As layoffs start to wane and companies slowly begin to hire again, the interview process is getting noticeably longer, with more interviews. As an abundance of talented job seekers thirst to return to corporate America, companies are being more diligent in their vetting process and extremely selective in extending offers. They want to be sure they hire the most talented candidates available.

Imagine walking into a car dealership and being told you can choose any one car on the lot. You would naturally want to choose the very best car for your needs. Say there were thousands of cars at this dealership. Your selection process would most likely entail looking at many of them, test driving a few and then test driving a few more. You would narrow your choice down to just several cars and then conduct a detailed evaluation of their features, safety ratings and overall consumer reviews before making your decision.

In a hiring situation that process translates to a recruiter combing through thousands of résumés, conducting screening interviews with a handful of qualified candidates and then screening a few more candidates. After that, the best of the screened candidates interview with the hiring manager and other managers. This can easily add up to five or seven interviews as the candidate pool is narrowed and as interviews with potential internal team members are added on at the end. Often the most qualified candidate lacks interview skills, which are exposed by the extended process, and doesn’t get the job offer.

Being qualified to excel in a position simply isn’t enough in a recessionary job market. You also have to be skilled at competing for that position. Your confidence and your ability to quickly develop a rapport with interviewers and answer questions with clarity can be what get you from interview to offer. To be successful, you must do these three things:

1. Have an interview plan. The interviewers have a plan for what questions they’ll ask you and what information they’ll need to obtain to determine if you’re qualified for the job. You should also have a plan for communicating what separates you from others and how your experience and skills meet the requirements of the position, and for what questions you will ask of your interviewers.

2. Prepare answers for the questions you’re most likely to be asked. You can analyze the job description to figure out the questions you’re most likely to encounter during your interviews. At Attract Jobs NOW we ensure that our clients have not only answers to likely questions but examples of results that illustrate those answers. For example, if you’re interviewing for a finance position working closely with the sales division, it’s likely you’ll be asked about your ability to forecast sales. Instead of just explaining that you understand the process of forecasting, explain what you’ve accomplished. (“In my last position, at XYZ Company, my sales forecast came within 2% of actual sales. This enabled the company to maximize its return on investment.”) This shows your interviewers that you have experience providing the results they’re looking for.

3. Know your interviewers before you step in the room. You can often get valuable information about your interviewers with just a Google name search. You particularly want to know what positions they currently hold at the company, how long they’ve been there, what other companies they’ve worked for and what schools they attended. You want to find points of commonality that you can use to quickly establish rapport. You’ll find that the more you know about the interviewer, the less nervous you’ll be about the experience, since much of the anxiety of an interview comes from being in an unfamiliar situation.

Although the job market is slowly improving, it remains extremely competitive, and interviews are still hard to obtain. It’s worth it to invest your time and effort in improving your interviewing skills so you can make the most of every interview opportunity.

Here’s an important New Year’s resolution for job hunters: Sweat the small stuff.

Minor missteps can derail your search. With U.S. joblessness still rampant, numerous hiring managers are knocking applicants out of the running over the slightest mistake.

That’s what sporting-goods sales executive Daniel Obergfell did while seeking a marketing manager last winter. He rejected one contender for mispronouncing his surname four times—after correcting her thrice. (His last name actually is pronounced “Oberfell,” with a silent “g.”) She was among 40 people he interviewed for the $80,000 post, which attracted more than 400 prospects from one online listing.

“Your nerves cause you to do things you would not normally do when you must vie against many people for a job,” Mr. Obergfell says. Despite such sentiments, he explains, he “couldn’t get past” his disappointment over the woman’s failure to pronounce his name right. “Given she never really got it right—even after being corrected, told me it was probably started with nervousness, but the issue more than likely ran deeper than that,” he says.

Small interview errors are becoming more common. “Compared with two years ago, about 20% more candidates interviewed by our clients are not getting offers because of gaffes made due to their high anxiety,” says Dave Campeas, president and chief executive officer of PrincetonOne, an executive-search firm in Skillman, N.J.

The incidence of nervous job candidates has doubled since 2006, causing some to commit careless mistakes that “ruin their chances because they didn’t present themselves well,” says David Mezzapelle, director of marketing and development for Goliath Jobs Inc. in Stamford, Conn.
Mea Culpa?

Other small snafus that can derail job seekers:

-Failing to make direct eye contact with a hiring manager.

-Giving long-winded replies—even after interviewer signals your time is up.

-Making cultural faux pas, such as an American who gave an Australian employer the “thumbs’ up” sign, an insulting gesture there.

-Bragging about your irrelevant prior duties. Requesting reimbursement of expenses at the outset of an interview.

He bases his estimate on several thousand calls from job seekers, who use a free phone service provided by his firm’s two employment Web sites. The 39-person concern grew from 28 staffers a year ago.

The best solution? Prepare better for interviews. Added legwork should include extensive role playing, thorough homework about a possible employer’s culture and an empathetic sense of how your skills match its needs. “Turn your dial up on sensitivity,” suggests Gerard Roche, senior chairman of recruiters Heidrick & Struggles International Inc. “The little stuff counts.”

Here are five danger zones where small slip-ups could damage your chances:

Your attire. A middle-aged executive with an impressive résumé wore a slightly low-cut blouse during her interview with the head of a hospital in a small Texas town. Leaning across his desk, she revealed a black panther tattoo on her breast.

The CEO nixed her for the finance chief’s role. The large tattoo “would not fly with the board members and the community for someone in that position,” he told Bradley G. Richardson, a partner at recruiters Kaye/Bassman International Corp., which handled the search.

Extra preparation helped Mr. Obergfell avoid a sartorial misstep. After losing his job last September, he hoped to become national sales manager for Mahco Inc., a sporting-goods importer in Bentonville, Ark.. The night before his final interviews, he asked a Mahco vice president he previously worked for elsewhere whether donning a suit might intimidate potential colleagues.

“Don’t wear a tie,” the former boss replied. Less worried about looking overdressed, Mr. Obergfell says he concentrated harder on selling himself. He began his new job in late December.

Your meal etiquette. Most job seekers know not to order messy food. Your timing matters, too. Hoping to join a big Midwestern bank, a recent college graduate arrived late for a group interview at a restaurant. Officials and fellow candidates already were seated.

The latecomer “ordered the most expensive item on the menu, ate and finished his meal before others were served,” recalls Barbara Pachter, a business-etiquette specialist who advised the bank. She learned about the young man from a successful attendee at the group dinner who participated in an etiquette class that Ms. Pachter led for the bank. She says poor manners were the main reason the bank spurned the latecomer for its management-training program.

Your tactfulness. As an executive vice president of a technology management consultancy, Dan Burns often asked promising prospects when they could start work before he made an offer. They often said they weren’t available for weeks because they needed to give notice.

“That’s the last thing a hiring manager wants to hear,” says Mr. Burns, a recent retiree and author of “The First 60 Seconds: Win the Job Interview Before It Begins.” You risk killing your candidacy unless you tell an interested employer that you’re equally interested in the job, he cautions. Once you get an offer, you’re in a better position to negotiate your arrival date.

Your sweat. A project manager hired by Mr. Burns a few summers ago jogged 12 blocks from a train station to the office of a client that was considering the recruit for a consulting gig. “Overheated and soaked, he asked if the company had shower facilities that he might use before the interview started,” remembers Mr. Burns, who met the project manager in the lobby of the client’s building before the interview. “You could see the sweat stain on his white shirt.”

The company lacked showers and executives refused Mr. Burns’s request to reschedule the meeting. They chose a different consultancy for their project.

“Plan ahead,” Mr. Burns warned the project manager afterward. He arrived an hour early for his next client interview, “and he wasn’t sweating,” adds Mr. Burns.

Arriving early also lets you practice relaxation techniques, such as deep breathing, that may dry your sweaty palms before shaking hands with a hiring manager, says Gail Golden, a Chicago leadership coach.

Your deportment. Inappropriate behavior can cause problems. Ms. Golden, who helps companies screen top-level candidates, dislikes male ones who put a hand on her shoulder following an interview. The patronizing touch comes across as “‘Thanks for your time, sweetheart,’” she complains.

During a July interview at Goliath Jobs, an aspiring marketing manager waved his hands wildly to demonstrate his enthusiasm for the job. The gesturing prospect knocked over his sealed water bottle twice. An intern soon served coffee. Extending his arm to show how far he’d go for a sale, the man toppled the mug. Coffee covered the conference table. “He was very passionate, but way too much,” Mr. Mezzapelle says.

The man nevertheless landed the job—thanks to strong references. But he quit in November, frustrated by his scant commissions.

“He could not handle sales in an industry he knew nothing about,” Mr. Mezzapelle says. In hindsight, Mr. Mezzapelle realizes the anxious hand waving “displayed a lack of confidence in his abilities.” He regrets hiring the unemployed man.

The key question when it comes to moving locations for a new job is what will happen to your living standard? Specifically, how much will your living standard change if you move for the same pay, and how much more (or less) must you make to maintain your living standard? Spending less or working harder represents the price of the move, and these days we need to know precisely the price of everything we buy, including our location.

But user beware! Simple cost-of-living tools, which abound on the Web, give wrong answers to both questions and can lead to very bad location choices.

Take CNNMoney.com. Its cost-of-living tool tells you that moving for equal pay from Kansas City to Seattle will cut your living standard by 22%, but that if you earn 28% more at the new job, you’ll be made whole.

This presumes that what you currently earn is what you spend. Not so. The Internal Revenue Service as well as state tax collectors make sure of that. Moreover, your ability to spend today depends on your regular and retirement account assets and your future after-tax income from Social Security, pensions and work.

CNNMoney’s cost-of-living tool also assumes that your spending pattern is the same as the national average. But if Uncle Vinnie in Seattle offers you his condo for next to nothing, housing in Seattle may be cheaper even though CNN says it’s 72% more expensive.

The “rest of your life” is another reason the simplistic, static measures can be miles off. Suppose you spend like the average household, but want this to be your last move. Then Seattle means paying higher housing, grocery and other prices for the rest of your life, not just during your working life.

There are other complicating factors. If the Seattle job comes with health insurance, a pension and a 401(k) with matching employer contributions, it’s one thing. If it comes with no fringe benefits, it’s another. Second, earning more will likely boost your future Social Security benefits as well as those your spouse may collect on your earnings record.

Third, gross and net costs of housing are different. If you buy, rather than rent, you can deduct the extra mortgage interest and property taxes you’ll face provided you itemize.

And fourth, there’s the taxman. Moving for higher pay means higher federal and, potentially, state taxes for each of your remaining years. So deciding today whether to move requires provisionally filing all your future tax returns. And this year, it means including the special tax credits available both to first-time home buyers and to long-time homeowners. (For advice on the credit, click here .)

Pulling your hair out yet? Don’t. There’s a new, free, Web tool that can make all these complex current and future calculations in two seconds. It not only tells you what will happen to your living standard if you head to Seattle for the same pay. It will also tell you how much more you’ll need to earn in the new job, to maintain your spending power. The tool–ESPlannerBASIC –is a life-cycle personal financial planning program provided as a public service by the company founded by one of the authors of this piece–Laurence Kotlikoff.

ESPlannerBasic and CNNMoney.com calculate very different location prices. Take Bill and Sally Owens, a 55-year-old, childless couple. Both earn $75,000 working for an India-based company that pays no benefits. They plan to retire at 65 and are assuming a 2% investment return after inflation.

Billy and Sally have $300,000 in regular assets and $250,000 each in traditional pre-tax individual retirement accounts to which they contribute $3,000 each per year. They each expect to collect $2,500 (in today’s dollars) per month from Social Security starting at age 65. They own a $400,000 house with a $200,000, 15-year mortgage that requires a monthly payment of $1,600. Their annual property taxes, homeowners insurance and maintenance costs total $4,000, $1,000 and $2,000, respectively.

Since they telecommute, they can move to Seattle without switching employers. CNNMoney.com says Bill and Sally need to earn $192,192 to have the same living standard. Since $150,000 is only 78% of $192,192, CNNMoney.com is also saying that Bill and Sally’s living standard will be 22% lower if they move for the same pay.

ESPlannerBASIC delivers different results. The program lets you enter housing expenses separately and determines how much you can and should spend on a discretionary basis each year to smooth your living standard through time.

In moving the Owens to Seattle, we assumed they buy a house that’s 72% more expensive than their current house and that they borrow the extra $288,000, leaving them with a total mortgage of $488,000 and a monthly payment of $3,904. We assume the property taxes, insurance and maintenance costs are also 72% higher.

According to ESPlannerBASIC, Billy and Sally can spend $78,898 per year on a discretionary basis if they stay in Kansas City. This discretionary spending is over and above their housing costs, tax payments, contributions to IRAs and saving for retirement. If Billy and Sally move to Seattle, their sustainable discretionary spending drops to $72,552 per year or to $64,894 after accounting for the higher cost of groceries, utilities, transportation and health care.

Hence, if we measure living standard based on discretionary spending, the move from Kansas to Seattle reduced Billy’s and Sally’s living standard not by 22%, as CNNMoney.com suggested, but by 18%. But even this overstates the living standard difference. The reason is that in Seattle, Billy and Sally will be sitting on a house worth $288,000 more dollars. If Billy and Sally take out a reverse mortgage at say, age 75, that lets them borrow $150,000, they’ll end up at age 100 (if they last that long) with roughly the same equity as in Kansas City. In this case, their living standard in Seattle is only 15% lower. That’s two-thirds the drop CNNMoney predicts.

Also, according to ESPlannerBASIC, the salary increase needed to keep Billy and Sally whole is 55%, not 28% ($192,192 divided by $150,000)! The reason is that Billy and Sally are only going to work another 10 years and every extra dollar they earn is being taxed at a 33% rate federal marginal rate, although at a zero state income tax rate since Washington has no state income tax. Clearly, if Billy and Sally are really concerned about maintaining their living standard, they may need to work 55% harder or longer for a decade. That’s a big price to pay for better coffee shops, not to mention rain and fog.

To summarize, compared with CNNMoney.com’s toy calculator, ESPlannerBASIC says Billy and Sally suffer a smaller living standard reduction, but require a larger increase in salary to remain whole. So, depending on the question being asked, CNNMoney either overstates or understates the true price of Billy and Sally’s living in Seattle. In ignoring tax savings on housing and the fact that part of the higher housing expenditure in Seattle is an investment, not pure consumption, CNNMoney is overstating the living standard decline from an equal-salary move to Seattle. But in ignoring the long number of years that the couple will face higher prices and the relatively short number of working years available to make up this difference, CNNMoney is understating how much more earnings are needed each year of their remaining work life to make them whole.

Laurence J. Kotlikoff is a professor of economics at Boston University, president of Economic Security Planning

After graduating in 2007 from Loyola Marymount University, Rachel Jones was laid off from two jobs consecutively in her chosen field, public relations. In the grueling nine-month job search that ensued, she sent her résumé to more than 130 employers, initially applying for just about any opening she could find—from office assistant to movie-production coordinator. She also sent the same generic cover letter to every employer.

“It’s easy to fall into a routine of just copying and pasting in a new company name,” the 24-year-old says.

It wasn’t until Ms. Jones started focusing on junior positions in her field and writing introductory notes tailored to specific opportunities she was aiming for that things started to turn around. She started receiving more interview invites for jobs she actually wanted. In August, she landed an account-coordinator position at a small Los Angeles public-relations firm.

For many out-of-work professionals, finding a job in today’s market requires far more effort than it did in the past—and a lot more stamina. Last month, the Labor Department reported that it takes unemployed workers an average of 27.2 weeks to land a job, up from 19.1 weeks in September 2008 and 16.7 in September 2007. But career experts say there are several ways job hunters can revive a stalled search.

Taking a highly targeted approach, as Ms. Jones eventually did, is one strategy. Another is to focus on obtaining leads to unadvertised positions where the companies seek out their own applicants. Relying solely on job-board listings, which have been shrinking, isn’t enough these days. There were roughly 3.3 million jobs advertised online last month, compared with 4.4 million in September 2008 and 4.7 million in September 2007, according to the Conference Board, a research firm.

Many employers have cut back on advertising jobs online because they are overwhelmed with applications, says Bradley G. Richardson, a partner at executive-search firm Kaye/Bassman International Corp. in Plano, Texas. Instead, they are relying on word of mouth and referrals to draw a more manageable number of applicants, he says. That requires more networking on the part of the job seeker—even tapping into people you don’t know well.

After getting laid off from a market-research firm in November, Jon Evoy says, he devoted most of his time to applying for positions he found online. “It’s easier to sit in front of your computer and just start looking for jobs as opposed to pounding the pavement,” he says.

But then a month passed during which Mr. Evoy, 30, says he failed to land a single interview. The lack of interest prompted him to shift gears. He reached out to everyone in his network—even people he hadn’t spoken to in years. One was an advertising professional he had met two years earlier at an industry event. Kaplan Thaler Group Ltd., the New York agency where she worked, wasn’t hiring at the time, but she agreed to set him up on an informational interview with a colleague who was a director at the firm.

Meanwhile, Mr. Evoy followed another bit of advice career counselors recommend to boost a lagging job search. He made a point of keeping up with news and trends in his target industry to identify potential job opportunities. When he came across an article in a trade magazine about how the firm he did the informational interview with had won a big client, he sent the director a congratulatory email and asked if the firm would be hiring soon to meet the new demands. He received a reply tipping him off to a coming job opening. He applied and got it. Later, Mr. Evoy learned that an employer he did a free-lance assignment for during his job search contacted the advertising firm and put in a good word for him—further proof of the power of networking.

A drawn-out job hunt also can give out-of-work professionals the time they need to fill a skills a gap—which in turn can jump-start a hunt. During her 10-month search last year, Laura Perry says she noticed many openings in her field, communications, required or preferred expertise in social media—something she lacked. “In my previous job, they had not embraced social media at all,” she says.

So Ms. Perry, 54, attended a conference on the subject and later volunteered to create a Facebook page for a local hair salon. She went on to build Facebook and LinkedIn pages for the Los Angeles chapter of the Executive Women’s Golf Association, of which she is a member. She also created a Twitter account for herself and tweets about the communications industry.

Ms. Perry added that social-media experience to her résumé and says what she learned helped her talk intelligently in interviews with employers—and she was able to point to samples of her work in this area. In July, she was hired as director of communications for the school of nursing at University of California, Los Angeles, where part of her job is to manage the school’s presence on Facebook and other social media Web sites.

In a recession, another way to put a job search back on track is to push your boundaries. That means including employers of all sizes and in more cities—even if that requires considering lower-paying positions at small, unknown firms.

Following a layoff from a midsize publishing company in February, Brian Rushton Phillips, 37, embarked on a search for a creative-director position in the Toronto area paying annual salary of $85,000 or more.

“I began lowering my expectations [for pay] once it became clear that the market wouldn’t accept it,” he says. In August, he accepted an offer for such a job but from a small publisher in New York that pays about $15,000 less than he earned in his last position. But he says he is happy to have a job, particularly one in the field he wants to work in.

If other changes aren’t helping refresh a job search, check for something as minor as a misspelled name or grammatical gaffe in your resume or cover letter. Job seekers should bear in mind that in a cutthroat market, employers are less inclined to ignore such errors, says Brad Karsh, president of JobBound, a career-coaching company in Chicago. It’s critical for job seekers to take the time to carefully proofread their resumes and every cover-letter submission, or have someone else do it. “The slightest mistake of any component of your job search can destroy your chances,” says Mr. Karsh. “This needs to be a flawless process.”

With unemployment at 9.4% and rising, it’s a buyer’s market for employers that are hiring. But many employers are bypassing the jobless to target those still working, reasoning that these survivors are the top performers.

“If they’re employed in today’s economy, they have to be first string,” says Ryan Ross, a partner with Kaye/Bassman International Corp., an executive recruiting firm in Dallas. Mr. Ross says more clients recently have indicated that they would prefer to fill positions with “passive candidates” who are working elsewhere and not actively seeking a job.

The bias extends from front-line workers to senior managers. Charlie Wilgus, managing partner of executive search for Lucas Group, based in Atlanta, says a manufacturing client looking for a division president recently refused to consider a former divisional president at Newell Rubbermaid Inc. whose department had been eliminated. The client doesn’t want candidates who have been laid off, Mr. Wilgus says.

Bobby Fitzgerald prefers to hire the already employed even though he gets two dozen or more unsolicited résumés each day at his White Chocolate Grill.

Employers’ preference for the employed adds another hurdle for those who have been laid off. Job seekers frequently are competing with dozens of other applicants for the few available positions.

Bobby Fitzgerald, a partner in five restaurants in three states, says these days he gets two dozen or more unsolicited résumés each day at one of his Phoenix restaurants, the White Chocolate Grill. But Mr. Fitzgerald says his top candidates, for jobs ranging from servers to management, usually are people who are employed elsewhere. He currently has 50 openings across his five restaurants and has told recruiters to bring in only people who are working.

Mr. Fitzgerald has long practiced “guerrilla recruiting.” Even with so many applicants available, he still sends managers to other restaurants with instructions to approach staffers who seem to be strong performers.

Mr. Fitzgerald’s preference for the employed can be time-consuming and expensive. He recently spent three weeks courting a restaurant manager in Birmingham, Ala., for a management post. Mr. Fitzgerald flew the candidate to Phoenix for an interview and a “realistic job preview,” but the candidate chose not to relocate and declined the job offer. “There are a lot of applicants between Phoenix and Birmingham who would have gladly taken the job,” says Mr. Fitzgerald.

While the tactic doesn’t work very often, Mr. Fitzgerald says it lets people know he is hiring. “We are always looking for the very best of the industry, which happens to be people who are still employed,” he says. “The overflow of applicants hasn’t made it easier to hire at all.”

Even when employers are successful, recruiting the employed can cost money. Tim Donohue, senior account manager of Infinity Consulting Solutions, an executive-search firm specializing in finance-related industries, based in New York, says candidates who are wooed away from other jobs typically demand a higher salary than the unemployed, who tend to be more open to negotiation.

Nonetheless, many employers consider the employed more valuable and worth the extra effort. Health-care management-consulting firm Beacon Partners Inc., Weymouth, Mass., has openings for 10 technology-consulting and senior project-management positions. Chief Executive Ralph Fargnoli is looking first for people who are still working. “If they’re still employed that means they have some significant value,” Mr. Fargnoli says.

Beacon, with about 145 employees, targets candidates at conferences, presentations and other gatherings. “We attend industry events and approach the speaker or attendees to see if they’re happy at their job and whether they see a career path at their current employer,” says Mr. Fargnoli. Recently, Mr. Fargnoli successfully recruited a chief information officer of a hospital health system for a vice president role at Beacon after meeting the person at conferences.

The targets aren’t always eager to jump ship. “We’re seeing candidates afraid to move because they don’t want to be the last one in, first one out,” says Jaimie Lynn Craig, an executive recruiter with Premier Staffing in San Francisco. She says many executive-level candidates are seeking guarantees and severance provisions in case their new jobs fall through. Messrs. Fargnoli and Fitzgerald say the employees they approach are more risk-averse, given the shaky economy.

When employers post jobs, they often are flooded with applicants, many of whom aren’t good matches for the position. Kristi Robinson, vice president of talent acquisition at Express Scripts Inc., says applications at the St. Louis pharmacy-benefit manager are up 80% from last year, but many candidates are either over- or underqualified. By targeting people who are currently employed in comparable positions, the firm can bypass candidates who aren’t perfect matches.

Ms. Robinson is looking to fill more than 100 positions, from operations and sales to finance. She says Express Scripts is targeting passive candidates through networking and referrals, and expects them to account for about half of new hires this year, similar to last year.

Job seekers sense the trend. A recent online survey conducted by Infinity Consulting Solutions of 417 job hunters in the New York area found that 59% agreed or strongly agreed that employers gave preference to candidates that are currently employed.

However, there are still jobs to be had if you can calm an employer’s biggest worry about out-of-work applicants: that your termination was the result of poor performance.

Arming yourself with strong letters of recommendation from your previous employer, stating that you were laid off for economic reasons and that you are “eligible for rehire,” can help your case, says Mr. Ross of Kaye/Bassman. If you can’t obtain formal letters, get references from senior-level employees at your prior company, he says.

Being flexible on your salary or title also goes a long way, says Mr. Donohue of Infinity Consulting.

And if you lost your job when your department was eliminated, make sure to tell prospective employers; that will be considered more benign than selective layoffs, says Mr. Donohue. “If they got rid of half the team and you’re on the losing half, their antennas are up,” he says.

Biologist David Weinberg received feelers from a biotechnology start-up shortly after Merck & Co. laid him off in October.

But the 20-person firm never interviewed him for its middle-management vacancy because Dr. Weinberg had spent his 19-year career at the pharmaceutical giant. The biotech concern spurned six other prospects with similar backgrounds, according to recruiters Klein Hersh International, which handled the hunt.

The recruiters said the start-up’s officials feared a large-company alumnus “isn’t going to be able to move fast,” recalls Dr. Weinberg, of Westfield, N.J. “Frankly, I think there’s some truth to that.” The scientist remains unemployed.

As many major U.S. companies slash staff, more job seekers with big-business résumés are pursuing smaller employers. Concerns with 500 or fewer people employ more than half of the nation’s private-sector workers. However, fledgling and midsize enterprises say they often reject applicants from sizable companies as bad fits for their businesses.

Big-business veterans face greater hurdles in downsizing employers than during the 2000-2001 downturn. Smaller employers often assume big-company veterans prefer a highly structured workplace, plentiful perks and extensive organizational support. To overcome such stereotypes, you must portray yourself as a self-starter. “Just having a blue-chip company in your background isn’t going to open doors like it once did at small concerns,” says Fred Whelan, a San Francisco recruiter and co-author of the forthcoming book, “GOAL! Your Game Plan for Success.”

Yet “the right executive can make that difficult leap,” says Glenn Fox, CEO of BusinessElite, a free online service that helps senior executives find opportunities. “You have to have very specific skills to be attractive to the smaller companies.” Among the skills sought are small-team leadership and high-level strategy expertise, he adds. Five big-business executives recently aided by BusinessElite joined small employers.

You could position yourself for the same switch by reviewing activities on and off the job that illustrate your likelihood of thriving in an entrepreneurial setting. For example, you might cite a risky project where you wore multiple hats.

That’s what Kate Gerwe did. While a senior marketing director for Yahoo Inc., she led the company’s “Green Team,” a volunteer group of 200 staffers with a tiny budget that tried to promote colleagues’ awareness of environmental issues. Team members persuaded Yahoo last year to install a real-time energy-monitoring system from Lucid Design Group, a start-up in Oakland, Calif. The new system assisted Yahoo in reducing energy usage.

Ms. Gerwe, an ardent environmental advocate, was intrigued by Lucid and soon began chatting with its founders. Chief Executive Michael E. Murray initially was skeptical. At the time, the start-up only consisted of him and three co-founders and he worried whether a corporate executive could flourish at a little workplace where “roles are going to be shifting.”

Ms. Gerwe says she argued that Green Team’s success demonstrated she could “achieve results with little or no resources.” She promised to help Lucid grow because she understood complex management systems — rather than arrogantly asserting, “This is how we did things at Yahoo,” according to Mr. Murray. Ms. Gerwe became Lucid’s first chief operating officer last October. The firm now employs nine people.

Adapting your large-company tool kit to a smaller enterprise’s needs may boost your candidacy. If that potential employer is struggling, for instance, you could propose speedy revival steps based on your big-business experience and contacts. Smaller concerns need confidence in a candidate’s transferable skills because “every person hired has a magnified impact” in a small company, explains Mike Ramer, a career coach and recruiter in Livingston, N.J.

Some big-company veterans have trouble migrating. In January, a division controller laid off by a huge computer maker tried to prove that he had a small-business mindset. He hoped to become controller of a $500 million concern that “wanted someone very hands on,” recalls Dora Vell, managing partner of Vell & Associates Inc., a high-tech search firm in Waltham, Mass., that was conducting the controller search for the concern.

But because his last employer was a slow-moving bureaucracy, the executive couldn’t convince Ms. Vell that he was a “hands-on” player there. He further weakened his prospects when he bragged that he used to oversee 45 people. He’s still jobless.

Some small firms ignore big-business veterans because they would refuse to make the coffee or fix a jammed printer. At a start-up, “you have to do everything,” says Gregory M. Coticchia, CEO of eBillingHub, a small Pittsburgh provider of law-firm billing software. “It’s very difficult to wean yourself from all the things that are done for you at a larger company.” The result? Mr. Coticchia favors applicants with start-up experience.

A willingness to take less status may enhance your chances of landing at a smaller employer. Randy Briggs was a project manager and vice president for Wells Fargo Bank until his January layoff. He omits his VP title when he sends his résumé to small concerns because most don’t realize that a vice presidency of a big bank represents a midlevel role. Mr. Briggs would accept a lower-paid position at a smaller employer as long as “everything else is right,” he remarks. “I always thought there was more job security in large companies — but not lately.”

The higher you rise along the corporate ladder, the more attractive you’re likely to become to executive recruiters. But even if they contact you first, your odds of getting a job as a result can flounder if you don’t understand how the search business works. For example, some up-and-coming corporate leaders withhold critical information, such as their current salary, due to privacy concerns. Yet recruiters work on a confidential basis, asserts Wes Richards, a senior client partner and managing director at Korn/Ferry International Inc. “We’re like your doctor, your priest or your lawyer,” he says. To avoid being labeled a greenhorn, see these tips for forging and managing strong relationships with recruiters.

Your First 90 Days

Be sure. Offer yourself as a candidate to recruiters only if you’re serious about wanting to change jobs, warns Daniel Cahill, president of Hobson Associates Inc., a boutique search firm in Cheshire, Conn. “Don’t call a headhunter because you had a bad day, you’re bored or mad,” he says. Carefully assess your situation first, because if you turn down a recruiter’s interview offer, chances are he or she “won’t work with you again,” he says.

Be specific. Let recruiters know if you’ll only work in a certain area, geographically or industry-wise, and keep in mind that the thinner your search parameters, the fewer your options, says Mr. Cahill. Also, avoid saying you’ll move anywhere for a job if you don’t really mean it. “Anytime you renege on an opportunity or change your mind, you create a problem,” he warns.
Provide references. Include three names—and their contact information—when you send recruiters your resume, says Mr. Cahill. These can be former bosses, colleagues or people you managed. The effort will help bolster a recruiter’s desire to represent you to his or her clients, he says.

Ask smart questions. If a recruiter approaches you about a career opportunity, show you’re job-search savvy by inquiring about the size of the employer, its culture, the competencies needed for the position and whether you’re the first candidate to be considered, advises Mr. Richards. Also request a copy of the job’s specifications. “The recruiter will say this is somebody who understands the bigger picture and is digging in deep to understand what the job is all about,” he explains.

Explain rejections. For jobs that aren’t a good match, let recruiters know why, says Mr. Richards. This will allow them to clear up any false impressions you might have or gain a better understanding of what you prefer. It also may prompt the search professional to add you to his or her tickler file for consideration down the road. Mr. Richards says about three-quarters of the candidates he places are people he’d previously tried to place. Meanwhile, if possible, recommend someone else for the jobs you turn down. “Headhunters are quid pro quo people,” says Mr. Cahill. “They keep score.”

Stay involved. Check in with recruiters about once every two weeks to stay on their radar, unless you have something to report, such as feedback on an interview you completed or any progress you made your own. “A headhunter doesn’t want to be embarrassed calling a company you already have an interview with,” says Mr. Cahill. Act as your recruiter’s assistant by researching companies and offering a list of ones you consider a strong fit. “Those are the people I work hardest for,” he says.

Suggest moving on. If a recruiter hasn’t secured you any substantial interview invites after 90 days, ask for a reference to another search professional in your niche, advises Mr. Cahill. The request might motivate the recruiter to try harder. “Headhunters are competitive,” he says.

You’ve prepared for your next job interview by researching the company, brushing up on your sales pitch and pressing your suit. But one key task remains: Figuring out what to expect as compensation.

In a tough economy, you don’t have a lot of wiggle room when it comes to negotiating base salary, says David Wise, senior consultant at Hay Group Inc., a global management-consulting firm.

But, just like any rule, there are exceptions. If you have the kind of skills that are in short supply and are critical to a business’s bottom line, employers are often willing to pay “above and beyond the market average,” says Ravin Jesuthasan, global practice leader at Towers Perrin, a Stamford, Conn.-based consulting firm.

Employers are also increasingly sweetening job offers for high-demand candidates, with benefits previously reserved for workers already in the company, such as flexible schedules and work-from-home arrangements, says Kenan Abosch, leader of the compensation consulting practice at Hewitt Associates Inc., a provider of human-resources services based in Lincolnshire, Ill. “If a company has someone they’re really hot to get, because it’s a pivotal role, they’ll go the extra mile,” he explains. College graduates who fall into this category may be enticed with iPods, laptop computers and other perks, he adds.

How can you tell if your skills are in demand? The answer varies by industry. For example, executives with global outsourcing experience are highly sought after at consumer-goods companies, because more employers are outsourcing their manufacturing overseas. And risk-management professionals are on the most-wanted lists of food concerns due to recent historic increases in commodity prices.

Max Donley, vice president of human resources at MedImmune Inc., says, “Compensation [restrictions] would be taken off the table” in negotiations for a senior director of cancer biology, a job that’s been open for six months. “It’s a very high-demand position in the biotech industry, and very few people have the skills required to be successful in this role.”

A global oil and gas company recently hired a business-development executive at a salary “significantly above the market average because of his exceptionally strong negotiating and selling skills,” says Michael Wing, a recruiter for executive-search firm Loewenstein & Associates Inc. in Houston. “There are few candidates at the middle-management level with this skill set.”

If you have a unique background, be sure to highlight that in your résumé and cover letter, advises Mr. Abosch. “Make it easy for an employer to spot,” he says. “Interviewing for a job today is as much about marketing as it is about background and experience.”
What if you lack the kind of expertise that employers are bending over backward for? To gain negotiating leverage, you first need to understand how salaries are set. Employers typically start out by reviewing pay surveys from consulting companies and executive-search firms, says David Insler, a senior vice president at Sibson Consulting, which specializes in human resources, benefits and compensation consulting. (Sibson doesn’t collect or sell pay data.) These show the lowest and highest salaries for a position, plus the average and median, by industry, career field, company size and region. They also look at years of experience and education required as well as the responsibilities of the job.

Consulting firms generally collect data by distributing lists of jobs to employers and requesting the information, usually in exchange for a free or discounted copy of the survey. Submissions are closely scrutinized for errors and figures that seem out of whack.

If you’re eager to get your hands on the surveys that employers use, prepare to pay a bundle — and to get far more information than you probably need. Consider, for example, a recent report on information-technology jobs from consulting firm Mercer LLC: It cost $3,075 for nonparticipants and covered 270 positions at more than 1,800 U.S. companies.

Even if you did get a coveted peek, employers mainly use the market averages shown in survey data for benchmarking against a candidate’s current pay, says Mr. Wise. “Most [employers] start with what you’re making now and provide something above that to entice you,” he says. If you’re making a lateral move, expect something between what you make now and a 10% increase, Mr. Wise says. “But if it’s a bigger job, it’s reasonable to expect something in the 15% to 20% range.” On the other hand, if you’re already earning an above-average salary, employers might bristle at that kind of increase and look for someone more affordable.

Another trick job-seekers can use is to do their due diligence on the scope of the job’s responsibilities, says Mr. Wise. For example, some chief financial officers “are really nothing more than controllers, while others participate in strategic discussions with the executive team or they may play an operational role,” he explains. “The bigger job is the one that’s going to receive more pay.” For this reason, he warns job candidates to be clear on a position’s responsibilities when evaluating its pay.

“Before you take a similar-titled role at another place, you better understand what the job’s responsibilities really are because a title won’t always capture those nuances,” he says. “You have to make the job bigger through something you bring to the table in order to justify a larger pay package.”

Where else can you flex your negotiating muscles? You might have bargaining power when it comes to securing a sign-on bonus. Employers are generally more open to negotiating these because they’re one-time payments, explains Mr. Wise. “It’s absolutely appropriate to ask for a sign-on bonus to help you seal the deal, especially if you’re leaving a job in the middle of the year and leaving a partially earned bonus on the table,” he says.

To increase your odds of securing a sign-on bonus, offer to tie it to how you perform in your first six to 12 months on the job, suggests Mr. Insler, adding that more employers are considering or using these arrangements. You’ll have grounds for negotiating a bigger sign-on bonus than someone who doesn’t promise employers a return on their investment, he says. You’ll have to deliver — or your bonus will likely be rescinded.

Finally, remember that there’s more to a job than the amount of money it pays, notes Mr. Wise. “Things like work-life balance, personal development opportunities and an organization’s culture can be far more important than any extra 10% to 15% increase in pay.”

Annual pay raises in the U.S. in 2008 are expected to stay about the same as this year’s. The catch: Your share could be even more closely tied to your performance.

A survey conducted by consultant Towers Perrin of Stamford, Conn., shows that salary budgets in the U.S. are set to increase an average of 3.9% in 2008 — the same increase employers reported in 2007. The survey of 4,000 companies in 60 countries, slated for release today, highlights a growing shift in the way companies pay employees. Rather than awarding increases in fixed pay, they are increasingly tying pay raises to employee performance, human- resources consultants say.

Performance-based pay used to be popular mostly in the financial-services sector, says Ravin Jesuthasan, managing principal and practice leader in the Chicago office of Towers Perrin, but it is now spreading to other industries. And while the trend used to be restricted to midlevel management, it is now spreading to union employees, he says.

The gap is widening between the raises awarded to top and bottom performers. Top-rated employees received an average raise of 5.6% in 2007 while the lowest-rated performers received only 1.8%, according to human-resources consultant Mercer.

Many countries in the Towers Perrin survey are expecting larger-percentage increases in salaries than in the U.S. In India, salaries are expected to rise 15% next year, compared with 14% in 2007. In China, employers are projected to award raises of 9%, up from 8% this yea