21 ms·

70 job interviews in 17 days

171 points by dookehster 9y ago

110011 9y ago
This is a classic case of tragedy of the commons. I don't find anything particularly noteworthy about this to warrant communicating this to a larger audience. Unilaterally spamming potential employers in this way may result in improving your outcomes, but at whose cost?
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- ahartman00 9y ago
  Exactly, this is a self reinforcing feedback loop. I've heard about getting 200 resumes for an open position multiple times. Obviously it varies. Assuming 40 1 hour interviews per week, this would be 5 weeks. Also, your employees aren't working during that time, which can be bad if you have way too much work, right now. So there's a need to filter heavily. Enter filter by keywords, or maybe even discrimination. while(true) { 1. faced with a large number of resumes, employer become aggressive about filtering. 2. faced with a large number of rejections or not hearing back, employee sends even more resumes. }
onion2k 9y ago
The lesson here isn't that spamming works - it does now, but it'll very soon stop working if everyone does it. The real lesson is that applying for positions at companies that you want to work at, even if they aren't advertising the job you do, works. Send them your resume regardless and see what happens.
- lathiat 9y ago
  Meanwhile unemployment benefits in certain countries (e.g. Australia) legally require you to do this to keep your benefits. Literally applying. On the one hand I get that you need to require them to do something and I don't have an immediately better idea, but on the other hand they keep talking about increasing the number of jobs you have to apply for etc despite their literally not being enough jobs for everyone on benefits. Fun times
  - delazeur 9y ago
    > Meanwhile unemployment benefits in certain countries (e.g. Australia) legally require you to do this to keep your benefits. Literally applying. I had to document a certain number of applications per week to get unemployment in the U.S., but those policies vary by state.
    - mjevans 9y ago
      During the height of the recession I had to do the same (also US). After a while you can tell that a good number of those positions are just recruiting firm honeypots; which makes the search both aggravating and depressing (since you feel like there aren't any /real/ jobs out there).
- clarry 9y ago
  > applying for positions at companies that you want to work at Wanting to work at any company that is willing to hire you, is that an unacceptable answer?
IPS3c 9y ago
Any advice for interviewing? I have a second interview coming up soon.
cairo_x 9y ago
It was really hard, and took many spammy attempts, but you can do it too! homeless dude looks up hopefully, fishes out his tattered, vacant resume "In my case, my message was: I've built 2 companies, got a strong technical background, worked at places like Microsoft/Amazon/Nvidia, and I'm looking to work with great people." Oh.
- mikekchar 9y ago
  I'm really not trying to start an argument here, because there are many disadvantages that are hard/impossible to hurdle. However, being unemployed comes with a single, potentially powerful advantage: time. As a programmer, you need a computer (cheap second hand one is fine), you need a place to work and you need and internet connection. If you are unemployed for more than about 6 months, people start to look at you suspiciously, but after that you can't really fall any further. Being unemployed for 1 year or 2 years can be an advantage if you use that time productively. It won't appeal to everyone, but battling back from nothing is also a compelling story. Like I said, there will be many people who can not do it, for one reason or another, but I think the message that brand is important is not wrong.
- CM30 9y ago
  Yeah, he's certainly got a 'different' background from a lot of people looking for work at the moment. It's a bit like an entrepreneur writing a blog post about startup success, then mentioning how their parents/friends gave them $500,000 to start the company with. Most people probably wouldn't be that lucky. Still, it does also show that even the best candidates will struggle with the job finding process in this day and age. I mean, someone with that sort of technical background and experience should be getting offers all over the place. If you're an ex Microsoft/Amazon/Nvidia employee who set up two companies and has a strong technical background, and you're still only getting a 5.4% conversion rate... Yeah, the system is really messed up.
andrewingram 9y ago
I recently had 4 good offers on the table at the same time and it was unbelievably stressful for me, I don't ever want to go through that again. I don't see the value in applying to even more companies and increasing that stress further...
- zabana 9y ago
  Yeah I'm going through that at the moment, it's paralyzing to have to make a choice of that importance.
  - dookehster 9y ago
    This book is an incredibly good book for making this kind of decision: https://www.amazon.com/How-Will-Measure-Your-Life/dp/0062102419 https://www.amazon.com/How-Will-Measure-Your-Life/dp/0062102...
- billf1953 9y ago
  This has to be some sort of logic fallacy. With multiple offers you are guaranteed to be able to get higher pay, more time off, and/or better working conditions. You can't see the opportunity cost for one job offer, but tradeoffs to other jobs still exist. You might still be happier more productive and better qualified for a different job at a different company.
  - Zach_the_Lizard 9y ago
    This times 1000. When I took my current position, I had only one offer. I was moving cities and my response rate was lower than I'd like (some jobs explicitly requested locals), plus I had a shorter window in which to jump ships. Needless to say, I wasn't negotiating from a position of strength. A nice bump, for sure, but I could have done much better. I regret having to move so quickly. But now that I have a strong name on my resume, companies are lining up to interview me and this time around I can pit their offers against one another. Sure, having to pick companies might be slightly stressful, but knowing you got the best deal is an amazing feeling.
  - 9y ago
codingdave 9y ago
"5.4% conversion" That is the key number here. And that was just to get an interview. He got 6 offers from those 70 interviews, which is over a 90% rejection rate, despite some pretty good credentials in his background. Personally, I go the other way. I send out resumes selectively, and run closer to about a 30% response rate. And In my entire career, I've only ever NOT gotten an offer twice. Not because I am some extremely special coder --- I'm not. But because I take some care in selecting who I talk to in the first place to make sure we're a match before even getting that far.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- zabana 9y ago
  Yeah that. Quality over quantity all day errday.
- egman_ekki 9y ago
  I would like to believe this, too. However, after spending 6+ months helping my SO applying for more than 100 positions, handcrafting every CV and cover letter for each position, highlighting the skills that each position required, and all that we got back was maybe 5 negative answers, I think it's time to try the mass spamming approach. It's true the positions were not hardskills programming ones (more BA/data analyst oriented), but I still find it quite baffling.
  - victor9000 9y ago
    The strategy which worked best for me was to first find a job that I was interested in, and then to reach out to someone in recruiting via linkedin, twitter, whatever you find. The point is to have an actual conversation/email exchange so you're not just a pdf in someone's inbox. The recruiters won't think it's weird that you dug up their contact info because this is exactly what they do for a living, and you come in the door as a warm lead, so in the end it's a win for them. I had around an 80% success rate in getting phone screens and on-site interviews using this method.
  - deleted 9y ago
jroseattle 9y ago
> the script I used to algorithmically apply I'm not the same as everyone else, so take my opinions with a grain of salt. I'm a hiring manager, with many openings. To those who are considering this approach, keep this in mind: - This industry is smaller than you think. I have colleagues all over town and across the country. It's not uncommon for me to be maybe 2-3 degrees of separation from any person or place on your resume. If I think you automated your way into a conversation with us, I don't discount you right away but I highly doubt your sincerity. - Generic templated messages vs. thoughtful direct messages are _easy_ to detect. Even if I'm wrong, if it doesn't pass the smell test, I will pass. Do NOT kid yourself about the importance of managing quality vs. quantity in discussion with us. This process likely works in landing you an interview, but it can ignore the human element. To me, how you get in the door matters. Picking out the interested-after-the-fact vs. those who have done their homework on us is easy, and that matters greatly to me. I hire for the long-term and career-growth minded, and I recognize anyone on my staff can up and leave at any moment. I commit time, resources and energy to ensuring my staff is healthy and happy with us. This saturate-the-airwaves approach to introductions, even if refined, makes me think you're going to treat us as a temporary stop, simply looking to jump to the next "better" opportunity, and therefore leaves me less interested in devoting time to you. If all this just sounds like better execution with this approach, you're right. Just remember you don't get a second chance with us to make a first impression.
- SmellTheGlove 9y ago
  I'm a hiring manager as well and let me throw out a partial counterpoint: What OP is doing isn't because he doesn't want to be genuine with you. It's motivated because the HR screen is the hurdle to overcome, and there will be no opportunity to have a genuine conversation with you unless he gets past the HR filter first. I have a solution to this that works for me, but maybe not for everyone - I have HR do a very basic screen for my posting (candidate in market, unless I'm going to relo; current career level somewhere in my ballpark), with the exception that I want everything that includes a cover letter. If you're not big enough to have an initial screen happening, then obviously my point doesn't apply and you're entirely correct. But for many, getting anywhere near the hiring manager is the most difficult step. Plus, from my memories as an applicant - to startups and larger firms alike - I can't tell you how many times in my past I've taken the step of writing a nice, personalized cover letter and a tailored resume for something which was a reasonably good fit, only to either never hear a word or to receive an automated form rejection in return. Courtesy is a two way street - if your ATS blasts rejections to people, you can't get upset with candidates blasting applications to play the numbers.
dahart 9y ago
Even after reading the intro, knowing what was coming, it still somehow surprised me to bump into the word "funnel" referring to job applications. Good way to think about it if applying for lots and lots of jobs is the goal! > Having lots of offers takes a lot of psychological pressure off of the process. This intrigues me the most, I'd love to hear more about it. I personally would have expected the opposite before reading this. Often having multiple job offers makes me freeze up and worry a lot about which one I should choose. But maybe that's because I'm worrying about 2-3 jobs I want, as opposed to 70. I'm often optimizing relationships and my own happiness potential rather than compensation. That one sentence does make me want to try an approach like this. It'd be equally easy to spam without a script, right? This one looks like it hit "Apply" 1300 times in 1.5 hours - I'm looking at the 4 second delay. The script might be a 10-20 minute job, but I'd be paranoid enough about running something like this with my name attached that testing it and making absolutely certain it didn't go haywire would very likely take me a few hours. I probably would have done something that didn't scale, and clicked 1,300 times manually. I did chuckle a little when creativity was mentioned multiple times, for a process that is automated and "spam". It is a bit creative, so I don't mean to judge - I'm seeing the word spam in many comments here - but I feel like there are some much more creative ways to get exactly the job you want, and the idea here might be more about DIY than "creative" per se.
JCDenton2052 9y ago
Personally, I would be reluctant to go to a face-to-face interview that hasn't been preceded by a phone interview and (ideally) a technical test. By the time I step into the employer's office, I am 90% sure I would like to work for them. Anything else would be inefficient use of time, both mine and the employer's.
dookehster 9y ago
Author here. A few notes: I'm not proposing high touch methods are incorrect. I'm proposing there exists an alternative. HR professionals, the receiving end, spend their day spamming people on LinkedIn, email, etc. The same is true about sales people, marketers, and anybody trying to get the word out, except they do it at scale. I'm a little surprised by how many folks take issue with messaging people who might be interested and also do exactly what you're doing. If everybody does this, then job hunting becomes more like marketing since your message/resume has to stand out more. Consumers are bombarded with messages every day, they're good at ignoring things they don't want. The folks doing the hiring would become better "consumers". Engineering roles are, in general, way easier to land than a non-engineering roles because there aren't enough decent engineers.
- ThrowawayR2 9y ago
  > ...how many folks take issue with messaging people who might be interested and also do exactly what you're doing. ... Consumers are bombarded with messages every day, they're good at ignoring things they don't want. ... That's the same logic used by advertisers to plaster every square inch of the world with ads. Yet how many people here on HN use spam filters on their mail, ad-blockers in their browsers and commercial-skipping functions on their DVRs? Are we, as job seekers going to want to run the gauntlet of whatever HR devises that's the equivalent of those things if your technique becomes common? Perhaps your method works, perhaps it's not against any rules, but I have to say that find it to be morally dubious at best. I sincerely hope that it does not see wide adoption.
  - dookehster 9y ago
    You're arguing advertising and the way business is done worldwide is morally dubious. Why is it morally dubious? You have to become better at demonstrating value, yes.
- John_Cena 9y ago
  I have a BS computer engineering from GT and the only interviews I have received have been from companies wishing me to sign a 3 year contract or other 1*star glassdoor type shenanigans. I am trying to stay positive but I have lost hope. Ive done the mass submitting and specific tailoring strategies to no avail. Now I wish I had gotten a degree in ANY other engineering discipline. Any advice?
lmeyerov 9y ago
As a founder perspective: 1. I highly second using angel list. Modern founders know, and we (graphistry) list there! 2. ... We are overwhelmed by candidates from there, both by junior or bigco candidates who are hard to distinguish just on paper, and senior candidates who we are not sure are serious. Probably ~100% of the people we talk to didn't do the author's generic approach, but shared a carefully crafted 1-3 paragraphs. The more you go out of your way, the more we notice. Take it from the perspective of a neat small team (like ours!) who is excited about what we do & are growing. Whoever we hire now has a huge impact on what we're building, and as we're planning out the next 3-4 doublings of our team, your personal DNA & culture will determine the success of the 10 people who descend from you. You want to apply to teams who are spending time on doing this well.. and in turn, do it well yourself. Also.. build@graphistry.com if you agree ;-)
home_boi 9y ago
> Startup compensation can be right up there with the big companies. Does anyone know how to find these companies when you're already at the high end of the spectrum? There are thousands of start ups and even shooting an email or checking LinkedIn for previous work history of current engineers can be a time drain to figure this out. Ideally, the compensation would be something like > 80% total comp of big tech company in liquid money + a lot of private RSU's ( > 50% of big tech total comp)
- mrisoli 9y ago
  Most things about job seeking are a time drain, not only it is hard to find companies because of fragmentation but when companies use terms such as 'developer', 'programmer', 'engineer'(plus the weird ones: 'ninja'/ 'rockstar') it gets much harder to search, I would kill for someone to come up with international standard codes for these like SE0001 for a software engineer.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
ufmace 9y ago
It seems very odd to me to treat the job application process in this way. If nothing else, interviews are pretty much an all-day affair, at least in the sense that even if you have a short one, it's still going to be tough to schedule 2 in a day. Add that onto how many companies want multiple rounds of interviews, phone screens, take-home projects, etc and you get that you want to have a good idea that you actually want to work for a company before you apply and go for an interview. That doesn't mesh very well with writing scripts to mass-apply to companies and going on multiple dozens of interviews.
donovanm 9y ago
Is job searching really at a point now where hiring people to mass apply to jobs for you is an actual suggestion?

171 points by dookehster 9y ago

This is a classic case of tragedy of the commons. I don't find anything particularly noteworthy about this to warrant communicating this to a larger audience. Unilaterally spamming potential employers in this way may result in improving your outcomes, but at whose cost?

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
ahartman00 9y ago
Exactly, this is a self reinforcing feedback loop. I've heard about getting 200 resumes for an open position multiple times. Obviously it varies. Assuming 40 1 hour interviews per week, this would be 5 weeks. Also, your employees aren't working during that time, which can be bad if you have way too much work, right now. So there's a need to filter heavily. Enter filter by keywords, or maybe even discrimination. while(true) { 1. faced with a large number of resumes, employer become aggressive about filtering. 2. faced with a large number of rejections or not hearing back, employee sends even more resumes. }

onion2k 9y ago

The lesson here isn't that spamming works - it does now, but it'll very soon stop working if everyone does it. The real lesson is that applying for positions at companies that you want to work at, even if they aren't advertising the job you do, works. Send them your resume regardless and see what happens.

lathiat 9y ago
Meanwhile unemployment benefits in certain countries (e.g. Australia) legally require you to do this to keep your benefits. Literally applying. On the one hand I get that you need to require them to do something and I don't have an immediately better idea, but on the other hand they keep talking about increasing the number of jobs you have to apply for etc despite their literally not being enough jobs for everyone on benefits. Fun times
- delazeur 9y ago
  > Meanwhile unemployment benefits in certain countries (e.g. Australia) legally require you to do this to keep your benefits. Literally applying. I had to document a certain number of applications per week to get unemployment in the U.S., but those policies vary by state.
  - mjevans 9y ago
    During the height of the recession I had to do the same (also US). After a while you can tell that a good number of those positions are just recruiting firm honeypots; which makes the search both aggravating and depressing (since you feel like there aren't any /real/ jobs out there).
clarry 9y ago
> applying for positions at companies that you want to work at Wanting to work at any company that is willing to hire you, is that an unacceptable answer?

IPS3c 9y ago

Any advice for interviewing? I have a second interview coming up soon.

cairo_x 9y ago

It was really hard, and took many spammy attempts, but you can do it too! homeless dude looks up hopefully, fishes out his tattered, vacant resume "In my case, my message was: I've built 2 companies, got a strong technical background, worked at places like Microsoft/Amazon/Nvidia, and I'm looking to work with great people." Oh.

mikekchar 9y ago
I'm really not trying to start an argument here, because there are many disadvantages that are hard/impossible to hurdle. However, being unemployed comes with a single, potentially powerful advantage: time. As a programmer, you need a computer (cheap second hand one is fine), you need a place to work and you need and internet connection. If you are unemployed for more than about 6 months, people start to look at you suspiciously, but after that you can't really fall any further. Being unemployed for 1 year or 2 years can be an advantage if you use that time productively. It won't appeal to everyone, but battling back from nothing is also a compelling story. Like I said, there will be many people who can not do it, for one reason or another, but I think the message that brand is important is not wrong.
CM30 9y ago
Yeah, he's certainly got a 'different' background from a lot of people looking for work at the moment. It's a bit like an entrepreneur writing a blog post about startup success, then mentioning how their parents/friends gave them $500,000 to start the company with. Most people probably wouldn't be that lucky. Still, it does also show that even the best candidates will struggle with the job finding process in this day and age. I mean, someone with that sort of technical background and experience should be getting offers all over the place. If you're an ex Microsoft/Amazon/Nvidia employee who set up two companies and has a strong technical background, and you're still only getting a 5.4% conversion rate... Yeah, the system is really messed up.

andrewingram 9y ago

I recently had 4 good offers on the table at the same time and it was unbelievably stressful for me, I don't ever want to go through that again. I don't see the value in applying to even more companies and increasing that stress further...

zabana 9y ago
Yeah I'm going through that at the moment, it's paralyzing to have to make a choice of that importance.
- dookehster 9y ago
  This book is an incredibly good book for making this kind of decision: https://www.amazon.com/How-Will-Measure-Your-Life/dp/0062102419 https://www.amazon.com/How-Will-Measure-Your-Life/dp/0062102...
billf1953 9y ago
This has to be some sort of logic fallacy. With multiple offers you are guaranteed to be able to get higher pay, more time off, and/or better working conditions. You can't see the opportunity cost for one job offer, but tradeoffs to other jobs still exist. You might still be happier more productive and better qualified for a different job at a different company.
- Zach_the_Lizard 9y ago
  This times 1000. When I took my current position, I had only one offer. I was moving cities and my response rate was lower than I'd like (some jobs explicitly requested locals), plus I had a shorter window in which to jump ships. Needless to say, I wasn't negotiating from a position of strength. A nice bump, for sure, but I could have done much better. I regret having to move so quickly. But now that I have a strong name on my resume, companies are lining up to interview me and this time around I can pit their offers against one another. Sure, having to pick companies might be slightly stressful, but knowing you got the best deal is an amazing feeling.
- 9y ago

codingdave 9y ago

"5.4% conversion" That is the key number here. And that was just to get an interview. He got 6 offers from those 70 interviews, which is over a 90% rejection rate, despite some pretty good credentials in his background. Personally, I go the other way. I send out resumes selectively, and run closer to about a 30% response rate. And In my entire career, I've only ever NOT gotten an offer twice. Not because I am some extremely special coder --- I'm not. But because I take some care in selecting who I talk to in the first place to make sure we're a match before even getting that far.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
zabana 9y ago
Yeah that. Quality over quantity all day errday.
egman_ekki 9y ago
I would like to believe this, too. However, after spending 6+ months helping my SO applying for more than 100 positions, handcrafting every CV and cover letter for each position, highlighting the skills that each position required, and all that we got back was maybe 5 negative answers, I think it's time to try the mass spamming approach. It's true the positions were not hardskills programming ones (more BA/data analyst oriented), but I still find it quite baffling.
- victor9000 9y ago
  The strategy which worked best for me was to first find a job that I was interested in, and then to reach out to someone in recruiting via linkedin, twitter, whatever you find. The point is to have an actual conversation/email exchange so you're not just a pdf in someone's inbox. The recruiters won't think it's weird that you dug up their contact info because this is exactly what they do for a living, and you come in the door as a warm lead, so in the end it's a win for them. I had around an 80% success rate in getting phone screens and on-site interviews using this method.
- deleted 9y ago

jroseattle 9y ago

> the script I used to algorithmically apply I'm not the same as everyone else, so take my opinions with a grain of salt. I'm a hiring manager, with many openings. To those who are considering this approach, keep this in mind: - This industry is smaller than you think. I have colleagues all over town and across the country. It's not uncommon for me to be maybe 2-3 degrees of separation from any person or place on your resume. If I think you automated your way into a conversation with us, I don't discount you right away but I highly doubt your sincerity. - Generic templated messages vs. thoughtful direct messages are _easy_ to detect. Even if I'm wrong, if it doesn't pass the smell test, I will pass. Do NOT kid yourself about the importance of managing quality vs. quantity in discussion with us. This process likely works in landing you an interview, but it can ignore the human element. To me, how you get in the door matters. Picking out the interested-after-the-fact vs. those who have done their homework on us is easy, and that matters greatly to me. I hire for the long-term and career-growth minded, and I recognize anyone on my staff can up and leave at any moment. I commit time, resources and energy to ensuring my staff is healthy and happy with us. This saturate-the-airwaves approach to introductions, even if refined, makes me think you're going to treat us as a temporary stop, simply looking to jump to the next "better" opportunity, and therefore leaves me less interested in devoting time to you. If all this just sounds like better execution with this approach, you're right. Just remember you don't get a second chance with us to make a first impression.

SmellTheGlove 9y ago
I'm a hiring manager as well and let me throw out a partial counterpoint: What OP is doing isn't because he doesn't want to be genuine with you. It's motivated because the HR screen is the hurdle to overcome, and there will be no opportunity to have a genuine conversation with you unless he gets past the HR filter first. I have a solution to this that works for me, but maybe not for everyone - I have HR do a very basic screen for my posting (candidate in market, unless I'm going to relo; current career level somewhere in my ballpark), with the exception that I want everything that includes a cover letter. If you're not big enough to have an initial screen happening, then obviously my point doesn't apply and you're entirely correct. But for many, getting anywhere near the hiring manager is the most difficult step. Plus, from my memories as an applicant - to startups and larger firms alike - I can't tell you how many times in my past I've taken the step of writing a nice, personalized cover letter and a tailored resume for something which was a reasonably good fit, only to either never hear a word or to receive an automated form rejection in return. Courtesy is a two way street - if your ATS blasts rejections to people, you can't get upset with candidates blasting applications to play the numbers.

dahart 9y ago

Even after reading the intro, knowing what was coming, it still somehow surprised me to bump into the word "funnel" referring to job applications. Good way to think about it if applying for lots and lots of jobs is the goal! > Having lots of offers takes a lot of psychological pressure off of the process. This intrigues me the most, I'd love to hear more about it. I personally would have expected the opposite before reading this. Often having multiple job offers makes me freeze up and worry a lot about which one I should choose. But maybe that's because I'm worrying about 2-3 jobs I want, as opposed to 70. I'm often optimizing relationships and my own happiness potential rather than compensation. That one sentence does make me want to try an approach like this. It'd be equally easy to spam without a script, right? This one looks like it hit "Apply" 1300 times in 1.5 hours - I'm looking at the 4 second delay. The script might be a 10-20 minute job, but I'd be paranoid enough about running something like this with my name attached that testing it and making absolutely certain it didn't go haywire would very likely take me a few hours. I probably would have done something that didn't scale, and clicked 1,300 times manually. I did chuckle a little when creativity was mentioned multiple times, for a process that is automated and "spam". It is a bit creative, so I don't mean to judge - I'm seeing the word spam in many comments here - but I feel like there are some much more creative ways to get exactly the job you want, and the idea here might be more about DIY than "creative" per se.

JCDenton2052 9y ago

Personally, I would be reluctant to go to a face-to-face interview that hasn't been preceded by a phone interview and (ideally) a technical test. By the time I step into the employer's office, I am 90% sure I would like to work for them. Anything else would be inefficient use of time, both mine and the employer's.

dookehster 9y ago

Author here. A few notes: I'm not proposing high touch methods are incorrect. I'm proposing there exists an alternative. HR professionals, the receiving end, spend their day spamming people on LinkedIn, email, etc. The same is true about sales people, marketers, and anybody trying to get the word out, except they do it at scale. I'm a little surprised by how many folks take issue with messaging people who might be interested and also do exactly what you're doing. If everybody does this, then job hunting becomes more like marketing since your message/resume has to stand out more. Consumers are bombarded with messages every day, they're good at ignoring things they don't want. The folks doing the hiring would become better "consumers". Engineering roles are, in general, way easier to land than a non-engineering roles because there aren't enough decent engineers.

ThrowawayR2 9y ago
> ...how many folks take issue with messaging people who might be interested and also do exactly what you're doing. ... Consumers are bombarded with messages every day, they're good at ignoring things they don't want. ... That's the same logic used by advertisers to plaster every square inch of the world with ads. Yet how many people here on HN use spam filters on their mail, ad-blockers in their browsers and commercial-skipping functions on their DVRs? Are we, as job seekers going to want to run the gauntlet of whatever HR devises that's the equivalent of those things if your technique becomes common? Perhaps your method works, perhaps it's not against any rules, but I have to say that find it to be morally dubious at best. I sincerely hope that it does not see wide adoption.
- dookehster 9y ago
  You're arguing advertising and the way business is done worldwide is morally dubious. Why is it morally dubious? You have to become better at demonstrating value, yes.
John_Cena 9y ago
I have a BS computer engineering from GT and the only interviews I have received have been from companies wishing me to sign a 3 year contract or other 1*star glassdoor type shenanigans. I am trying to stay positive but I have lost hope. Ive done the mass submitting and specific tailoring strategies to no avail. Now I wish I had gotten a degree in ANY other engineering discipline. Any advice?

lmeyerov 9y ago

As a founder perspective: 1. I highly second using angel list. Modern founders know, and we (graphistry) list there! 2. ... We are overwhelmed by candidates from there, both by junior or bigco candidates who are hard to distinguish just on paper, and senior candidates who we are not sure are serious. Probably ~100% of the people we talk to didn't do the author's generic approach, but shared a carefully crafted 1-3 paragraphs. The more you go out of your way, the more we notice. Take it from the perspective of a neat small team (like ours!) who is excited about what we do & are growing. Whoever we hire now has a huge impact on what we're building, and as we're planning out the next 3-4 doublings of our team, your personal DNA & culture will determine the success of the 10 people who descend from you. You want to apply to teams who are spending time on doing this well.. and in turn, do it well yourself. Also.. build@graphistry.com if you agree ;-)

home_boi 9y ago

> Startup compensation can be right up there with the big companies. Does anyone know how to find these companies when you're already at the high end of the spectrum? There are thousands of start ups and even shooting an email or checking LinkedIn for previous work history of current engineers can be a time drain to figure this out. Ideally, the compensation would be something like > 80% total comp of big tech company in liquid money + a lot of private RSU's ( > 50% of big tech total comp)

mrisoli 9y ago
Most things about job seeking are a time drain, not only it is hard to find companies because of fragmentation but when companies use terms such as 'developer', 'programmer', 'engineer'(plus the weird ones: 'ninja'/ 'rockstar') it gets much harder to search, I would kill for someone to come up with international standard codes for these like SE0001 for a software engineer.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

ufmace 9y ago

It seems very odd to me to treat the job application process in this way. If nothing else, interviews are pretty much an all-day affair, at least in the sense that even if you have a short one, it's still going to be tough to schedule 2 in a day. Add that onto how many companies want multiple rounds of interviews, phone screens, take-home projects, etc and you get that you want to have a good idea that you actually want to work for a company before you apply and go for an interview. That doesn't mesh very well with writing scripts to mass-apply to companies and going on multiple dozens of interviews.

donovanm 9y ago

Is job searching really at a point now where hiring people to mass apply to jobs for you is an actual suggestion?