Is being an out-of-state candidate an obstacle when applying for an executive-level position?
Generally, the higher up the executive ladder you are, the less important geographic location is, for a couple of reasons.
For managers with nationwide responsibilities, including extensive travel, many times companies are open to where you will be based – as long as you have access to a good airport with lots of direct flights.
Also, the more unique and valuable your skill set, one can presume that the rule of scarcity is in effect, and the recruiter will be asked to do a regional if not nationwide search in order to find someone of your caliber. In these cases, the hiring manager will be expecting to pay for relocating their ideal candidate, so it really does not matter where you live when applying for the role.
With all that said, please make sure to put your current location on the top of your resume. It is fine to say, “Willing to relocate for the right opportunity.” Recruiters consistently see resumes lacking this key bit of information, and it makes it virtually impossible to make a match. The majority of ATS (applicant tracking systems) will not even accept a resume without that data in it, and without knowing if you are a local candidate or live in Timbuktu, rather than enlarging the options by not providing this information, you end up not even being considered.
Have a question you’d like a recruiter to answer? Write to me at AskAnn@execunet.com
No Replies to "Should Out-of-State Candidates Even Apply?"