Earlier quoted context omitted.
About that heuristic, when hiring for sysadmins in the early 2000s, I found there to be an inverse relationship between résumé quality and candidate quality (with one notable exception — résumés written in LaTeX were usually of high quality and almost always indicated a quality candidate). Originally I had a similar conception about résumés — they should be one or two pages max, should look nice, and should contain n…
How do you determine that? I wrote mine in LaTeX but submit a PDF. Usually that default LaTeX font is a dead giveaway, but I find it to be pretty ugly so I switched it out.
We only hire the best means we only hire the trendiest (2016)
621–630 of 653 posts
Re: We only hire the best means we only hire the trendiest (2016)
#622Earlier quoted context omitted.
there's no business incentive for them to do so. But there is one: to save the precious time of valuable people. I think it's an interesting suggestion.
Even more important than that is to get people who really are aligned with what the company actually is, instead of just the standard bullshit that everybody says. I, too, really like the idea, but I wonder if, in practice, it wouldn't work because companies don't introspect deeply enough to understand what makes them distinct? For instance, if what's remarkable about your company is that you have a great culture whe…
Re: We only hire the best means we only hire the trendiest (2016)
#623Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm a web developer who has been thinking about engineering hiring and culture a LOT over the last 6 months. I'm confused about employers' desire to cast a wide net, only to filter through applicants thoughtlessly. Instead, why don't engineering teams save time and energy by articulating their specific engineering values, and sharing that information up front? Be honest. Say divisive things. This will allow job-seeke…
Applicants do not self-filter. If you've ever read resumes for a job listing that haven't been prescreened, you'll be blown away by how many people refuse to self-filter even for basic fitness for the job. Put out a job listing asking for a college degree, and you'll get applicants who are still in school with their graduation date two years in the future looking for an internship. That's an extreme, but people will…
Re: We only hire the best means we only hire the trendiest (2016)
#624Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm a web developer who has been thinking about engineering hiring and culture a LOT over the last 6 months. I'm confused about employers' desire to cast a wide net, only to filter through applicants thoughtlessly. Instead, why don't engineering teams save time and energy by articulating their specific engineering values, and sharing that information up front? Be honest. Say divisive things. This will allow job-seeke…
This sounds nice, but is very far away from actual reality. Sadly, almost 25%-30% of applicants, in my experience, don't even read the full job description or ignore key parts that are listed in bold text, some examples based on actual real life: - "You need to be based in , we don't do remote" -- applies from US/Pakistan/Russia, wants remote work. - "Make clear what attracts you in our business/industry" -- ignores…
For the second example, because most engineers value honesty because a lack of complete transparency cost time/money or worst kills people. And frankly, most engineers like technology and could care less about the company and/or the industry. And that's why they are horrible at sales. And what your asking for is a kind of sales.
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-34324772
http://money.cnn.com/2015/12/10/news/companies/gm-recall-ign...
Btw, I'm not saying you shouldn't look for engineers that have people skills, just why your having a hard time finding them... :)
Re: We only hire the best means we only hire the trendiest (2016)
#625Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even more important than that is to get people who really are aligned with what the company actually is, instead of just the standard bullshit that everybody says. I, too, really like the idea, but I wonder if, in practice, it wouldn't work because companies don't introspect deeply enough to understand what makes them distinct? For instance, if what's remarkable about your company is that you have a great culture whe…
the other side of the coin. who would invest in such a company? a few people maybe but most probably not.
Re: We only hire the best means we only hire the trendiest (2016)
#626Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The average developer can't even CSS, What do you mean by that? How sophisticated is it to "do CSS"? When I've dealt with it, you basically look at the inspector and at your CSS libraries of preexisting classes, and basically do a combination of attaching classes and writing new ones with custom styles until you get it all to look right. What should I be looking to learn?
He means do it well . There's a lot to doing CSS well, and frankly I just don't have any interest in learning all the ins and outs. It's not a fun platform to work in, it's very fiddly, and it's not exactly programming either. There's an art-form to doing amazing pixel perfect web designs, and I really respect the people who are good at it. That's not me though, and it's never going to be me.
Re: We only hire the best means we only hire the trendiest (2016)
#627Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you're mostly talking about orthography (writing), and not language itself. You might be saying that because of the different writing systems, the spoken language is different today, which seems plausible. In any case, no matter how "mixed" a language's history is, I bet that for its native speakers, it is acquired as one language and feels like one language. When people learn and acquire language, they don't…
> I think you're mostly talking about orthography (writing), and not language itself. You might be saying that because of the different writing systems, the spoken language is different today, which seems plausible. In any case, no matter how "mixed" a language's history is, I bet that for its native speakers, it is acquired as one language and feels like one language. When people learn and acquire language, they don…
The beginning of your comment is still talking about the writing system. If you are a kid learning to speak (or in the rarer case that you never learn the writing system of the language) then you don't notice that the orthography is inconsistent. Furthermore, if you are a literate native speaker of a language whose orthography is very inconsistent to begin with, due to an extreme liberal use of loan words, introduced at different times, and pronunciation shifts (I'd say English is a good example), where technically knowing the origin of a word (and when English borrowed it) can help you match its spelling to its pronunciation, you still feel like you're only speaking and writing one language. I'd say an even a stronger example is writing systems that aren't phonetic at all, where no matter what you do you can't figure out the pronunciation from the orthography alone.
Your point about language nerds making up rules about how load words should behave is interesting and true I'd say in most modern languages whose societies contain... academics. That's why you "can't" split infinitives in English, end sentences with prepositions, or say "pendulums" and "octopuses". Unlike German, English doesn't have gendered nouns (pronouns excluded), but still people will try. See "alumnus". The argument about "Zucchini" might exist literally in English, but an analogous one for "Cannoli" certainly exists.
So I'd say your statements about German apply just as equally in English, and so perhaps other people can chime in whether they actually feel like they're speaking a "mixed" language, and at what point they felt like that. In a way, inevitably, almost all modern languages are "mixed".
I think you'll find with all your examples that there is contention. Aren't there German speakers who say "Pommes Frites" the German way and to hell with who ever says that's technically not correct? In the cases that it's not exactly contentious, there's still a funny feeling. Why do people want to say "Computer mouses" so much, even though they utter it and think afterwards "wait, computer mice??". When you take a suppletive form (irregular form) and put it in another context, it s up for debate (academic and probably inside your brain) what you do with it. Not exactly the same as what happens with loan words, but this demonstrates that when you look at language, you'll arrive at multiple answers for how things "should" be, and which one you actually say depends on some decision, by language nerds, or by youself consciously or unconsciously. Language rules are anything but simple!!
Re: We only hire the best means we only hire the trendiest (2016)
#628Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of my best friends has a MD and an MBA degree. He currently manages a $100M investment portfolio. We chat online almost daily. He is, by far, the worst speller I know. Even after 20+ years of online conversation, I can barely understand what he's saying sometimes. He also passes bits of professional writing past me for validation, usually to check his intent. His professional writing is always perfectly spelled,…
So your argument is that your rich friend can hire people to prof read his writing. So everyone else can do that to? That does sound like a solution that will work, but maybe not practical for everyone?
You keep looking for excuses, not solutions. He knew, and knows, he has a problem with spelling. So he does everything he can to get the help he needs to keep his spelling from limiting his career. He did it when he was a poor college student. Now, he can get secretaries to check, because he has a successful career built around his strengths, rather than letting his limitations define him.
Re: We only hire the best means we only hire the trendiest (2016)
#629Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are two problems: For employers, it's casting a wide net and then struggling to filter out "noise" quickly. Employers will use pass on great engineers and interview not-so great ones (see parent comment). Instead of saying, "Work for us, we're the best!" why don't engineering teams say, "We prioritize speed over quality, are great for individual contributors, and prefer asynchronous comms over lots of meetings.…
Again, I think the problem is bad devs that will apply for any job regardless of your stated values.
Re: We only hire the best means we only hire the trendiest (2016)
#630Earlier quoted context omitted.
Applicants do not self-filter. If you've ever read resumes for a job listing that haven't been prescreened, you'll be blown away by how many people refuse to self-filter even for basic fitness for the job. Put out a job listing asking for a college degree, and you'll get applicants who are still in school with their graduation date two years in the future looking for an internship. That's an extreme, but people will…
Most people are told to apply anyway, because most employers are setting the requirements ridiculously too high.
Unreasonable expectations created by hyperspecialization and role blending as part of corporate restructuring, or as pushed by the investors/stakeholders that follows economic recessions.
The expansionary period that follows provide people opportunity to leave, providing more liquidity in the labor market.
So talent leaves for greener pastures and now you have a hiring manager who's direct report has left them with a gaping hole and finance dictates that you have 1:1 for this spot.
So you type of the list of roles and responsibilities and send your requisition to HR to help find candidates. Meanwhile you assign out duties to remaining team members because work must get done.
The search lingers because the hiring manager looking for the proverbial purple squirrel, meanwhile the team seems to be handling the workload with no measurable impact on quality.
This then just repeats itself over and over, at companies large and small.
This is only one use case, there are many, but I think one that plays a big part in the problem of job search and matching talent with opportunity.