5 ms·

Employers like a github link, should go some way towards what you need?

vmception 5y ago
Employers don’t really care If you have enough experience for a recruiter to respond at all, none of that extracurricular stuff matters
- codetrotter 5y ago
  > none of that extracurricular stuff matters But that “extracurricular stuff” is exactly what op has been spending their time doing for the past years.
- TomVDB 5y ago
  When I’m given a resume with GitHub links, I jump at the opportunity to check them out. (It almost never happens.) You don’t?
  - mewpmewp2 5y ago
    I really don't and I am not aware of anyone at work who would. I rarely even read resumes and that if I am very mixed after the 1 hour coding/design/arch whatever round. I never send my GitHub links either. If I am coding a side project and I think it has business potential I am unlikely to start with open source and if it doesn't have business potential, I wouldn't bother. Also if I am building something on the side, code is likely to be rushed and seemingly horrible. I have no idea what in GitHub was written by the owner itself, what was copied, how long it took them etc.
  - moksly 5y ago
    I don’t. I’m Danish and almost everyone here has some kind of higher education, so our hiring practices are a little different from other countries. Anyway, there is no reason to spend the time looking at what people have done on GitHub. Once you make the final five or ten candidates, we could honestly use sheer chance to decide and end up just fine. The only reason we don’t do that, is because it would be disrespectful to the applicants, but the interviews are as much an opportunity for them to figure out if they want to work with us once they’ve met us, as it is for us to do the same. Hiring people once you move past a certain skill level is much more about finding a common fit, so that you can continue having the good culture that you have already established. It’s not that I think you are wrong to look at github though. It’s just that I don’t feel it’s really ever worth the resources you need to allocate to get a proper picture. I feel the same way about the coding interview, it’s just a waste or everyone’s time. I mean, how can you tell if their GitHub profiles aren’t doctored? If it was too clean or too good, I’d personally be suspicious why they’d work for us.
    - mewpmewp2 5y ago
      One thing I'd like to mention about being "fine", you'd be fine, but you could be extremely well off if you are able to find the engineers that go way beyond. I find the multiplying effect of engineers within top 1% can be more than 5x. These folks will take responsibility for everything, innovate and work intelligently, tirelessly and passionately to solve any problems thrown at them as opposed to someone who will just pick up Jira tickets blindly. It's just a little attitude thing that makes so much difference. The way salaries work, they probably don't get 5x salary so they are extremely valuable for the company and to find in general. If you just look at general performance, resumes and things like that you might just get "rest and vest" types.
      - sokoloff 5y ago
        These great engineers you describe are almost never making more than 1.5x the “pack”. If you can find (or create) and retain them, it’s the best overlay I’ve ever found in employment.
      - moksly 5y ago
        > One thing I'd like to mention about being "fine", you'd be fine, but you could be extremely well off if you are able to find the engineers that go way beyond. Really? Because that’s not what our data shows on it. It shows specifically that regardless of what we submit applicants to won’t matter. Maybe we’re just bad at hiring, but with 25 years of data from a very broad range of job types (public sector) we can at least be comfortable with the knowledge that everyone else sucks as much as us. I get your point though. Some engineers are more valuable than others, but the thing is, that it’s not a constant and there are no real way to make sure you both attract and keep them. We employ an engineer who just might be the countries leading techie on ADFS and how it plays into our national and EU vases strategies for NSIS certifiably authentication. With a background as a bouncer, I’m not sure how many places would have guess that when he was first hired. I’m another such story though in a different manner. I used to be real rockstar developer, and a real workhorse. This was way before I got into management and long before I had children. Because when I did have children it turned out that may undiagnosed ADHD could no longer fit into the responsibilities of adult life and I worked myself into first a nice range of stress, then anxiety and then a depression. Now I never work more than 37 hours a week unless there is a big event, like elections, and when there is, I make sure to not-work the extra hours after wards. If you had hired me the year before my first daughter was born, you would have gotten the workhorse with a very high degree of both creativity and getting things to actually do something useful for the business end. A year later you would have been sitting with a depression stricken employee who was on partial sick-leave for 9 months. I understand the dream of course, but unless you can show me some data on someone who figured out how to actually purposefully hire the dream employee, I’m personally going to consider it a dream. An unhealthy one even, because almost nobody is ever really irreplaceable in an enterprise organisation. Sure the loss of some employees are felt harder than others, but the truth is that IBM could stop selling consumer PCs and still trundle on. So in my opinion it’s much better to create a team of people who work well together and who have a good culture, because that means it’s also easier when someone moves on to other things. It also means that you’re not as effected by the life changes of your employees.
  - gkilmain 5y ago
    Same, but I don't get too much from it. If its not there I really don't care anymore and never ask for it. Whats the point of showcasing your github profile today? Little to no experience (entry level / jr) makes sense but for anyone else - don't fret.
- mratsim 5y ago
  People without a Github/Gitlab start with a huge disadvantage in the hiring process at my company since they don't have code to support their claims and that they can walk us through together. Now I get some people don't have time for open-source after work but it's way way easier to ace an interview when it can be based on something you build yourself, can show and can talk about the ins, the outs and the design constraints and your architecture choices.
  - wreath 5y ago
    So few previous employers who bet on you and paid you hundreds of thousands on a yearly basis is not enough cred to prove that you can deliver software that solves business problems?
    - sokoloff 5y ago
      If you were at a place for five years, got two promotions, and shipped three products while you were there? Strong evidence. If you were at five places for 9-18 months at a time with several six month gaps interspersed? Not evidence of absence, but that’s absence of evidence to me. (Immediately, I’m assuming several of those gaps might be flameouts.)
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      - KptMarchewa 5y ago
        >If you were at five places for 9-18 months at a time with several six month gaps interspersed? I'm curious, what about this situation but no gaps?
        sokoloff 5y ago
        That’s better, because it suggests four times out of four, the decision to leave and timing was yours rather than “seven times out of nine [four listed], the change was employer-initiated”. None of these are signals that I rely on as binary go/no-go gates; the main point was “just because you got other employers to pay you for a short while, that’s not standalone evidence that you can deliver business value through working software”. I don’t believe in jobs-for-life, “putting in your time”, “paying your dues”, “never quit before 2 years”, or other nonsense advice, but if you’ve never had a long stint at a place, at minimum you’ve never seen the pain from your decisions 24 months prior play out and the maximum negative case is far worse.

Employers don’t really care If you have enough experience for a recruiter to respond at all, none of that extracurricular stuff matters

codetrotter 5y ago
> none of that extracurricular stuff matters But that “extracurricular stuff” is exactly what op has been spending their time doing for the past years.
TomVDB 5y ago
When I’m given a resume with GitHub links, I jump at the opportunity to check them out. (It almost never happens.) You don’t?
- mewpmewp2 5y ago
  I really don't and I am not aware of anyone at work who would. I rarely even read resumes and that if I am very mixed after the 1 hour coding/design/arch whatever round. I never send my GitHub links either. If I am coding a side project and I think it has business potential I am unlikely to start with open source and if it doesn't have business potential, I wouldn't bother. Also if I am building something on the side, code is likely to be rushed and seemingly horrible. I have no idea what in GitHub was written by the owner itself, what was copied, how long it took them etc.
- moksly 5y ago
  I don’t. I’m Danish and almost everyone here has some kind of higher education, so our hiring practices are a little different from other countries. Anyway, there is no reason to spend the time looking at what people have done on GitHub. Once you make the final five or ten candidates, we could honestly use sheer chance to decide and end up just fine. The only reason we don’t do that, is because it would be disrespectful to the applicants, but the interviews are as much an opportunity for them to figure out if they want to work with us once they’ve met us, as it is for us to do the same. Hiring people once you move past a certain skill level is much more about finding a common fit, so that you can continue having the good culture that you have already established. It’s not that I think you are wrong to look at github though. It’s just that I don’t feel it’s really ever worth the resources you need to allocate to get a proper picture. I feel the same way about the coding interview, it’s just a waste or everyone’s time. I mean, how can you tell if their GitHub profiles aren’t doctored? If it was too clean or too good, I’d personally be suspicious why they’d work for us.
  - mewpmewp2 5y ago
    One thing I'd like to mention about being "fine", you'd be fine, but you could be extremely well off if you are able to find the engineers that go way beyond. I find the multiplying effect of engineers within top 1% can be more than 5x. These folks will take responsibility for everything, innovate and work intelligently, tirelessly and passionately to solve any problems thrown at them as opposed to someone who will just pick up Jira tickets blindly. It's just a little attitude thing that makes so much difference. The way salaries work, they probably don't get 5x salary so they are extremely valuable for the company and to find in general. If you just look at general performance, resumes and things like that you might just get "rest and vest" types.
    - sokoloff 5y ago
      These great engineers you describe are almost never making more than 1.5x the “pack”. If you can find (or create) and retain them, it’s the best overlay I’ve ever found in employment.
    - moksly 5y ago
      > One thing I'd like to mention about being "fine", you'd be fine, but you could be extremely well off if you are able to find the engineers that go way beyond. Really? Because that’s not what our data shows on it. It shows specifically that regardless of what we submit applicants to won’t matter. Maybe we’re just bad at hiring, but with 25 years of data from a very broad range of job types (public sector) we can at least be comfortable with the knowledge that everyone else sucks as much as us. I get your point though. Some engineers are more valuable than others, but the thing is, that it’s not a constant and there are no real way to make sure you both attract and keep them. We employ an engineer who just might be the countries leading techie on ADFS and how it plays into our national and EU vases strategies for NSIS certifiably authentication. With a background as a bouncer, I’m not sure how many places would have guess that when he was first hired. I’m another such story though in a different manner. I used to be real rockstar developer, and a real workhorse. This was way before I got into management and long before I had children. Because when I did have children it turned out that may undiagnosed ADHD could no longer fit into the responsibilities of adult life and I worked myself into first a nice range of stress, then anxiety and then a depression. Now I never work more than 37 hours a week unless there is a big event, like elections, and when there is, I make sure to not-work the extra hours after wards. If you had hired me the year before my first daughter was born, you would have gotten the workhorse with a very high degree of both creativity and getting things to actually do something useful for the business end. A year later you would have been sitting with a depression stricken employee who was on partial sick-leave for 9 months. I understand the dream of course, but unless you can show me some data on someone who figured out how to actually purposefully hire the dream employee, I’m personally going to consider it a dream. An unhealthy one even, because almost nobody is ever really irreplaceable in an enterprise organisation. Sure the loss of some employees are felt harder than others, but the truth is that IBM could stop selling consumer PCs and still trundle on. So in my opinion it’s much better to create a team of people who work well together and who have a good culture, because that means it’s also easier when someone moves on to other things. It also means that you’re not as effected by the life changes of your employees.
- gkilmain 5y ago
  Same, but I don't get too much from it. If its not there I really don't care anymore and never ask for it. Whats the point of showcasing your github profile today? Little to no experience (entry level / jr) makes sense but for anyone else - don't fret.
mratsim 5y ago
People without a Github/Gitlab start with a huge disadvantage in the hiring process at my company since they don't have code to support their claims and that they can walk us through together. Now I get some people don't have time for open-source after work but it's way way easier to ace an interview when it can be based on something you build yourself, can show and can talk about the ins, the outs and the design constraints and your architecture choices.
- wreath 5y ago
  So few previous employers who bet on you and paid you hundreds of thousands on a yearly basis is not enough cred to prove that you can deliver software that solves business problems?
  - sokoloff 5y ago
    If you were at a place for five years, got two promotions, and shipped three products while you were there? Strong evidence. If you were at five places for 9-18 months at a time with several six month gaps interspersed? Not evidence of absence, but that’s absence of evidence to me. (Immediately, I’m assuming several of those gaps might be flameouts.)
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - KptMarchewa 5y ago
      >If you were at five places for 9-18 months at a time with several six month gaps interspersed? I'm curious, what about this situation but no gaps?
      - sokoloff 5y ago
        That’s better, because it suggests four times out of four, the decision to leave and timing was yours rather than “seven times out of nine [four listed], the change was employer-initiated”. None of these are signals that I rely on as binary go/no-go gates; the main point was “just because you got other employers to pay you for a short while, that’s not standalone evidence that you can deliver business value through working software”. I don’t believe in jobs-for-life, “putting in your time”, “paying your dues”, “never quit before 2 years”, or other nonsense advice, but if you’ve never had a long stint at a place, at minimum you’ve never seen the pain from your decisions 24 months prior play out and the maximum negative case is far worse.