Well it depends on an opinion , I mean I have seen some people I considerd to be , well , not that attractive while others thought they were georgous , so I guess the beauty is in the eye of the beholder thing rings true
Yes it does matter, both for men and women, but probably more for women. In general, the first impression is usually made after first 30 seconds and after two minutes of the interview the interviewer already have created an opinion about you that is often hard to revert afterward.
Last time I checked I think you can't discriminate against someones looks. If they are qualified for the job, can do it right and get it done then I'm for hiring them. Some times it's whats inside that counts more.
The communication skills and physical presentation of the applicant are more important when you hire somebody.
There are beautiful people who doesn't know how to dress up looks more ugly. However, those who are not too beautiful who comes for an interview wearing the proper attire looks more charming and smart. That's the applicant who gets the higher probability of being hired. This is more of a general concept for all positions in a company.
Is being employed a favour? If so and we are sincere, then beauty is an added advantage in recruiting an employee. Employers are humans and have natural feelings of being attracted to the opposite sex and being repelled to same sex - Men employers will go for beautiful ladies and ugly men, women employers will go for handsome gentlemen and ugly women.
Studies have shown attractive people are more likely to be hired given the choice. I know I'm guilty of that, though I would never hire someone JUST because they are attractive. They still have to be qualified to do the work.
From what they teach us in management, its not supposed to make a difference what the prospect looks like. It does though. We tend to instantly form an opinion about someone the moment we see them. Thank God we do though. If I weren't so good looking I wouldn't have a job. I can't do anything marketable.
Sometimes looks do count whether you get a job or someone else gets it over you. But i think it's more about taking care in of yourself and your appearence that's more important, than how good looking you are.
Hello, I have been assessing the recruitment procedures since past several days and here is the order of preference in which a candidate would be selected:- 1. If he or she has any reference or internal or external source. 2. If he or she is extremely talented. 3. Last but not the least in case of females if they are a bit above average in terms of looks then they have the maximum possibilities of getting selected from the flock of those who do not fulfill the above 2 criteria.
Exactly. In addition, for women: Looks matter quite a lot when recruitment is handled by a man, except for the level where you're already head-hunted. When the recruiter is a woman, it might even be considered a disadvantage.
This works on a subconscious level, sometimes people even do not notice that. There is also another aspect - people with better looks are generally more confident (generally - not always), and that makes a real difference.
Even if the good-looking applicant is slightly inferior in terms of qualifications, there is still a good chance that he/she will get the job. Assuming that all factors (educational attainment, skills, etc.) for competing applicants are the same except for the looks, then the power of beauty will most likely dominate.
Appearance matters in any job - an employee should be clean, well groomed and dressed suitably for their position.
But unless you are talking about modelling or some job based around looks, physical beauty should not be a factor. The right qualifications, enthusiasm, experience, honesty and ability to get on with people are far more important.
And why in these threads about looks is it always about women? Men have looks too!
CMH, appearance SHOULD not be a factor, but unfortunately it is. Employers get a lot of CVs - if you look better, yours will be noticed first, you will be forgiven a few non-essential flaws.
With regards to men, situation is about the same - better looking gets in easier and most of the times gets promoted faster. This is not the rule also, but we are all just humans after all (one chromosome away from a monkey).
Well, there are many times when a photo is included in a CV, right? And by flaws I meant for example, something that's done a bit differently than required in a job ad or a mistype or some formatting error (as long as it remains not essential).
For any remotely serious job in business in US or UK and most of the Europe the standard formatting of CV does not include photo, putting photo would be such a mistake that it would eliminate you from getting an interview no matter how you look. Same with having typos.
When I think about this topic now, it's way too general. The overall answer is definitely yes - appearance matters. How - and this already depends on the country (thinking about all over the world), the company (big and small), the job itself (from shop assistants to general managers), etc. I must also make it clear that even if I say appearance matters, it by no means can be considered even close to the level of qualifications and experience.
With regards to a more or less serious job in business in such countries as UK or US - your CV basically only includes contact details, qualifications, experience and additional skills. Nothing else. Here appearance takes its toll during an interview
The answer is that is should not matter but the truth is that it does! But beyond that, employers want to hire people that are healthy and take care of themselves because that will reflect in their work.
It really shouldn't matter, but the truth is, is that it does. Positions requiring face to face with clientele require average to above average looks...also, it is an image that they are giving to their clients/potential clients. Receptionists are, generally, well groomed and above average looking as they greet clients.
Employees should be hired based on skill, experience and referrals. Sadly, this is not always the case.
However, such as not the case always. Attractiveness rules over brains in many instances. Companies would rather hire an attractive person who is mediocre than an unattractive, even ugly person who has prodigious talent. Attractiveness makes companies monies while unattractiveness is a socioeconomic liability to companies as unattractive employees can repel clients and make them not to want to do business with the former.
But if we're talking about workers in a big company. Do set aside the beauty. I had no enough beauty.... but I can run and trouble shoot machine whom Manufactured most of the present Technology. We call this as skills and knowledge.
NOPE, this IS the real world where looks count. Attractive people always have an EDGE over their less attractive counterparts in the corporate world. Studies show that attractive people earn more than their less attractive counterparts in addition to being promoted more. If one is unattractive and ugly, he/she will have a more difficult time procuring employment, especially high end and high visibility jobs. That is a fact of life.
I worked for a few months in a telephone company in Spain. The work and pay was entirely based on performance. I was completly useless at it. Never reached the bare minimun once in 11 months, but they kept me 11 months!!!! while they were firing all the low performers after a 3 month contract.
I don't know how my contract was renewed every 3 months (maybe because I was sitting in front of the boss?)
Eventually I left the job, otherwise I am sure they would have kept renewing my 3 month contracts ad infinitum...
It shouldn't be a criteria and yes it is against the law to discriminate but as some have already stated - the beautiful are usually hired first. I have also learned that when someone has the job experience along beauty that radiates from within ... they will get the job most every time.
In the entertainment, high end, and people centered industries, more attractive people are hired regardless of the educational and/or skill levels. Such jobs are front end and high visibility jobs which want attractive people to represent their brand. However, in jobs that are less visible and low end, less attractive, even ugly people are hired.
Is Sarah Jessica Parker judged harshly because she is beautifulThe world sometimes lashes out at people who dare to be different and present a new, interesting type of beauty. Do you think that peoples' feelings...
Do you get angry if your boyfriend/spouse looks at other women?Assuming he doesn't do it in front of you, is looking harmless? Would you want him to be honest about it if he does or keep it to himself?