PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 10125280

The self-assessment process.

Abstract

The entire job or career search can best be illustrated as a ladder. With the bottom rung as the beginning of the job or career search process, the next rung in the self-assessment process is the preparation of an effective resume, and ultimately the top rung of the ladder, or the final objective, is securing the appropriate position. The goal in each step of the process is to understand yourself and to present yourself as positively as possible, to overcome any negative aspects that would inhibit a competitive job offer, and to be ultimately successful in the interview process. All of this must be achieved using the most effective, efficient method in the shortest possible time while still facing serious and aggressive competition. The long road ahead can be made easier and can make you stand out from the crowd if the sometimes difficult and time-consuming groundwork provides your ladder with the foundation necessary to reach that top rung as a winner.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

B G Haywood. 1993. The self-assessment process.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10125280/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Racial and ethnic disparities in faculty promotion in academic medicine.

CONTEXT: Previous studies have suggested that minority medical school faculty are at a disadvantage in promotion opportunities compared with white faculty. OBJECTIVE: To compare promotion rates of minority and white medical school faculty in the United States. DESIGN AND SETTING: Analysis of data from the Association of American Medical Colleges' Faculty Roster System, the official data system for tracking US medical school faculty. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 50,145 full-time US medical school faculty who became assistant professors or associate professors between 1980 and 1989. Faculty of historically black and Puerto Rican medical schools were excluded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Attainment of associate or full professorship among assistant professors and full professorship among associate professors by 1997, among white, Asian or Pacific Islander (API), underrepresented minority (URM; including black, Mexican American, Puerto Rican, Native American, and Native Alaskan), and other Hispanic faculty. RESULTS: By 1997, 46% of white assistant professors (13,479/28,953) had been promoted, whereas 37% of API (1123/2997; P<.001), 30% of URM (311/1053, P<.001), and 43% of other Hispanic assistant professors (256/598; P =.07) had been promoted. Similarly, by 1997, 50% of white associate professors (7234/14,559) had been promoted, whereas 44% of API (629/1419; P<.001), 36% of URM (101/280; P<.001), and 43% of other Hispanic (122/286; P =.02) associate professors had been promoted. Racial/ethnic disparities in promotion were evident among tenure and nontenure faculty and among faculty who received and did not receive National Institutes of Health research awards. After adjusting for cohort, sex, tenure status, degree, department, medical school type, and receipt of NIH awards, URM faculty remained less likely to be promoted compared with white faculty (relative risk [RR], 0.68 [99% confidence interval CI, 0.59-0.77] for assistant professors and 0.81 [99% CI, 0.65-0.99] for associate professors). API assistant professors also were less likely to be promoted (RR, 0.91 [99% CI, 0.84-0.98]), whereas API associate professors and other Hispanic assistant and associate professors were promoted at comparable rates. CONCLUSION: Our data indicate that minority faculty are promoted at lower rates compared with white faculty. JAMA. 2000;284:1085-1092

Career Mobility↗