4 ms·

That would be pretty cool-- and although software development is meritocratic, it's not as meritocratic as those orchestras, right?. They simply want the best m

That would be pretty cool-- and although software development is meritocratic, it's not as meritocratic as those orchestras, right?. They simply want the best musicians PERIOD, whereas lots of software companies would probably hesitate to hire someone with a lot of talent but a toxic attitude.

yaddayadda 12y ago
Unfortunately I'm in bind with first impressions. By nature, I'm a massive introvert, which has always caused me problems. But I'm also coming from a toxic workplace environment (our boss regularly berates employees in front of other employees, to include profanity and yelling loud enough to be clearly understood through multiple walls, and he's been know to literally rip doors off their hinges, just because he's mad at the world). In the handful of interviews I've been on, I've tried to focus on the positives of potential new jobs, instead of the negatives of my current job, but I always seem to slip up and mention something about the toxic nature of my current position. The combination of these two factors means I have a really hard time "making a good first impression". I recently completed a programming bootcamp and when I explained this to several of my classmates they made a point of highlighting what a great programmer I am (relatively to our peers) and that I'm a really great person to work with "once people get to know me". But, there's the crux of the matter for me - in an interview situation, if I'm ruled out in the first 30 seconds then nobody "gets to know me" or my programming potential. To add to the irony, about 2/3rds of my current co-workers know that I'm looking for a job and they regularly make comments to me about how much they don't want me to go, followed by comments about understanding my need to work in a less toxic environment.
- brianwawok 12y ago
  So get better at being a fake extrovert for 90 seconds. Programmers as a class of people are shy and awkward. Not hard to be not the shyest and awkwardest around.
  - AnonJ 12y ago
    Just be yourself. Interviews are not equal to acting like an extrovert, and any attempt to "fake" will likely backfire. But indeed I have to admit I was quite shocked at how incredibly unsociable and inexpressive those programmers are at my first work. Probably it's just because I'm not working at a world-class place yet and the sample size is way too small, I can only assume.
- JohnBooty 12y ago
  I also realize that no two people or situations are alike, and that I have no idea what you're going through! But from a fellow introvert who has had success with interviews: an interview is a good example of a social situation that's fairly "hackable." By hackable I mean an interview is something where, at least compared to an open-ended conversation with a stranger, there are certain... branching paths of conversation?... that you can practice ahead of time. The inevitable questions about why you're leaving your current job are definitely a thing you can practice. I don't think it's necessarily bad to mention some negatives regarding your current position and why you want to get out of it. If it didn't suck in some way, why would you be looking for a new job? I think a good answer to the "why are you looking to leave your current position?" question would involve: 1. What you like about the new company ("You guys seem to hire really good coders, you're growing as a company, and I like your approach to A, B, and C.") 2. What you want to achieve at the new company (ex: "I'm looking for an opportunity to do less support and more coding.") 3. Optionally, something about what's bad at your current company. Preferably in a positive context. (ex: "I'm really excited about building modern web applications, and I'm not able to achieve that at Company XYZ because we've committed to supporting IE6.0 until 2050 because it's what the owner's mom uses.") Anyway, it's not easy, but it's.... hackable. Unless it's a really weird interview, most of the ground you'll cover is rehearseable. Good luck!!
  - yaddayadda 12y ago
    Thank you for the advice and good luck! In all of the interviews I've been to recently, the interviewers continue to press me if I focus on their company and don't say something about why I want to leave my current employer. After a particularly bad interview, I did start practicing for these types of questions and I'm getting better, but that's still relative. Part of the problem is that I've been in the toxic workplace so long and I'm so desperate to get out of it, that thoughts of escaping push to the front of my brain while I'm in interviews and I either blurt out something I shouldn't [1] or I just freeze up (think deer in headlights), typically a combination of the two which is even worse. [1] I don't blurt out anything quite as bad as "my current boss is an ass", rather things like "My boss doesn't believe in bug trackers and I think they're extremely important." So far so good, right? But then there's a pregnant pause and I catch myself blurting out, "At least a client threatened to take away our business if we didn't start keeping bug records, so now we have 3-ring binders and paper forms to record our bugs. But that doesn't do any good when the same bug is reported multiple times in every binder and the boss doesn't actually look at the bug reports or give anyone else access to the code." At which point the looks on the interviewers face tell me I've blown it again. (Very true scenarios about our bug reporting and my idiotic blurting out in an interview.)
cbd1984 12y ago
I honestly don't know: Is a toxic attitude somehow not a problem in the orchestra world? Because you'll never convince me that no musicians have toxic attitudes. Even at the symphony orchestra level.
king_jester 12y ago
> and although software development is meritocratic, it's not as meritocratic as those orchestras Software development IS NOT meritocratic and neither are orchestras. There is just as much politics, networking, and problems with "value" in orchestras as in software development.
- AnonJ 12y ago
  This sounds a bit cynical and negative to me. Probably if your company is too big then these are quite inevitable. But at least at where I work now I feel free. There's enough transparency, candidness and equality among all. Don't know whether things will change in the future, but a relatively "clean" state is certainly possible, at least according to my current feelings.
AnonJ 12y ago
I've always figured that the thing about an "absolutely impartial" standard is a mirage. Go way too much into it and what you create will be deformed, mechanical processes which largely deviates from the thing's original intention and end up worse than what it intends to replace. Look at any huge national exam system(China for example) then you'll perfectly understand what I mean. Students get absolutely no space for personality, and nothing else than abilities to do specified types of exams get evaluated. No holistic abilities at all. A process with space for subjectivity certainly isn't perfect, but it allows so much more to be evaluated than purely mechanical and many times deformed narrow "skill sets", if so can be called. I remember reading Peter Thiel say PayPal didn't recruit a guy because "he loved playing basketball", although all other attributes looked great. That might be a little bit extreme but it says a lot about how hiring, and generally admission processes, isn't a precision science, and that's actually probably how lots of decision-makers want it to be. It requires dynamism, interactions and gauging between people. Simple blind mechanical assessment results aren't equal to "justice" in any way. It's the same thing as you cannot just choose your friends nor your mate by "assessment scores". I feel many commentators are stressing too much on another extreme of things here.
Retra 12y ago
Most people don't have a toxic attitude, and you can always fire them if they do.

yaddayadda 12y ago

Unfortunately I'm in bind with first impressions. By nature, I'm a massive introvert, which has always caused me problems. But I'm also coming from a toxic workplace environment (our boss regularly berates employees in front of other employees, to include profanity and yelling loud enough to be clearly understood through multiple walls, and he's been know to literally rip doors off their hinges, just because he's mad at the world). In the handful of interviews I've been on, I've tried to focus on the positives of potential new jobs, instead of the negatives of my current job, but I always seem to slip up and mention something about the toxic nature of my current position. The combination of these two factors means I have a really hard time "making a good first impression". I recently completed a programming bootcamp and when I explained this to several of my classmates they made a point of highlighting what a great programmer I am (relatively to our peers) and that I'm a really great person to work with "once people get to know me". But, there's the crux of the matter for me - in an interview situation, if I'm ruled out in the first 30 seconds then nobody "gets to know me" or my programming potential. To add to the irony, about 2/3rds of my current co-workers know that I'm looking for a job and they regularly make comments to me about how much they don't want me to go, followed by comments about understanding my need to work in a less toxic environment.

brianwawok 12y ago
So get better at being a fake extrovert for 90 seconds. Programmers as a class of people are shy and awkward. Not hard to be not the shyest and awkwardest around.
- AnonJ 12y ago
  Just be yourself. Interviews are not equal to acting like an extrovert, and any attempt to "fake" will likely backfire. But indeed I have to admit I was quite shocked at how incredibly unsociable and inexpressive those programmers are at my first work. Probably it's just because I'm not working at a world-class place yet and the sample size is way too small, I can only assume.
JohnBooty 12y ago
I also realize that no two people or situations are alike, and that I have no idea what you're going through! But from a fellow introvert who has had success with interviews: an interview is a good example of a social situation that's fairly "hackable." By hackable I mean an interview is something where, at least compared to an open-ended conversation with a stranger, there are certain... branching paths of conversation?... that you can practice ahead of time. The inevitable questions about why you're leaving your current job are definitely a thing you can practice. I don't think it's necessarily bad to mention some negatives regarding your current position and why you want to get out of it. If it didn't suck in some way, why would you be looking for a new job? I think a good answer to the "why are you looking to leave your current position?" question would involve: 1. What you like about the new company ("You guys seem to hire really good coders, you're growing as a company, and I like your approach to A, B, and C.") 2. What you want to achieve at the new company (ex: "I'm looking for an opportunity to do less support and more coding.") 3. Optionally, something about what's bad at your current company. Preferably in a positive context. (ex: "I'm really excited about building modern web applications, and I'm not able to achieve that at Company XYZ because we've committed to supporting IE6.0 until 2050 because it's what the owner's mom uses.") Anyway, it's not easy, but it's.... hackable. Unless it's a really weird interview, most of the ground you'll cover is rehearseable. Good luck!!
- yaddayadda 12y ago
  Thank you for the advice and good luck! In all of the interviews I've been to recently, the interviewers continue to press me if I focus on their company and don't say something about why I want to leave my current employer. After a particularly bad interview, I did start practicing for these types of questions and I'm getting better, but that's still relative. Part of the problem is that I've been in the toxic workplace so long and I'm so desperate to get out of it, that thoughts of escaping push to the front of my brain while I'm in interviews and I either blurt out something I shouldn't [1] or I just freeze up (think deer in headlights), typically a combination of the two which is even worse. [1] I don't blurt out anything quite as bad as "my current boss is an ass", rather things like "My boss doesn't believe in bug trackers and I think they're extremely important." So far so good, right? But then there's a pregnant pause and I catch myself blurting out, "At least a client threatened to take away our business if we didn't start keeping bug records, so now we have 3-ring binders and paper forms to record our bugs. But that doesn't do any good when the same bug is reported multiple times in every binder and the boss doesn't actually look at the bug reports or give anyone else access to the code." At which point the looks on the interviewers face tell me I've blown it again. (Very true scenarios about our bug reporting and my idiotic blurting out in an interview.)

cbd1984 12y ago

I honestly don't know: Is a toxic attitude somehow not a problem in the orchestra world? Because you'll never convince me that no musicians have toxic attitudes. Even at the symphony orchestra level.

king_jester 12y ago

> and although software development is meritocratic, it's not as meritocratic as those orchestras Software development IS NOT meritocratic and neither are orchestras. There is just as much politics, networking, and problems with "value" in orchestras as in software development.

AnonJ 12y ago
This sounds a bit cynical and negative to me. Probably if your company is too big then these are quite inevitable. But at least at where I work now I feel free. There's enough transparency, candidness and equality among all. Don't know whether things will change in the future, but a relatively "clean" state is certainly possible, at least according to my current feelings.

AnonJ 12y ago

I've always figured that the thing about an "absolutely impartial" standard is a mirage. Go way too much into it and what you create will be deformed, mechanical processes which largely deviates from the thing's original intention and end up worse than what it intends to replace. Look at any huge national exam system(China for example) then you'll perfectly understand what I mean. Students get absolutely no space for personality, and nothing else than abilities to do specified types of exams get evaluated. No holistic abilities at all. A process with space for subjectivity certainly isn't perfect, but it allows so much more to be evaluated than purely mechanical and many times deformed narrow "skill sets", if so can be called. I remember reading Peter Thiel say PayPal didn't recruit a guy because "he loved playing basketball", although all other attributes looked great. That might be a little bit extreme but it says a lot about how hiring, and generally admission processes, isn't a precision science, and that's actually probably how lots of decision-makers want it to be. It requires dynamism, interactions and gauging between people. Simple blind mechanical assessment results aren't equal to "justice" in any way. It's the same thing as you cannot just choose your friends nor your mate by "assessment scores". I feel many commentators are stressing too much on another extreme of things here.

Retra 12y ago

Most people don't have a toxic attitude, and you can always fire them if they do.