10 ms·

Regarding over the top accomplishments in resumes: every resume writing workshop tells you to do this. I don't think you should be rejecting these first just be

Regarding over the top accomplishments in resumes: every resume writing workshop tells you to do this. I don't think you should be rejecting these first just because someone listened to the advice of "sell yourself".

mola 4y ago
Or maybe they should, so we can stop with this nonsense and make it easier for everyone.
- godelski 4y ago
  I think to do that we need to recognize that it is really hard to actually evaluate people. Resumes are only a weak signal. A lot of people think they're way better at hiring than they are. Just like employees overestimate their skills (and are encouraged to because the resume process) employers also over estimate their hiring skills (and are encouraged to because the bureaucratic process).
yamtaddle 4y ago
Have a relative who's quite accomplished in HR and recruiting and, can confirm, they don't encourage outright lying but they do insist you have to stretch everything to the max and freely imply a lot more than a very honest person might be inclined to. Judging from the results for people I know who've had this person re-work their résumés, it's extremely good advice. Non-braggy résumés seem to just get round-filed for not knowing how to play the game, even if they're otherwise very well-written. I'm sure there are a few folks hiring—probably almost all at relatively small enterprises—who have the opposite reaction but they're instead rejecting good people who are simply playing their hand the best possible way, given the rules. Those who fluff up their résumés get much better results.
- layer8 4y ago
  > Non-braggy résumés seem to just get round-filed for not knowing how to play the game That doesn’t make sense, there must be a different causality.
  - yamtaddle 4y ago
    I guess it's also possible that HR people actually believe all the stuff on résumés is accurate and think those candidates are worse than someone presenting the exaggerated version of the exact same work history and abilities. I was trying to be generous and assume they simply think those are amateurish or are some kind of non-conformist or lack-of-social-awareness red flag.
  - ghaff 4y ago
    Why? People expect it to effectively be a sales document. So if you have a bullet item like "One of 100 people peripherally involved with only modestly successful $PRODUCT," readers would be forgiven for discounting that experience. To be clear, per parent, I'm not saying to lie but things can generally be presented in a positive way.
    - layer8 4y ago
      My objecting is against “for not knowing how to play the game”. You’re arguing for a more plausible causality.
  - giantg2 4y ago
    I can say that I have generally been a modest person who has performed well in the past. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. People can have fewer accomplishments and make a big deal out of them and get more out of it. I would rather not make a big deal out of meaningless stuff. I recently certified as an AWS practicioner after my associate level certs expired. My manager wants to send an email out to the department about that accomplishment. I don't get it - it's just practicioner.
- anon50118810 4y ago
  One of the twists in the software industry is that something that looks braggy to a non-technical recruiter can look irrelevant to someone in the know, or from the other direction something that looks braggy to a tech person can be meaningless to a non-tech person. For example, if you say that you "developed software that saved the company $X million/year," that might look good to a non-tech person but a tech person will understand that could mean nothing. Maybe you spellchecked comments in a sub-subcomponent of a project a thousand people worked on. On the other hand you might say you "worked on v1 of the Frobnicator library" which might look like nothing to a recruiter but which is a legendary accomplishment in the field. In my case I just say what I did in plain language that includes a bunch of keywords and hope that's enough.
  - chris11 4y ago
    I'd say it depends on the company. Silicon Valley likes to promote on impact. So being able to communicate that impact is a valuable skill.
    - anon50118810 4y ago
      The company and the position, so a good idea for an employee #1 position, less so if you're the tenth IC on some random team at some random company.
pepy 4y ago
Impossible Is Nothing
Silhouette 4y ago
There's also the possibility that some candidates actually do have the track record they claim. If your default assumption is that anyone claiming really strong experience is obviously exaggerating when you haven't even talked to them then you're going to rule out a lot of the best candidates stupidly. I've been in the bracket where ageism is a factor for a while now and so have many of the best people I know who still work as ICs. Being told that no-one really has that breadth or depth of experience and unicorns don't exist should be surprising for this group but sadly isn't any more. If the person making the silly comment is an important player in a hiring process then that's not a good sign. The worst I've seen is when you're personally invited in as an expert/consultant by someone in your network and then HR insist on treating the gig as if they're hiring some random junior developer applicant. Objectively the professional thing to do if you're getting messed around like that is usually to politely disengage but then you risk making your friend/colleague look bad. Sometimes going via your network is a double-edged sword.

mola 4y ago

Or maybe they should, so we can stop with this nonsense and make it easier for everyone.

godelski 4y ago
I think to do that we need to recognize that it is really hard to actually evaluate people. Resumes are only a weak signal. A lot of people think they're way better at hiring than they are. Just like employees overestimate their skills (and are encouraged to because the resume process) employers also over estimate their hiring skills (and are encouraged to because the bureaucratic process).

yamtaddle 4y ago

Have a relative who's quite accomplished in HR and recruiting and, can confirm, they don't encourage outright lying but they do insist you have to stretch everything to the max and freely imply a lot more than a very honest person might be inclined to. Judging from the results for people I know who've had this person re-work their résumés, it's extremely good advice. Non-braggy résumés seem to just get round-filed for not knowing how to play the game, even if they're otherwise very well-written. I'm sure there are a few folks hiring—probably almost all at relatively small enterprises—who have the opposite reaction but they're instead rejecting good people who are simply playing their hand the best possible way, given the rules. Those who fluff up their résumés get much better results.

layer8 4y ago
> Non-braggy résumés seem to just get round-filed for not knowing how to play the game That doesn’t make sense, there must be a different causality.
- yamtaddle 4y ago
  I guess it's also possible that HR people actually believe all the stuff on résumés is accurate and think those candidates are worse than someone presenting the exaggerated version of the exact same work history and abilities. I was trying to be generous and assume they simply think those are amateurish or are some kind of non-conformist or lack-of-social-awareness red flag.
- ghaff 4y ago
  Why? People expect it to effectively be a sales document. So if you have a bullet item like "One of 100 people peripherally involved with only modestly successful $PRODUCT," readers would be forgiven for discounting that experience. To be clear, per parent, I'm not saying to lie but things can generally be presented in a positive way.
  - layer8 4y ago
    My objecting is against “for not knowing how to play the game”. You’re arguing for a more plausible causality.
- giantg2 4y ago
  I can say that I have generally been a modest person who has performed well in the past. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. People can have fewer accomplishments and make a big deal out of them and get more out of it. I would rather not make a big deal out of meaningless stuff. I recently certified as an AWS practicioner after my associate level certs expired. My manager wants to send an email out to the department about that accomplishment. I don't get it - it's just practicioner.
anon50118810 4y ago
One of the twists in the software industry is that something that looks braggy to a non-technical recruiter can look irrelevant to someone in the know, or from the other direction something that looks braggy to a tech person can be meaningless to a non-tech person. For example, if you say that you "developed software that saved the company $X million/year," that might look good to a non-tech person but a tech person will understand that could mean nothing. Maybe you spellchecked comments in a sub-subcomponent of a project a thousand people worked on. On the other hand you might say you "worked on v1 of the Frobnicator library" which might look like nothing to a recruiter but which is a legendary accomplishment in the field. In my case I just say what I did in plain language that includes a bunch of keywords and hope that's enough.
- chris11 4y ago
  I'd say it depends on the company. Silicon Valley likes to promote on impact. So being able to communicate that impact is a valuable skill.
  - anon50118810 4y ago
    The company and the position, so a good idea for an employee #1 position, less so if you're the tenth IC on some random team at some random company.

pepy 4y ago

Impossible Is Nothing

Silhouette 4y ago

There's also the possibility that some candidates actually do have the track record they claim. If your default assumption is that anyone claiming really strong experience is obviously exaggerating when you haven't even talked to them then you're going to rule out a lot of the best candidates stupidly. I've been in the bracket where ageism is a factor for a while now and so have many of the best people I know who still work as ICs. Being told that no-one really has that breadth or depth of experience and unicorns don't exist should be surprising for this group but sadly isn't any more. If the person making the silly comment is an important player in a hiring process then that's not a good sign. The worst I've seen is when you're personally invited in as an expert/consultant by someone in your network and then HR insist on treating the gig as if they're hiring some random junior developer applicant. Objectively the professional thing to do if you're getting messed around like that is usually to politely disengage but then you risk making your friend/colleague look bad. Sometimes going via your network is a double-edged sword.