ACRL College & Researc Libraries News

College & Research Libraries News

Scott DiMarco responds

Shortly after my article was published in the June 2000 issue, I received immediate positive feedback from many esteemed colleagues. I thank them. I thank the writer of this essay for agreeing with many points and welcome her comments on the few differences of opinion. I am sure we all agree that when it comes to the recruitment process, sculpting a job advertisement is easier said than done.

I sympathize with the writer and her frustration about the process and would like to address just a few of the points mentioned. A common mistake is giving the job advertisement far too much credit, as it is just one part of a detailed process.

First, while we all feel for the unqualified job seeker trying to catch a break, it doesn’t mean we can include an unqualified applicant in our search. The time spent on such applications is wasted for both parties. Also, certain standards and minimums must be enforced. For example, degree requirements must be adhered to even if they seem “ego-threatening” to many.

The essay perpetuates the myth that one isn’t responsible for his or her actions in our society. Accepting late applications because the applicant has just started their search is irresponsible. Try telling government agencies or foundations that your grant application should be considered late because you just heard about it.

How is this fair to those who followed the rules? Lawsuits and liability are far too common for us not to protect ourselves.

A vague position description will only increase frustration within the search process. I, for one, would much rather be presented with as many of the details concerning the position as possible. How else could anyone make an educated decision?

I welcome feedback or comments from colleagues in regards to bettering the search process. After all, we are all in this together. Herkimer County Community College, dimarcosr@hccc.suny.edu

—-Scoff R. DiMarco,