Boondocks

I interview executives for a living.

When interviewing, I do notice what the person is wearing. The worst thing to wear is something that is distracting, because then the interviewers' eyes will focus on the distraction, rather than her face.

That means that colors should coordinate, and complement her skin tone and hair color.

I would wear a suit to the on-campus interview, and for an on-site interview, I would contact the person arranging the interview and ask how to dress. That may sound odd to some, but people will usually tell her whether they dress business casual or dress well. They may say something like, “We’re going to give you a plant tour and you could get grease all over anything you wear – no need to wear a suit.” Nothing wrong with asking.

Jewelry should be minimal or not worn at all, and perfume should be out (some people are allergic, and I interviewed a woman with perfume so strong it bowled me over – a powerful negative). She should know the obvious about peekaboo blouses and miniskirts, but I’ve interviewed women who think that these are fashionable or attractive or something, and it comes across as inappropriate.

When in doubt, overdress. If the interview is a daylong affair, the jacket can come off if she’s wearing a suit, so she can become less formal. Also, for daylong trips, have her bring a change of clothes, in case she gets a blotch gets on her blouse. I (I’m male) always have an extra shirt and t-shirt in the car, and once in a while, have to change midday.

You asked about a briefcase. A nice portfolio will do fine, unless she has to carry more than her portfolio will hold.

An about-to-graduate college student isn’t expected to walk in wearing a $2,000 outfit and $800 shoes. Key is that it doesn’t look cheap, and fits. As mentioned above, fit is very noticeable, whereas the caliber of the wool isn’t as easy to discern, especially when new.

And someone mentioned tailoring – that’s worth the small investment.

cosmicfish

This is not always true and therefore not a safe bet to make. For the first interview I would ALWAYS recommend a suit unless instructed otherwise, and would make a point of asking (if not told up front) what attire is appropriate for subsequent interviews. While there will always be exceptions, it is better to overdress than underdress, and the ones expecting more casual attire are much more forgiving than the ones expecting a suit. Underdressing implies that either you did not know what was appropriate or did not care, and neither are appealing attributes in someone looking for a job.

As a personal example, my first interview for my current job was done on campus at a career fair. The interviewer was an engineer by training, but was in management at a level where a suit was daily wear - he wore a suit, and after finding out that I had been awake the previous 36 hours (I had a night job during my last year) he congratulated me on still coming in appropriately dressed. My next series of interviews was onsite, and I was told upfront to dress business casual in shoes I could walk a mile in - standard attire for engineers at the company, but nothing I would wear to an interview without specific notice. Interestingly, there were a couple people who did NOT follow those directions and they had a tougher time of it from what I saw.

KamelAkbar

At my big engineering school's career fair, a business formal dress code was strictly enforced. It sounds absolutely nuts that you'd go to a job interview as a male without a suit.

Shrinkrap

UCB; You just blew my mind! How do you happen to know that level of detail about shopping for men's suits?

ucbalumnus

Mainly from reading around the web, after I found that most off-the-rack suits and dress shirts do not fit me very well. Then I figured out why the new graduate and intern candidates coming to interview dressed in suits or dress shirts tended to have way too much dress shirt around the abdomen area.

Fortunately, work is a very casual dress place.

Shrinkrap

Well, I'll be.......!

JonJon13926

As far as dress shirts go, I used to have problems with there being too much shirt around the abdomen when the sleeve and collar fit. Being 6'1, 175, I found that fitted shirts are a much better fit for me than slim fit or any other. They're still big at the chest, but they move inward at the abdomen.

They're sometimes harder to find, but anyone who's having the problem I used to have should try a fitted shirt.

hylyfe

Terrible to find stuff with small waist ( think <28 inch for male) and big shoulders and my weight fluctuates so much. Can drop 3-4 pounds in a week if i dont eat 3000+ cal a day. terrible to find anything that fits ever, pretty much given up... I am always awkwardly dressed. Even if I get something tailored, it may fit one week, but another week its just not gonna work...
Think a lot of young guys can relate with this, especially those that body build or lift. Not sure what the solution is though..

ucbalumnus

If you have a small waist and large chest, you likely have to go made-to-measure or full-custom / bespoke for dress clothes (though possibly suit separates with a lot of alteration on the jacket may work for the suit), although if you body build and change size all the time, that still may not work.

30" waist is pretty much the smallest size commonly seen in men's clothing, except for board shorts that go down to 28". Supposedly the average waist size for men in the US is around 38", so clothing of that size tends to be well stocked.

Chucktown

The kicker though, is that a 30'' isn't actually a 30'' anymore as retailers have made the waist measurements smaller than what they actually are. With tape, my waist measures 35'', but depending on the store I wear between 31-32 in the waist. There was a report done not too long ago that ABC aired that showed 36's were actually size 41's but retailers had changed the sizes as a marketing ploy. For instance, In 1999 (high school) I was 6ft 175lbs and pretty average wearing a 34. Fast forward 12 years and some time in the gym and I am 195lbs wearing a 32...something is wrong.

ChrisTKD

Chucktown "The kicker though, is that a 30'' isn't actually a 30'' anymore as retailers have made the waist measurements smaller than what they actually are."

I thought they only did that in women's clothing! The retailer won't be able to control that but you will find significant variation among manufacturers. One may have a 32 waist be exactly 32 inches; another may have the 32 fit a 32 waist, i.e., a bit larger; another may add extra for weight fluctuation. The most important thing in a mens suit is not the quality of the fabric or the name brand but the fit.

If you go to a quality department store they should have salespeople in the mens department that actually know something about suits and proper fit. I'd go there for specific advice rather than looking for a potentially less expensive suit at a discount store. It's not impossible to get a good fitting suit at a discount store but the staff is not knowlegeable and often the cheaper suit isn't a good buy in the long run. You do not need to buy the top end suits though.

ucbalumnus

You must be referring to this:
Pants Size Chart - Mens Pant Sizes by Brand - Esquire

But, interestingly, the 30" trousers (not suit trousers) and shorts that I have measured have generally been honestly sized (at most 0.5" variation), and a few are actually slightly smaller (i.e. true size 29" or 29.5") than their nominal size. Perhaps the inflation is more common in the larger sizes?

"Some time in the gym" could result in you weighing more (with more muscle) while having a smaller waistline (with less fat).

Chucktown

Haha. Actually, I was referring to this one:
Not to Scale: One Size Doesn't Fit All? - ABC News

And yes I did gain muscle, a good 20lbs of it. But, at 6ft 175lbs and a 3 sport high school athlete I didn't even have time for fat then. Definition wise I have always looked the same, I just got bigger.

Also, I have measured my current size 32's and they measure to 35, crazy but true.