6 ms·

Speaking as a hiring manager this feels perfectly reasonable so I'd be interested to know why people might think it isn't. I write a job spec which lists what

Speaking as a hiring manager this feels perfectly reasonable so I'd be interested to know why people might think it isn't. I write a job spec which lists what we're looking for which is advertised and passed to recruiters - if you're interested in the job you've almost certainly seen that. Assuming you do have the experience, using the spec you should be able to tweak your CV in about 5 minutes to highlight the key things we're looking for. If you do that, you've cleared this (very low) bar with a very small time investment and it's not a problem. If your CV makes it past the recruiter (or HR department or other non-technical screener) I then know that the CV I'm looking at is worth my time and the following interview is more focused as I know a bit more about what you've done where. Yes you are having to spend time but, as I say, this should be a very short tweak to your existing CV so it doesn't feel like a big ask given that I'm going to spend longer than that reading it (and hopefully interviewing you about it). Obviously if there is no job spec then this doesn't work so well but there's usually something, even if it's just stuff you've gleaned from the advert or conversations with the person you learned about the role from. As an aside, please don't ever try to get round the keyword thing by listing everything you've done or used. I had a CV the other week which listed 43 skills, tools and technologies for one nine month role. From that I have no way of knowing what you used in passing and what you really know - you've provided so much information it just became noise. My rule when I'm working out what to put - if you put it on your CV you'd better feel happy answering (proper) questions about it and I don't believe that you passed that threshold with 43 things in a nine month period.

mercurial 12y ago
Speaking as a developer, why do you feel it's reasonable to disregard side projects? If, say, I claim LLVM knowledge based on a publicly available language developed on my spare time, why shouldn't be taken into account in the recruiting process?
- Tyrannosaurs 12y ago
  I don't disregard them completely and I think CVs can be written in such a way that recruiters (who actually get very excited about such stuff these days) and HR people will be fine with this sort of thing. What I would say is that there is a difference between hobby code where you get to do what you want and code where you didn't control requirements and had to deliver to unreasonable people in unreasonable timeframes (aka commercial software development). Obviously it would depend on the projects but generally someone who has commercial experience would probably be viewed more favourably as it's more directly comparable to what I need you to do. All that said, I deal in corporate style CRUD apps (there is a bit more to it that that but that's the core). That's an area where OSS - the best sort of out of work project as it's team based, real world and so on - isn't that active so it's not a consideration I have to make too often.
  - talmand 12y ago
    What I get out of that first statement is that you do tend to disregard unless the candidate knows exactly how to describe the related subjects on their CV in a way that makes you happy. And you don't see the problem that developers might have with that? Especially when they don't know the secret method of describing things to make recruiters happy? As for the rest, I think it's reasonable to assume that a candidate with commercial experience will favor over hobby experience. I'm sure there are plenty of examples of where that doesn't hold true, but I suppose it's a decent rule.
    - DigitalJack 12y ago
      The GP is giving helpful advice here. It takes stages to get to the people who will have some idea if your side project is really something or a bit of fluff. Recruiters don't have the experience to know, so it is your job to help them out with your CV. They are looking at many applicants and can't research them in depth and get through the stack at the same time. I believe this is essentially true for hiring managers as well, although they will probably be able to tell fluff from something interesting, they won't have the time to do it. And it will reflect poorly on you if you aren't willing to work your CV for relevance to the job. When you get through those gates to a peer interview, you can talk up your side projects all you want, and these are the people who might look at it and incorporate it in their decision making.
      - talmand 12y ago
        It is helpful advice, to get a job from that recruiter. But what I'm saying is that this is an example of the games that job seekers have to play with different recruiters that have their own methods and agendas. It's also possibly a difference between Europe and United States hiring methods, which could be a misunderstanding on my part. But you've mentioned part of the problem, "Recruiters don't have the experience to know", therefore there is an issue with some recruiters being the gatekeepers. Especially when they state things that imply if you didn't explain things in the magic way that they want to read it then they'll pass on your resume. That's my issue. It's one thing to say "please phrase your experience in simple terms for a non-technical person might be able to understand and can easily use as a basis for research" as opposed to "write it the way I like it or I may disregard". It's not as bad as the guy who throws out resumes stating he doesn't hire unlucky people, but it is a problem. After all, if someone writes that they have AngularJS experience and the recruiter can't be bothered to think "I don't know what that is, maybe I should look on Google" then there's a problem. I'm not saying that the recruiter in this thread is that person, but does seem to have something close to that mindset. Which, I feel the need to point out, I've personally never had a bad experience with a recruiter nor hiring manager. I'm not sure if that means that this problem that crops up quite frequently in the community is not that big a deal as it seems or I'm just lucky. I've also been on the hiring side of the table. It's just my personal experience and it may or may not mean anything to the discussion.
couchand 12y ago
There's one very simple reason that this strategy fails: good developers can and do learn new technologies quickly. It's far more important to find someone willing and able to learn than someone who can copy and paste a few keywords.
- Tyrannosaurs 12y ago
  But it doesn't fail. I've been recruiting solid teams who deliver software for a decade now. The right current skills and the ability to learn future skills aren't incompatible. After all, how do you think those people got those current skills? I don't have to choose one or the other and I've rarely met anyone in IT who isn't willing to learn new skills. Generally I have two or three core skills I'm looking for for a role for and the rest are nice to have. To me it's a given you'll basically be smart and that you'll need to learn stuff but I also know from experience I can get smart people who have a core set of knowledge which will make them productive early on. I certainly have no interest in someone who can copy and paste keywords and if that's all you'd done you won't get past first interview. All I'm asking is that you present your experience in a way which is most relevant to me to help me understand.
  - Retric 12y ago
    You have little idea what your opportunity costs are. However, it’s unlikely that the best fit is going to have your ideal background and be willing to spend much time jumping through your hoops.
    - couchand 12y ago
      ...probably because your best fit already has a job they're happy with.
    - Tyrannosaurs 12y ago
      My hoops? Did you read what I wrote? I suggest 5 minutes of CV tailoring. You think that's jumping through hoops?

mercurial 12y ago

Speaking as a developer, why do you feel it's reasonable to disregard side projects? If, say, I claim LLVM knowledge based on a publicly available language developed on my spare time, why shouldn't be taken into account in the recruiting process?

Tyrannosaurs 12y ago
I don't disregard them completely and I think CVs can be written in such a way that recruiters (who actually get very excited about such stuff these days) and HR people will be fine with this sort of thing. What I would say is that there is a difference between hobby code where you get to do what you want and code where you didn't control requirements and had to deliver to unreasonable people in unreasonable timeframes (aka commercial software development). Obviously it would depend on the projects but generally someone who has commercial experience would probably be viewed more favourably as it's more directly comparable to what I need you to do. All that said, I deal in corporate style CRUD apps (there is a bit more to it that that but that's the core). That's an area where OSS - the best sort of out of work project as it's team based, real world and so on - isn't that active so it's not a consideration I have to make too often.
- talmand 12y ago
  What I get out of that first statement is that you do tend to disregard unless the candidate knows exactly how to describe the related subjects on their CV in a way that makes you happy. And you don't see the problem that developers might have with that? Especially when they don't know the secret method of describing things to make recruiters happy? As for the rest, I think it's reasonable to assume that a candidate with commercial experience will favor over hobby experience. I'm sure there are plenty of examples of where that doesn't hold true, but I suppose it's a decent rule.
  - DigitalJack 12y ago
    The GP is giving helpful advice here. It takes stages to get to the people who will have some idea if your side project is really something or a bit of fluff. Recruiters don't have the experience to know, so it is your job to help them out with your CV. They are looking at many applicants and can't research them in depth and get through the stack at the same time. I believe this is essentially true for hiring managers as well, although they will probably be able to tell fluff from something interesting, they won't have the time to do it. And it will reflect poorly on you if you aren't willing to work your CV for relevance to the job. When you get through those gates to a peer interview, you can talk up your side projects all you want, and these are the people who might look at it and incorporate it in their decision making.
    - talmand 12y ago
      It is helpful advice, to get a job from that recruiter. But what I'm saying is that this is an example of the games that job seekers have to play with different recruiters that have their own methods and agendas. It's also possibly a difference between Europe and United States hiring methods, which could be a misunderstanding on my part. But you've mentioned part of the problem, "Recruiters don't have the experience to know", therefore there is an issue with some recruiters being the gatekeepers. Especially when they state things that imply if you didn't explain things in the magic way that they want to read it then they'll pass on your resume. That's my issue. It's one thing to say "please phrase your experience in simple terms for a non-technical person might be able to understand and can easily use as a basis for research" as opposed to "write it the way I like it or I may disregard". It's not as bad as the guy who throws out resumes stating he doesn't hire unlucky people, but it is a problem. After all, if someone writes that they have AngularJS experience and the recruiter can't be bothered to think "I don't know what that is, maybe I should look on Google" then there's a problem. I'm not saying that the recruiter in this thread is that person, but does seem to have something close to that mindset. Which, I feel the need to point out, I've personally never had a bad experience with a recruiter nor hiring manager. I'm not sure if that means that this problem that crops up quite frequently in the community is not that big a deal as it seems or I'm just lucky. I've also been on the hiring side of the table. It's just my personal experience and it may or may not mean anything to the discussion.

couchand 12y ago

There's one very simple reason that this strategy fails: good developers can and do learn new technologies quickly. It's far more important to find someone willing and able to learn than someone who can copy and paste a few keywords.

Tyrannosaurs 12y ago
But it doesn't fail. I've been recruiting solid teams who deliver software for a decade now. The right current skills and the ability to learn future skills aren't incompatible. After all, how do you think those people got those current skills? I don't have to choose one or the other and I've rarely met anyone in IT who isn't willing to learn new skills. Generally I have two or three core skills I'm looking for for a role for and the rest are nice to have. To me it's a given you'll basically be smart and that you'll need to learn stuff but I also know from experience I can get smart people who have a core set of knowledge which will make them productive early on. I certainly have no interest in someone who can copy and paste keywords and if that's all you'd done you won't get past first interview. All I'm asking is that you present your experience in a way which is most relevant to me to help me understand.
- Retric 12y ago
  You have little idea what your opportunity costs are. However, it’s unlikely that the best fit is going to have your ideal background and be willing to spend much time jumping through your hoops.
  - couchand 12y ago
    ...probably because your best fit already has a job they're happy with.
  - Tyrannosaurs 12y ago
    My hoops? Did you read what I wrote? I suggest 5 minutes of CV tailoring. You think that's jumping through hoops?