3 ms·
From then on 100% of your hiring chances are dependent on your resume and interview performance Comparing the resume to interview performance is misleading. In
by cushychicken 5y ago
From then on 100% of your hiring chances are dependent on your resume and interview performance
Comparing the resume to interview performance is misleading. Interview performance has far more impact than your resume does once you've gotten to the point of talking to actual humans at the hiring company. To illustrate my point: no company would hire someone with perfect qualifications on paper if they were, for example, abrasive or rude in their recruiter calls.
Interview performance is a big deal, and lots of devs don't like to admit this because of how uncomfortable it is. It truly is "performance": you are putting yourself on display for prospective coworkers, and being judged on that display. Nobody likes that feeling.
It's one of the big clashes between tech's meritocracy narrative and the day-to-day realities of workplace culture. It's a persistent belief among tech workers that "if I'm technically good enough or exceptional, anyone will accept me as a coworker". If you're being evaluated by an interview panel, and that panel is composed of people who have to work with you every day, this belief just ain't so.
- michaelt 5y ago> Interview performance has far more impact than your resume does once you've gotten to the point of talking to actual humans at the hiring company. Right. But if your resume is rejected at screening, you won't reach that point. If they only hire people with degree A or B from colleges C, D or E with experience of F and G, you'd better have those on your resume.