What if your job doesn't add much to the bottom line? (transaction, interviewing)

[altlover85]

Is anyone else tired of reading about how every job needs to help out the company and make a difference to the bottom line. Some jobs just don't have the same effect on a company as others. It bothers me that writing what you've done in the job isn't enough. Maybe that's my own issue, but it just seems like some of this "tell us how you helped the company" is arbitrary and/or just not that realistic for some positions.

Honestly, sometimes a job is just a job. You aren't given the ability to go above and beyond. You do the tasks you are assigned and that's it. The job itself and management aren't interested in you progressing or what else you can do and you are busy enough the tasks at hand that you don't have the time to do extra tasks.

And as far as some people asking how you benefit the company or add to the bottom line, sometimes just doing the job is beneficial for the company. Otherwise they wouldn't have hired you for it. It doesn't necessarily mean you aren't replaceable, but it means that those hiring you felt that you are capable of doing the job you were hired for.

Finally, I'm bothered by the idea that you need to quantify everything you've done on your job in your resume. For example, if I say I did 20 transactions in an hour, that could be super efficient or very slow. It depends on the industry. In order for those numbers to mean anything the person reading the resume might need to be familiar with the industry or even have worked in that position or for that company.

All of this focus on how your job specifically helps the company seems arbitrary and unnecessary at times.

Sometimes a job is just a job.

Rant over!

[Cleverbeetle98]

Are you saying new employers are asking how you benefited a former company? I've never had anyone ask me how I helped the company.

But if you can't come up with (an admittedly BS) answer, you're not trying. You always have to be able to spin yourself positively. Even the housekeepers can give examples of how they are efficient by multitasking, saving money by not wasting resources, ect. At the very least spin this into a 'without me, these things would have to be done by so-and-so, which cuts into the time for them to do their assigned tasks'. Really, they just want you to look at the big picture.

Maybe you can't do extra tasks, but you can do your tasks exceptionally well.

[fishbrains]

I believe the OP is talking about résumé items.

You're right. Sometimes a job is just a job, structured in such a way that you cannot do anything extraordinary. Some workplaces are set up this way; the benefit for them is that nobody works much under the standard either.

Personally, I am tired of reading resumes where every single applicant claims to be the absolute best X, having single handed re-engineered their company from the ground up by over-clocking the coke machine at MCD's in order to move the drinks line faster.

Don't stress it too much. Career advancement is usually incremental, and you will be interviewing for jobs equal to or one step up from the one you currently hold. The person interviewing you will generally understand the limitations of your current position.

My deep dark secret? I rarely read the bullet points on a résumé. They are a laundry list of exaggerations. I am all about start date:end date, job title, company/industry. If you have something exceptional to tell me, put it in the cover letter or bring it up in the interview.