4 ms·
Not that I disagree with you, but sadly, most companies don't seem to want to train people anymore. They rather push that responsibility to either universities
by rifung 10y ago
Not that I disagree with you, but sadly, most companies don't seem to want to train people anymore. They rather push that responsibility to either universities or the applicants themselves.
In fairness, I do think that someone who is very comfortable with a language or framework will be able to do things much faster than someone who isn't. Considering how quickly people change jobs nowadays, I can also see how companies don't want to train people only so they will leave shortly after or even before they're useful.
Obviously this is just based on my own experience in the US.
- GoToRO 10y agoI agree with you about the training. However if the stack is too specific, then the stack it's like a fingerprint and they are looking for somebody with the same fingerprint...
- Jemmeh 10y agoThis is actually one of my interview red flags. For example if I say "I've worked with VB.NET 5 years, but not much C#" and they want 1 year C# experience. If they say that's a problem most of the time they don't know what they're talking about or they're not a company willing to invest in training their employees. I want a job that lets me learn.
- GoToRO 10y ago@Jemmeh I "failed" a similar interview (VB, C#) Don't they know that the VB and C# examples are shown on Microsoft's site side by side?! The only conclusion I reached is that one should navigate in life in such a way that your well being should not depend on people that are less smart, less experienced, less curious than yourself.
- sshumaker 10y agoI think this is probably because there is still a stigma associated with being a VB programmer. If you knew F# instead you might have been hired anyway.
- sidlls 10y agoDefine "much faster." I am seriously trying to think of a developer I'd describe as competent and smart who could not pick up a new language or framework with sufficient understanding to be minimally productive (fixing minor to moderate bugs, contributing to new if simple features) inside a week or two. If that's not fast enough, something has gone terribly wrong planning the project.
- rifung 10y agoI actually didn't mean the time it took for them to start contributing, I meant the time it would take for them to complete the same task. Someone who knows the ins and outs of their language won't have to look up or learn new stuff as they go for example. This isn't even necessarily restricted to languages or frameworks, if you've done something similar to an assigned task, you would likely have already encountered certain pitfalls and know the best way to complete the task.
- Spooky23 10y ago15 years ago, my employer easily invested $15-20k in training into me and most of the other techs. It was a major factor in me sticking around vs taking a raise at another employer. We've reverted to the mean in recent years unfortunately. No training, and lots of nickel and dime bullshit. Today, if I found the right role, it would just be a matter of finding the right number.
- morgante 10y agoWhat do you define as "training?" Personally I don't think companies should be paying for specific training because as a developer you can learn anything you need online. On the other hand, my experience is that many/most companies are willing to hire a senior developer even if they don't have experience with the company's specific stack. They rightly assume that any developer can pick up a new stack quickly enough.
- vonmoltke 10y agoMy experience has been that most companies aren't even willing to talk to me if I don't have experience in their specific stack. That's probably the downside of liking embedded/systems level development much more than webdev.