It stands to reason, then, that you should try to dress for an interview with an eye toward imitating the person conducting it. In the banking business, for instance, most middle and upper-management men wear dark, three piece suits with a conservative necktie, button-down shirt, and wing-tip shoes. Upper management women tend to dress equally conservatively; on the other hand, in many sales positions, a dark blue blazer, contrasting tan pants, and brown loafers is perfectly acceptable.
Then, there is the question of jewelry. The best idea is to wear as little as possible. I once knew a man who refused to hire an excellent candidate because he was wearing a gold "pinkie" ring. A college ring is universally acceptable, but a "pinkie" ring can prevent a person from getting hired! Even a lapel pin can get you in trouble. If you are a member of one civic or fraternal organization, you might offend an employer who belongs to another.
A woman wearing anything more than very small, simple earrings, and one conservative ring, is risking getting the job she is after. She might appear too "flashy" or "feminine" to the interviewer.
On the other hand, you can't dress too formally for an interview. This contention is based on the idea that people tend to respect those who dress formally and this, in turn, almost always translates to a favorable impression even if the job itself is casual. A case in point is the college junior who once approached me about getting a job as a bartender. He felt confident, he said, except that he needed some advice about what to wear for the interview.
He was reluctant, at first, but I convinced him. To his happy surprise, he got the job despite the fact that he had no previous experience as a bartender and others who had applied for the job did. Several months later, he asked his boss why he had been hired instead of someone else; the response was:
"The first and most basic reason was that you looked better than the other guys. You were the only one who looked serious. I guess I was impressed by your suit."
I have heard this story repeated time and again. As strange as it may seem, it is almost impossible to dress too formally for an interview.
Personally, I find it astonishing that people show up in the strange costumes that they do for employment interviews. Once, when I was trying to hire a branch manager for a collection agency, one man walked in wearing a cowboy outfit complete with everything but spurs and a holster. He even kept his cowboy hat on during our discussion. As you might surmise, it was a short interview. Another time, when I was seeking a middle manager for a small bank, a man came into my office in designer jeans and a velvet blazer. And in another situation, a candidate for a position as project engineer for a hazardous waste disposal company turned up in dirty clothes and a hardhat. Although he explained that he had come directly from work, the fact that he was greasy and was soiling my office furniture and left an oily imprint on my hand when we shook hands didn't exactly impress me. In fact, although he was qualified on paper, he disqualified himself by walking in filthy.
Then, there is the question of looking too good. A very attractive woman came into my office wearing a red sundress that was held together at each shoulder by two buttons. Each side had one button that was undone, and I spent my time wondering whether or not the whole dress would fall down. My concentration was further diverted by her very exposed cleavage. I didn't seriously consider her for the job in question because she looked too sexy and not much like an executive. The strange thing was that her credentials were extremely impressive and I was convinced, before I saw her, that she could do the job. She may have been very capable but the way she dressed, coupled with her obvious attempts to charm me with her figure, and turned me off. In fact, it made me angry.
It may seem to the reader that I was being shallow and arbitrary in dismissing these candidates on the basis of appearances alone; but, in my experience, and in the bulk of research on the topic, people tend to reflect themselves in their clothing. A collection agency doesn't want a pseudo-cowboy managing its operation and a bank doesn't want or need a playboy handling its funds. By the same token, a project engineer for a hazardous waste company has to be concerned with details and a person who carelessly leaves grease and oil stains behind is hardly the meticulous type. In any case, arbitrary or not, every employment interviewer I have known tends to judge people based on their appearance. So it is up to the candidate to look right. Looking right, however, is more than wearing the right clothes. It is also a matter of proper grooming. Studies demonstrate that people are inherently prejudiced against those who have extreme hair styles, dirty nails, or unpleasant odors. You can be a genius with the most impeccable references and still not land the job because of one of the offenses listed above.
Ask yourself the following question. If you had two acceptable men to consider for a job, each with identical credentials, and one of them had a pony tail and the other had well-trimmed hair, which one would you pick? Research tells us that unless you are very unusual, you would pick the man with the trimmed hair. Naturally, it depends to some extent on the specific position, but it would be rare to choose otherwise.
Once I was asked to talk with a potential vice-president of finance for a large, independently-owned department store. The owner was a client of mine and I had helped him recruit management personnel at other levels. The candidate had met my client at a cocktail party and apparently impressed him in some way. At his request, I saw the man in my office, and although he was a mature businessman with considerable executive experience, his fingernails were a disgrace with ends black with dirt. Also, his necktie was stained and his shoes had mud spots on them. Small items, to be sure, but they added up to an alarming picture for a man in a profession allegedly concerned with details. On top of this, vice-president of finance he would be expected to set an example for his staff. My recommendation to my client was not to hire him, for the reasons that I have mentioned. He was hired, nonetheless, and I was told it was just a question of having him "clean up his act." Apparently, my client spoke to him about his appearance.
For the first month or so, everything was fine. But before long, he returned to his old habits and, in time, after repeated warnings about his sloppy appearance, he was fired. Eventually, the owner conceded to me that the general discipline of his whole department began to suffer and that the vice-president's appearance was just a small part of his "sloppiness problem."
So it pays to look your best particularly when someone is looking you over as a potential employee. You can argue that drawing conclusions on the basis of something like appearance is "unfair" But it is a reality that you can expect.
