4 ms·

As a hiring manager, I'm not averse to hiring someone with non-domain experience for a domain-specific role with but I usually have a few apprehensions. You can

by extr 3y ago

As a hiring manager, I'm not averse to hiring someone with non-domain experience for a domain-specific role with but I usually have a few apprehensions. You can make yourself a better candidate by pre-empting these questions: * Were you actually good at your previous domain? (Be Good) * Does this person know they actually like working in this new domain? Or do they just think it might be "interesting"? (Show some proof that you are already investing yourself in this new domain) * Do they have a track record of successfully learning new things in the past? (Any other non-domain skills you've picked up that show me you can be successful doing that?) * Are they at a natural career inflection point and a good time for a transition? (You just got a Masters, so this is covered) Trying for a totally cold start is tough though. I would try to get a foot in the door via career fair or university contacts. Use whatever coursework you have completed in the area to show aptitude/interest. Good luck.

lylejantzi3rd 3y ago
> Were you actually good at your previous domain? (Be Good) Can you define "good"? and, more importantly, how do you convince others that you're "good" within the context of a job application?
- vsareto 3y ago
  You advertise some qualities that you think is good and see if it passes their bar of good. There's certainly some subjectivity here. A more general indicator is how far down into the details you can dive. Another is how well you can teach things to others.
- GianFabien 3y ago
  Your CV should provide examples of wins. eg decreased time to enter orders from 15 minutes to 5 minutes; increased widget production rate from 5000 / hr to 8000 / hr; reduced hosting costs by 5% to $1.5M, etc. Your technical competence needs to be reflected in the business benefits you have contributed to. Even refactoring code can be a win if it speeds up things, reduces costs, increases profits etc. Increased profits are always considered to be "good".
  - quickthrower2 3y ago
    The problem with this is it tells you nothing about how competent the candidate is. It tells you about the success of a metric of an IT project. And it is easy to make up. It is usually a “we” thing and it if they say “I” then I am suspicious. And say they single handily sped up some system. Maybe it was a half day of profiling and fixing some string copying bug. Yes that fix moved a needle and is “Worth millions” but is it? Many people could do the same fix. I am suspicious of team metrics (period!) and I am suspicious of them being used to judge a developer. What you really want to know is can they fix stuff, are they thinking in alignment with the business. Chasing metrics often isn’t that. Metrics are a necessary evil: they are part truth part bullshit and require nuance to interpret.

by extr 3y ago

lylejantzi3rd 3y ago

> Were you actually good at your previous domain? (Be Good) Can you define "good"? and, more importantly, how do you convince others that you're "good" within the context of a job application?

vsareto 3y ago
You advertise some qualities that you think is good and see if it passes their bar of good. There's certainly some subjectivity here. A more general indicator is how far down into the details you can dive. Another is how well you can teach things to others.
GianFabien 3y ago
Your CV should provide examples of wins. eg decreased time to enter orders from 15 minutes to 5 minutes; increased widget production rate from 5000 / hr to 8000 / hr; reduced hosting costs by 5% to $1.5M, etc. Your technical competence needs to be reflected in the business benefits you have contributed to. Even refactoring code can be a win if it speeds up things, reduces costs, increases profits etc. Increased profits are always considered to be "good".
- quickthrower2 3y ago
  The problem with this is it tells you nothing about how competent the candidate is. It tells you about the success of a metric of an IT project. And it is easy to make up. It is usually a “we” thing and it if they say “I” then I am suspicious. And say they single handily sped up some system. Maybe it was a half day of profiling and fixing some string copying bug. Yes that fix moved a needle and is “Worth millions” but is it? Many people could do the same fix. I am suspicious of team metrics (period!) and I am suspicious of them being used to judge a developer. What you really want to know is can they fix stuff, are they thinking in alignment with the business. Chasing metrics often isn’t that. Metrics are a necessary evil: they are part truth part bullshit and require nuance to interpret.