9 ms·

Programmer and owner of a technical recruitment agency here. I forked and rewrote the thing to make it more appealing to recruiters: https://gist.github.com/iwa

by s3nnyy 9y ago

Programmer and owner of a technical recruitment agency here. I forked and rewrote the thing to make it more appealing to recruiters: https://gist.github.com/iwangu/b0d8b8e140afdd4e30bb7e401babcbbc https://gist.github.com/iwangu/b0d8b8e140afdd4e30bb7e401babc... I mainly removed things that sound patronising to me. I think many HR people will just ignore you if you e-mail what OP posted. Once, I wrote a blogpost why programmers don't get jobs due to random factors ("Why software engineers don’t get jobs: Four horror stories" https://goo.gl/v4PUWV https://goo.gl/v4PUWV), but being patronising and "explaining programming to HR" is one of the things where you just shoot yourself in the foot by being too demanding too early in the process. You can be demanding ONLY AFTER they told you that they want to hire you, but not before. A tip for e-mailing HR and business e-mails in general: Try to never signal that you will be hard to work with. Always be kind and even a little bit submissive. Don't try to teach people something, don't quote authors and don't do footnotes. Imagine the person will take a maximum of 3 seconds per paragraph and 10 seconds in total to read your e-mail. There is a chance the reader is listening to an audiobook or is watching Youtube while answering e-mails in a cubicle. If you need to discuss something critical, invite the person for a phone call. Salary, negotiating or deviating from a standard process (like here) should be discussed in person/in a call. Hope that helps to get some insight from "the other side".

bitL 9y ago
I think your approach would work if there was a shortage of jobs; there is exactly opposite situation right now and HR should adapt or they would end up with a very narrow dissection of what is available. You are often asking accomplished individuals to waste their time on badly compensated job proposals, just because it makes your life easier. No wonder so many programmers think recruiters in this industry are a joke and try to actively avoid them.
- hnrodey 9y ago
  There seem to be an abundance of "openings" but a shortage of offers. At least that's if you believe the whining on boards like here, Reddit, etc.
  - organsnyder 9y ago
    That's been my observation. Tons of openings, but many companies lean toward denials, under the assumption that firing the wrong person is more costly than not hiring the right person. It also seems that many companies are looking for ready-to-go engineers, rather than being willing (or able) to build talent in-house. The only door open to many junior devs is the internship-to-hire funnel. This reminds me of this recent HN post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16337434 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16337434
    - ThrowawayR2 9y ago
      > ...assumption that firing the wrong person is more costly than not hiring the right person. I take it you've never had to hire or fire anyone. At mid-sized and large companies, it's a cumbersome process and, unless they're complete sociopaths, firing is also unpleasant for the firing manager and the team. It also means taking on the work and cost of doing a new candidate search and another new hire ramp-up. If easy-hire/easy-fire worked, everybody would be doing it.
      - organsnyder 9y ago
        Oh, the assumption is definitely warranted in many/most situations. Though there are often alternatives (such as contract-to-hire) to mitigate the risks.
    - kamaal 9y ago
      >>Tons of openings, but many companies lean toward denials, under the assumption that firing the wrong person is more costly than not hiring the right person. This might be their claim, but they almost always end up hiring wrong people and firing them. Its really simple, making hiring decisions based on an interview is really like deciding to go into a long term relationship with a person based on the make up they put up during a date. If you are choosing on these qualities alone, then the prettiest person would get selected. This says nothing about the person at all, or worse, bad people are likely to put up more make up to hide other obvious flaws.
- s3nnyy 9y ago
  I agree totally with what you said, but you're confusing macro- and micro-economics here. On a macro-level it is true, HR people should be treating programmers like gods at all times, but on a micro-level, the HR person sitting in the cubicle doesn't care about one programmer more or less. There might be ten other CVs of "okay'ish" engineers in HR's inbox and your interview will end by never hearing back the firm. Or if, despite being cocky, you get an offer there might be a note somewhere next to your CV on the CEO's desk saying "easy-to-work-with level: Only 50% score" which leads to 10k less for you in salary. As an applicant, you want to "manipulate" the employer to give you the best possible offer and why shouldn't you be friendly and a bit submissive to achieve your goal?
  - hysan 9y ago
    There's a distinction to be made here about the level of the position being discussed and the particular skillset. What you're saying makes more sense on the junior to mid-level dev positions or for more common skillsets. However, this is the Hacker News audience and you're clearly replying to someone who has already narrowed it down to senior dev positions. Given that context, I'm going to have to disagree with your assessment. If you're hiring for the best, then it's up to HR to respect their time. Otherwise you are just perpetuating the belief that recruiters add no value to either side of the equation.
    - s3nnyy 9y ago
      You're right. The more senior the role, the more leeway there is for the candidate to tailor the process, but signaling arrogance is just bad.
  - mywittyname 9y ago
    I see that you're receiving a bit of flak (which, given the audience, isn't unsurprising). But I wanted to let you know that I found this comment pretty insightful.
    - s3nnyy 9y ago
      Happy to help. When I was a full-time programmer I also thought writing ten paragraph e-mails with footnotes is smart but turns out it isn't (I learned this the hard way).
- dahart 9y ago
  > I think your approach would work if there was a shortage of jobs There is always a shortage of good jobs. You can fight the process all you want, if any job at all will do, and you don't care how long it takes to get it. > You are often asking accomplished individuals to waste their time on badly compensated job proposals What do you mean by badly compensated? Why would you assume someone else knows anything about your accomplishment and credentials and trusts the skills you list on your resume before you've demonstrated anything? Also, if you're good, then why does a low bar for entry scare or offend you? A screen for basic aptitude is narrowing the field and removing people from competition who can talk well but don't have programming experience. That seems like an advantage for anyone who can pass the easy tests.
  - bitL 9y ago
    Alright, imagine you worked for top engineering company, have github full of bleeding edge stuff anyone can observe, wrote books, have patents under your belt, do public speaking, teaching at universities etc. and some HR person comes in and wants you to do trivial HackerRank stuff. She basically interrupted you from working on something benefiting humanity just because she was lazy to check your CV and ignorant of the industry. Then you see the same company awarding their good jobs to friends of higher ups and all they have left are generic jobs they need to fill that would end up with all the work, complaining "where have all the good programmers gone?". And then you read on HN post like this and wonder why there is so much resistance to acknowledge one's qualification from what they provided in their CV. Imagine the same doing in other areas of industry - we don't care you won these multi-million law cases in the past, all we care is how the history of US North-East affected common law between years 1870-1893.
    - dahart 9y ago
      FWIW, I have a patent and do public speaking, recently sold a startup, and I gladly take the coding quizzes for all my interviews. They are fun, and they give me a chance to shine. The coding quizzes actually saved me once when I did really badly in another part of the interview. That company hired me, and gave me what others there thought was the good job. I also administer coding quizzes to people I hire, and I find them a small but useful part of the larger interview process. I'm giving an assembly language coding quiz to someone later today. > She basically interrupted you from working on something benefiting humanity That seems a little hyperbolic. Do you want the job? You have to spend time interviewing. Simple as that. Don't do the quizzes if you don't want the job. > Then you see the same company awarding their good jobs to friends of higher ups Most companies try to promote from within, and many people think that's a good thing. The alternative is you hire unknowns from outside the company over people who've been there putting in the time and know the system. > just because she was lazy to check your CV and ignorant of the industry It's both presumptuous and pessimistic, and also likely wrong, to assume that a coding quiz implies any laziness on anyone's part. > Imagine the same doing in other areas of industry Other jobs have it much worse, you have to get bureaucratic certifications for a lot of jobs that are a lot less fun than Hackerrank, and take months and months. Or you could be a lawyer or doctor, and you have to raise money and bring in clients in order to get the good jobs. What jobs are you thinking of that have it so much better than programmers?
- NutriSugar 9y ago
  Regardless of how the job market is currently, I see it as having a set amount of 'difficulty capital' that can be spent. The fewer openings, the less of this resource you have, but otherwise everything works the same. Given there is a limited supply, regardless of size, one should try to spend it optimally. That means being difficult when it comes to pay and benefits, and spending some of this capital when trying to determine the work/life balance. Using it to be insulting or patronizing is effectively wasting it with no return.

by s3nnyy 9y ago

bitL 9y ago

I think your approach would work if there was a shortage of jobs; there is exactly opposite situation right now and HR should adapt or they would end up with a very narrow dissection of what is available. You are often asking accomplished individuals to waste their time on badly compensated job proposals, just because it makes your life easier. No wonder so many programmers think recruiters in this industry are a joke and try to actively avoid them.

hnrodey 9y ago
There seem to be an abundance of "openings" but a shortage of offers. At least that's if you believe the whining on boards like here, Reddit, etc.
- organsnyder 9y ago
  That's been my observation. Tons of openings, but many companies lean toward denials, under the assumption that firing the wrong person is more costly than not hiring the right person. It also seems that many companies are looking for ready-to-go engineers, rather than being willing (or able) to build talent in-house. The only door open to many junior devs is the internship-to-hire funnel. This reminds me of this recent HN post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16337434 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16337434
  - ThrowawayR2 9y ago
    > ...assumption that firing the wrong person is more costly than not hiring the right person. I take it you've never had to hire or fire anyone. At mid-sized and large companies, it's a cumbersome process and, unless they're complete sociopaths, firing is also unpleasant for the firing manager and the team. It also means taking on the work and cost of doing a new candidate search and another new hire ramp-up. If easy-hire/easy-fire worked, everybody would be doing it.
    - organsnyder 9y ago
      Oh, the assumption is definitely warranted in many/most situations. Though there are often alternatives (such as contract-to-hire) to mitigate the risks.
  - kamaal 9y ago
    >>Tons of openings, but many companies lean toward denials, under the assumption that firing the wrong person is more costly than not hiring the right person. This might be their claim, but they almost always end up hiring wrong people and firing them. Its really simple, making hiring decisions based on an interview is really like deciding to go into a long term relationship with a person based on the make up they put up during a date. If you are choosing on these qualities alone, then the prettiest person would get selected. This says nothing about the person at all, or worse, bad people are likely to put up more make up to hide other obvious flaws.
s3nnyy 9y ago
I agree totally with what you said, but you're confusing macro- and micro-economics here. On a macro-level it is true, HR people should be treating programmers like gods at all times, but on a micro-level, the HR person sitting in the cubicle doesn't care about one programmer more or less. There might be ten other CVs of "okay'ish" engineers in HR's inbox and your interview will end by never hearing back the firm. Or if, despite being cocky, you get an offer there might be a note somewhere next to your CV on the CEO's desk saying "easy-to-work-with level: Only 50% score" which leads to 10k less for you in salary. As an applicant, you want to "manipulate" the employer to give you the best possible offer and why shouldn't you be friendly and a bit submissive to achieve your goal?
- hysan 9y ago
  There's a distinction to be made here about the level of the position being discussed and the particular skillset. What you're saying makes more sense on the junior to mid-level dev positions or for more common skillsets. However, this is the Hacker News audience and you're clearly replying to someone who has already narrowed it down to senior dev positions. Given that context, I'm going to have to disagree with your assessment. If you're hiring for the best, then it's up to HR to respect their time. Otherwise you are just perpetuating the belief that recruiters add no value to either side of the equation.
  - s3nnyy 9y ago
    You're right. The more senior the role, the more leeway there is for the candidate to tailor the process, but signaling arrogance is just bad.
- mywittyname 9y ago
  I see that you're receiving a bit of flak (which, given the audience, isn't unsurprising). But I wanted to let you know that I found this comment pretty insightful.
  - s3nnyy 9y ago
    Happy to help. When I was a full-time programmer I also thought writing ten paragraph e-mails with footnotes is smart but turns out it isn't (I learned this the hard way).
dahart 9y ago
> I think your approach would work if there was a shortage of jobs There is always a shortage of good jobs. You can fight the process all you want, if any job at all will do, and you don't care how long it takes to get it. > You are often asking accomplished individuals to waste their time on badly compensated job proposals What do you mean by badly compensated? Why would you assume someone else knows anything about your accomplishment and credentials and trusts the skills you list on your resume before you've demonstrated anything? Also, if you're good, then why does a low bar for entry scare or offend you? A screen for basic aptitude is narrowing the field and removing people from competition who can talk well but don't have programming experience. That seems like an advantage for anyone who can pass the easy tests.
- bitL 9y ago
  Alright, imagine you worked for top engineering company, have github full of bleeding edge stuff anyone can observe, wrote books, have patents under your belt, do public speaking, teaching at universities etc. and some HR person comes in and wants you to do trivial HackerRank stuff. She basically interrupted you from working on something benefiting humanity just because she was lazy to check your CV and ignorant of the industry. Then you see the same company awarding their good jobs to friends of higher ups and all they have left are generic jobs they need to fill that would end up with all the work, complaining "where have all the good programmers gone?". And then you read on HN post like this and wonder why there is so much resistance to acknowledge one's qualification from what they provided in their CV. Imagine the same doing in other areas of industry - we don't care you won these multi-million law cases in the past, all we care is how the history of US North-East affected common law between years 1870-1893.
  - dahart 9y ago
    FWIW, I have a patent and do public speaking, recently sold a startup, and I gladly take the coding quizzes for all my interviews. They are fun, and they give me a chance to shine. The coding quizzes actually saved me once when I did really badly in another part of the interview. That company hired me, and gave me what others there thought was the good job. I also administer coding quizzes to people I hire, and I find them a small but useful part of the larger interview process. I'm giving an assembly language coding quiz to someone later today. > She basically interrupted you from working on something benefiting humanity That seems a little hyperbolic. Do you want the job? You have to spend time interviewing. Simple as that. Don't do the quizzes if you don't want the job. > Then you see the same company awarding their good jobs to friends of higher ups Most companies try to promote from within, and many people think that's a good thing. The alternative is you hire unknowns from outside the company over people who've been there putting in the time and know the system. > just because she was lazy to check your CV and ignorant of the industry It's both presumptuous and pessimistic, and also likely wrong, to assume that a coding quiz implies any laziness on anyone's part. > Imagine the same doing in other areas of industry Other jobs have it much worse, you have to get bureaucratic certifications for a lot of jobs that are a lot less fun than Hackerrank, and take months and months. Or you could be a lawyer or doctor, and you have to raise money and bring in clients in order to get the good jobs. What jobs are you thinking of that have it so much better than programmers?
NutriSugar 9y ago
Regardless of how the job market is currently, I see it as having a set amount of 'difficulty capital' that can be spent. The fewer openings, the less of this resource you have, but otherwise everything works the same. Given there is a limited supply, regardless of size, one should try to spend it optimally. That means being difficult when it comes to pay and benefits, and spending some of this capital when trying to determine the work/life balance. Using it to be insulting or patronizing is effectively wasting it with no return.