7 ms·

"These companies don't notice that in this way, the good people a driven away, and only the desperate will apply." This. One of the reasons I chose my last emp

by maayank 15y ago

"These companies don't notice that in this way, the good people a driven away, and only the desperate will apply." This. One of the reasons I chose my last employer (SAP, or more specifically, SAP Research) was their no bullshit, yet very thorough, recruitment process. Compare that with my <A very, very, well known software corp> experience, where the phone call interview with HR went like that: HR drone: "So, what's your degree?" Me: "Mathematics." [didn't you read my resume?] HR: "Oh... well... Most of the people working here have CS degrees." Me: "Ah, well, my last job title was 'Computer Science researcher' and before that I had several years of experience as a programmer, so I think I'll fit" [apparently not!] HR: "Yes, but do you know algorithms?" Me: bangs head on wall Sorry, no matter how reputable your company is, if that's the recruitment process then I can do better.

Peroni 15y ago
Let me shed some prespective. I can absolutely guarantee you that the actual hiring manager briefed the HR department on the job spec and had to dumb it down significantly. The summary would have been something along the lines of 'Ideally the perfect candidate will have a CS degree from a major University as strong algorithmic knowledge is a fundamental requirement for the role.' HR would then interpret this as: 1: Must have CS Degree 2: Must know algorithms. 3: Only CS people study & understand algorithms. 4: Refer to step 1.
- jonnathanson 15y ago
  This. Ironically, it helps to think of the HR screening process as a really dumb algorithm. The HR staffer likely has little to no understanding of how to ferret out "knowledge of algorithms," (or any other job skill, for that matter). So he defaults to a list of keywords or phrases -- interpreted very literally -- from a job description received from the hiring manager. His internal logic is pretty much driven by two directives: 1: If a keyword or phrase is in the job description, a successful applicant MUST have it on his resume. (Word for word, preferably). 2: Anything on a candidate's resume that is not on the job description is irrelevant. In fairness, there is some legitimate value to the HR screening process. It is a filter. A dumb filter, but a filter that the hiring manager doesn't have time to run on X hundred (or Y thousand) resumes. Some HR filters are designed to screen out resumes that don't contain the right keywords. Others are designed to select for resumes that match all the right keywords. Either way, the effect is similar. Of course, such a process can (and does) weed out a lot of very talented, very qualified people. The trick is learning how to game the filter. The filter penalizes creative or unusual word choices. The filter flags candidates who reference someone they've met or spoken to at the company (doubly so if that person is the actual referrer). The filter rewards fidelity to the letter of the job description. Tailor your cover letter and resume accordingly.
  - maayank 15y ago
    I actually have a part in my resume that is intended for such filters (i.e. includes keywords like "OOP" and "Client-Server programming"). I call it "the HR blob". Admittedly, it's not in the beginning...
    - jonnathanson 15y ago
      I've actually gone so far as to have a mostly modular resume. There is no static document, per se, but a giant list of resume "modules" that can be picked and compiled into a coherent resume when the time comes. Some modules are used pretty much all the time (name, address, education, previous jobs and titles). Others are swapped in or out (bullet points under each job, interests if applicable, etc.). I've found that customizing the resume to fit the job is worth the extra 30 minutes of hassle to compile it. [Note that I do not advocate making shit up. Rather, I've found that sometimes even the same bullet point, phrased two different ways, can have positive or negative outcomes at two different job openings. Or sometimes Job X considers Accomplishment A very important, but Job Y considers A irrelevant. Etc.]
      - rch 15y ago
        This is a really good idea - like having a master license agreement (reads like a play book - think 50 pages of options and possible negotiation tracks for what starts as a 5 page agreement). Of course, an army of lawyers put that together - is there an equivalent group to do that for technical resumes? A resume coach at the VFW wouldn't cut it...
        jonnathanson 15y ago
        I'm sure there is a cool, hacked-together way to automate the process. And that might actually be a great idea for an app or utility of some sort. My system to date has been very paleolithic. I keep a spreadsheet with all my bullet points, categorized by job and mapped to different Skills and Experiences (i.e., the things to be demonstrated via the bullet points). When compiling a resume, I cross-reference by job description and its keywords, skills/experiences to be shown, etc. Then I sort of treat the process like a compilation of overlapping sets, i.e., "The job requirements are A, B, and C. I want to show that I've done X, which demonstrates A and B. Then I want to show that I've done Y, which demonstrates B. But maybe Z demonstrates B and C in a more effective way, so I'll use X and Z as my bullets." There is definitely an easier and more automated way to do all this, perhaps with databases, but I still value the organic process of poring over everything myself and gut-checking if the overall narrative flow makes sense. As you might imagine, I played too many RPGs as a kid.
- mavelikara 15y ago
  Steve, how to recruiters themselves find their jobs? Do you guys find your respective jobs via the traditional resume-interview route? I ask this because looking for word-for-word matches etc imply a lack of unfamiliarity with the process as viewed from the other side of the table. I understand that you have been a developer previously and probably understand the technical specifics better. But my guess is be that most of these recruiters might have gone the resume-interview route for at least _some_ job; I am surprised that they don't seem to understand how hopeless their techniques are.
  - Peroni 15y ago
    Recruitment is one of the easiest jobs in the world to get into. Which probably explains the abundance of terrible recruiters. If you have any recruitment experience what so ever you will have employers literally lining up at your door with job offers. The last time I put my CV on the market I had 4 solid job offers within a week. I didn't apply for a single one, they all approached me.
  - gaius 15y ago
    I wonder the same about how SAP employees book time off... It can't be with their own software. E.g. I can't see the holiday calendar and how many days I have remaining on the same screen. I can't open them in different tabs because of the way it does session management, it will break horribly. You would think that they would get this bit right at least, just for their own sanity!
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- Duff 15y ago
  You're assuming an actual spec existed. When budgets are tight, the ability to hire someone occasionally comes out of nowhere with an insane deadline. So instead of writing something up, the recruiter or manager googles around for "enterprise foobar developer", and copy/pastes a few pidgin english job descriptions from other places. This arrives in HR, who then needs to translate slop into something that can be posted. Hence, the loop you described above.
cheez 15y ago
Google?
- nuclear_eclipse 15y ago
  At least from my experience, the Google recruiter I worked with was very knowledgeable of the software domain.
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
kabdib 15y ago
Right. "We need someone to do real-time object-oriented programming." "I do real time. I do object-oriented design and programming." "But do you do real-time object-oriented programming?" "Yes." "I don't believe you." Their loss, not mine. Employers, listen: Your recruiters come across as idiots when you do this.
- Jach 15y ago
  I've flustered a lot of people asking them which definition of "real-time" they mean at the current moment.
lhnn 15y ago
Perhaps HR departments are counter-intuitive. Why can't a manager of a department or team hire their own teammate?
- maayank 15y ago
  When I meet such corporate bureaucracy I'm always reminded of this paragraph from one of PG's essays[1]: "A group of 10 managers is not merely a group of 10 people working together in the usual way... for a group of 10 managers to work together as if they were simply a group of 10 individuals, the group working for each manager would have to work as if they were a single person—the workers and manager would each share only one person's worth of freedom between them... the result is that each person gets freedom of action in inverse proportion to the size of the entire [corporate] tree. Anyone who's worked for a large organization has felt this." [1] http://www.paulgraham.com/boss.html http://www.paulgraham.com/boss.html
wpietri 15y ago
Man, this makes me happy to hear. I'm CTO at a small startup, so hiring is crucial. We've worked really hard to optimize the recruiting process to make it easy on candidates, but it's been hard to know how much it matters. To filter out the total idiots, I ask people to give me a one-paragraph answer to one of 5 technical-ish questions. That lets me spend plenty of time on the people that do make it through. I try to reply to all applications personally within 24 hours. Interviews take scheduling priority over pretty much anything else. We meet right after interviewing someone and try to get them an answer either way within a day. If folks have other things they like (or hate) about hiring processes, I'd love to hear about it. We really want to get this right.
- cydonian_monk 15y ago
  > I try to reply to all applications personally within 24 hours. With that, you've addressed my biggest issue with the ordinary hiring process: Complete Lack of Feedback. When I was fresh (or nearly) out of college in 2003, the only responses I received were from the CMU Robotics Lab. And while they were "we're not interested" replies, they at least had a real signature on them. Nothing else I applied for produced even as much as an automated response - print, e-mail, phone, nothing. (My options and interests at the time were admitedly a bit too narrow, and geography worked harshly against me.) Worse yet is when you interview somewhere and then never hear back. Thankfully that only happened once to me. Otherwise it really depends on the group and the culture. It doesn't bother me when Megacorps use standardized tests or puzzles (large or popular groups need some sort of advanced filter), but I prefer the hiring process at smaller companies to be more personal.
- maayank 15y ago
  Actually, that debacle is one of the reasons why I decided that my next job would be at a startup. So yes, it definitely matters.
- VladRussian 15y ago
  >To filter out the total idiots, I ask people to give me a one-paragraph answer to one of 5 technical-ish questions. from my recent job change (several offers). After supposedly reading my resume and after half an hour on the phone the company's staff recruiter asked me to write a paragraph on how i see my fit to the company. It became immediately obvious to me that there is no fit. Somehow that wasn't obvious for him. Next day he's calling and emailing - they really like to talk with me in-house and where is the paragraph? Couple days later - the same. Day after that - they really like to talk with me in-house. The paragraph somehow isn't mentioned anymore. Good luck guys. I hope you find the programmer(s) with a hobby for essay writing.

by maayank 15y ago

Peroni 15y ago

Let me shed some prespective. I can absolutely guarantee you that the actual hiring manager briefed the HR department on the job spec and had to dumb it down significantly. The summary would have been something along the lines of 'Ideally the perfect candidate will have a CS degree from a major University as strong algorithmic knowledge is a fundamental requirement for the role.' HR would then interpret this as: 1: Must have CS Degree 2: Must know algorithms. 3: Only CS people study & understand algorithms. 4: Refer to step 1.

jonnathanson 15y ago
This. Ironically, it helps to think of the HR screening process as a really dumb algorithm. The HR staffer likely has little to no understanding of how to ferret out "knowledge of algorithms," (or any other job skill, for that matter). So he defaults to a list of keywords or phrases -- interpreted very literally -- from a job description received from the hiring manager. His internal logic is pretty much driven by two directives: 1: If a keyword or phrase is in the job description, a successful applicant MUST have it on his resume. (Word for word, preferably). 2: Anything on a candidate's resume that is not on the job description is irrelevant. In fairness, there is some legitimate value to the HR screening process. It is a filter. A dumb filter, but a filter that the hiring manager doesn't have time to run on X hundred (or Y thousand) resumes. Some HR filters are designed to screen out resumes that don't contain the right keywords. Others are designed to select for resumes that match all the right keywords. Either way, the effect is similar. Of course, such a process can (and does) weed out a lot of very talented, very qualified people. The trick is learning how to game the filter. The filter penalizes creative or unusual word choices. The filter flags candidates who reference someone they've met or spoken to at the company (doubly so if that person is the actual referrer). The filter rewards fidelity to the letter of the job description. Tailor your cover letter and resume accordingly.
- maayank 15y ago
  I actually have a part in my resume that is intended for such filters (i.e. includes keywords like "OOP" and "Client-Server programming"). I call it "the HR blob". Admittedly, it's not in the beginning...
  - jonnathanson 15y ago
    I've actually gone so far as to have a mostly modular resume. There is no static document, per se, but a giant list of resume "modules" that can be picked and compiled into a coherent resume when the time comes. Some modules are used pretty much all the time (name, address, education, previous jobs and titles). Others are swapped in or out (bullet points under each job, interests if applicable, etc.). I've found that customizing the resume to fit the job is worth the extra 30 minutes of hassle to compile it. [Note that I do not advocate making shit up. Rather, I've found that sometimes even the same bullet point, phrased two different ways, can have positive or negative outcomes at two different job openings. Or sometimes Job X considers Accomplishment A very important, but Job Y considers A irrelevant. Etc.]
    - rch 15y ago
      This is a really good idea - like having a master license agreement (reads like a play book - think 50 pages of options and possible negotiation tracks for what starts as a 5 page agreement). Of course, an army of lawyers put that together - is there an equivalent group to do that for technical resumes? A resume coach at the VFW wouldn't cut it...
      - jonnathanson 15y ago
        I'm sure there is a cool, hacked-together way to automate the process. And that might actually be a great idea for an app or utility of some sort. My system to date has been very paleolithic. I keep a spreadsheet with all my bullet points, categorized by job and mapped to different Skills and Experiences (i.e., the things to be demonstrated via the bullet points). When compiling a resume, I cross-reference by job description and its keywords, skills/experiences to be shown, etc. Then I sort of treat the process like a compilation of overlapping sets, i.e., "The job requirements are A, B, and C. I want to show that I've done X, which demonstrates A and B. Then I want to show that I've done Y, which demonstrates B. But maybe Z demonstrates B and C in a more effective way, so I'll use X and Z as my bullets." There is definitely an easier and more automated way to do all this, perhaps with databases, but I still value the organic process of poring over everything myself and gut-checking if the overall narrative flow makes sense. As you might imagine, I played too many RPGs as a kid.
mavelikara 15y ago
Steve, how to recruiters themselves find their jobs? Do you guys find your respective jobs via the traditional resume-interview route? I ask this because looking for word-for-word matches etc imply a lack of unfamiliarity with the process as viewed from the other side of the table. I understand that you have been a developer previously and probably understand the technical specifics better. But my guess is be that most of these recruiters might have gone the resume-interview route for at least _some_ job; I am surprised that they don't seem to understand how hopeless their techniques are.
- Peroni 15y ago
  Recruitment is one of the easiest jobs in the world to get into. Which probably explains the abundance of terrible recruiters. If you have any recruitment experience what so ever you will have employers literally lining up at your door with job offers. The last time I put my CV on the market I had 4 solid job offers within a week. I didn't apply for a single one, they all approached me.
- gaius 15y ago
  I wonder the same about how SAP employees book time off... It can't be with their own software. E.g. I can't see the holiday calendar and how many days I have remaining on the same screen. I can't open them in different tabs because of the way it does session management, it will break horribly. You would think that they would get this bit right at least, just for their own sanity!
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
Duff 15y ago
You're assuming an actual spec existed. When budgets are tight, the ability to hire someone occasionally comes out of nowhere with an insane deadline. So instead of writing something up, the recruiter or manager googles around for "enterprise foobar developer", and copy/pastes a few pidgin english job descriptions from other places. This arrives in HR, who then needs to translate slop into something that can be posted. Hence, the loop you described above.

cheez 15y ago

Google?

nuclear_eclipse 15y ago
At least from my experience, the Google recruiter I worked with was very knowledgeable of the software domain.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]

kabdib 15y ago

Right. "We need someone to do real-time object-oriented programming." "I do real time. I do object-oriented design and programming." "But do you do real-time object-oriented programming?" "Yes." "I don't believe you." Their loss, not mine. Employers, listen: Your recruiters come across as idiots when you do this.

Jach 15y ago
I've flustered a lot of people asking them which definition of "real-time" they mean at the current moment.

lhnn 15y ago

Perhaps HR departments are counter-intuitive. Why can't a manager of a department or team hire their own teammate?

maayank 15y ago
When I meet such corporate bureaucracy I'm always reminded of this paragraph from one of PG's essays[1]: "A group of 10 managers is not merely a group of 10 people working together in the usual way... for a group of 10 managers to work together as if they were simply a group of 10 individuals, the group working for each manager would have to work as if they were a single person—the workers and manager would each share only one person's worth of freedom between them... the result is that each person gets freedom of action in inverse proportion to the size of the entire [corporate] tree. Anyone who's worked for a large organization has felt this." [1] http://www.paulgraham.com/boss.html http://www.paulgraham.com/boss.html

wpietri 15y ago

Man, this makes me happy to hear. I'm CTO at a small startup, so hiring is crucial. We've worked really hard to optimize the recruiting process to make it easy on candidates, but it's been hard to know how much it matters. To filter out the total idiots, I ask people to give me a one-paragraph answer to one of 5 technical-ish questions. That lets me spend plenty of time on the people that do make it through. I try to reply to all applications personally within 24 hours. Interviews take scheduling priority over pretty much anything else. We meet right after interviewing someone and try to get them an answer either way within a day. If folks have other things they like (or hate) about hiring processes, I'd love to hear about it. We really want to get this right.

cydonian_monk 15y ago
> I try to reply to all applications personally within 24 hours. With that, you've addressed my biggest issue with the ordinary hiring process: Complete Lack of Feedback. When I was fresh (or nearly) out of college in 2003, the only responses I received were from the CMU Robotics Lab. And while they were "we're not interested" replies, they at least had a real signature on them. Nothing else I applied for produced even as much as an automated response - print, e-mail, phone, nothing. (My options and interests at the time were admitedly a bit too narrow, and geography worked harshly against me.) Worse yet is when you interview somewhere and then never hear back. Thankfully that only happened once to me. Otherwise it really depends on the group and the culture. It doesn't bother me when Megacorps use standardized tests or puzzles (large or popular groups need some sort of advanced filter), but I prefer the hiring process at smaller companies to be more personal.
maayank 15y ago
Actually, that debacle is one of the reasons why I decided that my next job would be at a startup. So yes, it definitely matters.
VladRussian 15y ago
>To filter out the total idiots, I ask people to give me a one-paragraph answer to one of 5 technical-ish questions. from my recent job change (several offers). After supposedly reading my resume and after half an hour on the phone the company's staff recruiter asked me to write a paragraph on how i see my fit to the company. It became immediately obvious to me that there is no fit. Somehow that wasn't obvious for him. Next day he's calling and emailing - they really like to talk with me in-house and where is the paragraph? Couple days later - the same. Day after that - they really like to talk with me in-house. The paragraph somehow isn't mentioned anymore. Good luck guys. I hope you find the programmer(s) with a hobby for essay writing.