. I feel well prepared to perform in a larger environment, and I’m confident I’ll exceed your expectations through similar leadership activities—which really are all about getting the most from the people and resources of the organization, whatever its size.”

An interview is a high-stress activity where it’s crucial at perform your best. Preparation is key to peak performance in any endeavor. Don’t skimp on the preparation, and be sure to practice in the areas that will give you the greatest payoff.

_______________________________________

Louise Kursmark is an award-winning resume writer, president of Best Impression Career Services (www.yourbestimpression.com), and one of the most widely published authors in the careers field. Her 20 resume and career books can be purchased at online and traditional booksellers and directly from the author via this web page—http://www.yourbestimpression.com/books.html.
Louise works with executive job seekers to develop powerful resumes and related marketing documents and to craft efficient and effective job search strategies. She can be reached at 781-944-2471 or by email at LK@yourbestimpression.com..

2014/03/11

Worldwide Cost of Living 2014

Worldwide Cost of Living 2014

Dear Stefan,
 
Despite Abenomics driving consumer confidence and price inflation, a weaker yen has pushed Osaka and Tokyo away from the top of the cost of living ranking. This has paved the way for Singapore, which has been steadily moving up the ranking over the last decade, to claim the unenviable title of world’s most expensive city. Singapore’s rising price prominence has been steady rather than spectacular. The city-state was 18th most expensive ten years ago and has actually seen the cost of living compared with New York City decline over the last 12 months. However, over the last decade a 40% currency appreciation, coupled with solid price inflation, has consistently pushed Singapore up the ranking.
How do the remaining cities around the world rank in the latest Worldwide cost of living index?  Find out by downloading our free summary.

Get More Information


Kind regards,

Robert Ward
Editorial Director
The Economist Intelligence Unit
  Connect with us Facebook LinkedIn Twitter     Economist Intelligence Unit  

 If you have any comments or questions about our services please contact
the Economist Intelligence Unit offices here.
Please Manage Your Email Preferences

2014/03/07

Autoshow in Geneva: Mercedes, Ferrari and Volvo implemented iOS in their vehicles

The following text is in German. For other languages translations, use your browser to help.
Apple hat heute am Internationalen Automobil-Salon in Genf CarPlay vorgestellt. Es dient der Integration von iPhone und iOS-Software im Auto.
Mercedes wird demnächst auch iOS-Software bietenБорис Ульзибат / Wikipedia CC 3.0
» Von pd/jst/awp, 03.03.2014 07:53. 
CarPlay bietet iPhone-Anwendern einen  Weg mit einem Wort oder einer Berührung Telefonanrufe zu tätigen, Karten zu nutzen, Musik zu hören und auf Nachrichten zuzugreifen. Anwender können CarPlay über die ursprüngliche Benutzeroberfläche des Autos steuern oder den Sprachsteuerungsknopf des Lenkrads gedrückt halten, um Siri zu aktivieren. Diese Woche wird CarPlay in Fahrzeugen von Ferrari, Mercedes-Benz und Volvo seine Premiere geben. Laut Apple werden weitere Automobilhersteller folgen, wie etwa BMW, Ford, General Motors, Honda, Hyundai, Jaguar Land Rover, Kia, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Peugeot, Citroën, Subaru, Suzuki und Toyota.
Und so soll es funktionieren: Sobald das iPhone über die CarPlay-Integration mit dem Fahrzeug verbunden ist, unterstützt Siri den Fahrer beim Zugriff auf Kontakte, bei Telefonanrufen, beim Rückruf von verpassten Anrufen oder dem Abhören von Sprachnachrichten. Wenn eingehende Nachrichten ankommen, bietet Siri die Möglichkeit die Anfragen über Sprachbefehle zu beantworten, in dem es die Nachrichten dem Fahrer vorliest, sich die Antworten diktieren lässt oder einen Rückruf ermöglicht.

Daneben sind die iOS-Karten und der zugehörige Routenplaner nutzbar. Schliesslich gibt CarPlay dem Fahrer Zugriff auf seine Musik, Podcasts und Hörbücher, entweder durch die im Auto eingebauten Steuerungsmöglichkeiten oder durch Anweisungen an Siri.
CarPlay soll im Laufe des Jahres in den ersten Autos besagter Hersteller auftauchen.

2014/03/01

DARPA hires Raytheon to work on Plan X cyber warfare platform


The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency has awarded a $9.8 million contract to Raytheon as a part of its Plan X program, which is designed to plan for, conduct and assess cyber warfare in the same way that kinetic warfare is analyzed. Raytheon’s research and development will be contracted to enable scaling and execution of cyber operations for the Defense Department.
First announced in 2011, Plan X has connected cyber communities of interest from the commercial technology industry, user-experience experts, the defense industry and academia to create DOD’s foundational cyber warfare program, according to DARPA. While explicitly not funding research and development efforts in cyber warfare, the program seeks to create technologies for managing, planning and understanding cyber missions in dynamic network environments.
“The program covers largely unchartered territory as we attempt to formalize cyber mission command and control for the DOD,” Dan Roelker, DARPA program manager, said at the initial Proposers’ Day workshop in October 2012.
According to the Washington Post, one goal of Plan X is to create a program that will completely map out cyberspace and update itself as the Internet grows, giving commanders the ability to identify and attack targets. Another goal is the development of an operating system that is capable of both surviving counterattacks and launching its own offensives.
"When supporting our customers' missions, we can help assess the results of launching missiles or any weapons in other domains — land, air, sea or space," Jack Harrington, vice president of Cybersecurity and Special Missions for Raytheon Intelligence, Information and Services, said in an announcement by the company. "Raytheon is working to provide the same mission confidence to the cyber domain through our work with DARPA's Plan X."

2014/02/27

Opinion: Airbus Twin-Aisles—Big Needs, Limited Means

By Richard Aboulafia
Source: AWIN First
February 13, 2014
Airbus is at a crossroads. It needs to address its major twin-aisle product line disadvantage to Boeing, while simultaneously implementing organizational reforms that could leave the company with less cash for new product development.
The European jet maker faces three particular challenges. First, it must decide how best to compete with Boeing’s 787-8/9 for long, thin international routes. For years, Airbus has relied on its A350-800 to compete in this class, despite a widespread belief that this airplane would be too wide and heavy to compete with the 787. Yet, over the past year, the orderbook for this variant has fallen by about half. Last week, Aviation Week reported that International Lease Finance Corp. (ILFC) and Libyan Airlines had switched their combined 10 -800XWBs on order to the -900XWB model, dropping the total number of A350-800XWBs on order to 46.
The alternative is to develop a re-engined A330, which could carry on the A330’s profitable legacy. The problem with that approach is that it would cost more in non-recurring and ongoing overhead costs than simply offering one family of twin-aisle twinjets under the A350XWB range. Launching an “A330neo” would also produce a 2-3-year production downturn in Airbus’s most profitable program, as customers opted to wait for the re-engined A330. Given the weakness of the A350XWB-800 orderbook, Airbus may be facing a simple choice: Reengine the A330 despite the costs, or lose the 220-300-seat segment to Boeing.
Airbus’s second challenge is decide whether or not to rescue the A380. With new widebody engine technology arriving on the 787, A350XWB and 777X, the slightly older-generation engines on the A380 put it at a disadvantage, particularly since it has been plagued by a very high structural weight (on a per-seat basis). While Emirates continues to view the A380 as a mainstay of its fleet, there have been just 164 non-Emirates orders after 14 years on the market, and many of these have been filled. Airbus must decide whether it needs an “A380neo” to keep Emirates satisfied or should focus on expanding the A380 customer base beyond the current level.
Airbus’s third—and certainly largest—product-line challenge is to develop a response to Boeing’s 777-9X. With the A350XWB-1000 limited to 350 seats, it’s clear that Boeing’s 407-seat 777-9X will be the largest and most capable twinjet on the market. Here again, the limits of the A350XWB range are all too apparent. While a further stretch of the A350XWB fuselage is possible, it would need a new engine as well as wing and tail modifications. Even then, a notional “A350-1100” is not likely to match the 777-9X’s capabilities. An all-new big twin would be optimal, but quite expensive.
All of these challenges are emerging at a difficult moment in Airbus’s history. On the positive side, it is being reformed under CEO Tom Enders into more of a private-sector company, moving away from government ownership and influence. It’s becoming more like Boeing. Yet relying on private-sector investors necessitates a greater focus on providing returns—and more discipline in new product development spending. Late last year, Enders stated, “We’ll continue to focus on improving our profitability, our earnings, as well as our cash situation. . . . Why should we spend large amounts of money when we can make significant incremental improvements?”
Historically, Airbus has spent more than Boeing on development as a percent of sales than. But during the past 15 years, the bulk of this heavy spending was squandered on the A380. Today, development spending is set to fall in line with the company’s new direction. Last year, it fell below 6% for the first time since the company was established (see graph). Given the requirements of funding the A350XWB and A320neo, Airbus isn’t likely to have the resources to fund both an A330neo and A380neo and a new large twin, too. Tough choices will need to be made.
When these factors are taken into account, the market picture for the next decade or so becomes clear. Airbus may have a slight advantage in single aisles, but Boeing’s twin-aisle product line superiority implies a 55% market share by value across the board, assuming it can execute as planned on the 777X and 787-10. The odds are heavily against Airbus’s finding the resources to compete in the 360-450-seat twinjet segment for the next 10 years.
In short, Airbus will be paying the price for the A380 for many years to come.

Comments On Articles