Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think part of the problem is the titles themselves... "Senior" implies "Highly Experienced" meaning "lots of years of experience". Whereas it's completely possible for a person with 3-4 years of experience to be a "Very Good Engineer" within their specific domain and be as valuable, respected, listened-to, etc. as a "Senior Engineer". It doesn't happen often, but it happens. If we had titles more like "Apprentice",…
> "Senior" implies "Highly Experienced" meaning "lots of years of experience". Not necessarily. Medicine has "Senior Resident" or similar in some countries as the last step before becoming an independent physician. Law and finance have senior associate before junior partner.
61% of “Entry-Level” Jobs Require 3+ Years of Experience
271–280 of 364 posts
Re: 61% of “Entry-Level” Jobs Require 3+ Years of Experience
#272Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "Senior" implies "Highly Experienced" meaning "lots of years of experience". Not necessarily. Medicine has "Senior Resident" or similar in some countries as the last step before becoming an independent physician. Law and finance have senior associate before junior partner.
Well we're talking about developers, not physicians or attorneys. We don't have multiple steps like resident, physician, associate, partner, etc.
Re: 61% of “Entry-Level” Jobs Require 3+ Years of Experience
#273Earlier quoted context omitted.
Entry Level ought to be 'willing to train', Junior, some experience, Senior, 8+ years of experience. Sadly title inflation is also a thing.
I think part of the problem is the titles themselves... "Senior" implies "Highly Experienced" meaning "lots of years of experience". Whereas it's completely possible for a person with 3-4 years of experience to be a "Very Good Engineer" within their specific domain and be as valuable, respected, listened-to, etc. as a "Senior Engineer". It doesn't happen often, but it happens. If we had titles more like "Apprentice",…
Re: 61% of “Entry-Level” Jobs Require 3+ Years of Experience
#274Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's nothing wrong with " Senior ". Lots of years of experience translate to having a proven track record of delivered value, along with management skills and experience of failure, things that can't be substituted by talent or knowledge acquired from reading about the works of others. > a person with 3-4 years of experience to be a "Very Good Engineer" Not the same thing — this is actually the same problem as wit…
Lots of years of experience prove nothing. If someone was working for 10 years in Java backend apps, using outdated tech and in an environment that delivered value is secondary to risk, he/she is not senior. 3 years is minimum for getting close to being competent. I would argue that before that you will deliver very little.
If you take language out of it, the experience is easily transferable.
The problem is everyone thinks their project/product is special and they're inventing something completely new. You're not. Sorry. This is software where everything old is new again.
Re: 61% of “Entry-Level” Jobs Require 3+ Years of Experience
#275Earlier quoted context omitted.
How did they get to be seniors in their companies? They didn't give the title to themselves, so someone must value their skills. Is having the title mutually exclusive to being humble or self aware?
Some years ago they introduced job titles at the place where I work. My boss asked me: which job title do you want? I said: senior developer. Her said: ok. Master of the universe would have passed too.
Re: 61% of “Entry-Level” Jobs Require 3+ Years of Experience
#276Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have seen senior engineers with 1.5 years of experience and totally confident (in startup). And my lifelong experience is that such pepole have pretty good careers, better then humble more self aware people.
How did they get to be seniors in their companies? They didn't give the title to themselves, so someone must value their skills. Is having the title mutually exclusive to being humble or self aware?
LinkedIn is full of people who have mysteriously sprouted a Senior prefix that they definitely didn’t have when I was at the same company at the same time. So it probably is self-granted in most cases.
Re: 61% of “Entry-Level” Jobs Require 3+ Years of Experience
#277Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was also a recruiter for a while and when hiring I am always amazed at the absolute dismal amount of effort given when people apply for good jobs. Hiring is hard, someone with the right skill set will have a terrible mentality, hiring for the mentality is extremely tricky and can lead you down the road of groupthink if you're not careful. I'm still amazed how entirely incompetent people rise to managerial levels on…
If you have to apply to 250+ jobs just to get one, you can't invest much effort into each application. I've been a part-time developer for three years (and worked full-time on top of that), and I'm looking for a full-time position. I gave up on tech after applying to 500+ jobs and getting three interviews and zero offers. The closest I got was a consulting outfit in a small city in the Inland North, where one of the…
Sadly, the hiring process for developers has turned into not much more than hazing.
Re: 61% of “Entry-Level” Jobs Require 3+ Years of Experience
#278Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "Senior" implies "Highly Experienced" meaning "lots of years of experience". Not necessarily. Medicine has "Senior Resident" or similar in some countries as the last step before becoming an independent physician. Law and finance have senior associate before junior partner.
Well we're talking about developers, not physicians or attorneys. We don't have multiple steps like resident, physician, associate, partner, etc.
Re: 61% of “Entry-Level” Jobs Require 3+ Years of Experience
#279Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 2) Yes. Half or more of the applications I've reviewed are totally unqualified. Either they ignored the requirements or fudge it and flop on the interview. I mean if you are calling something "entry level position" and have "requires 3 years experience in the field", I'd expect people to apply anyway. I remember when I was fresh out of college all the entry positions I saw required several years of experience. If y…
>when I was fresh out of college all the entry positions I saw required several years of experience Same. That struck me as particularly BS'y. I asked career counselors at my school about that and they said to "embellish" my background a bit, but not to lie. The specific advice I got was if you worked as a developer on a short term project a year ago that would count as a year of work. If asked about it the advice wa…
I would love to see job postings that require 2,000+ hours of experience for junior level or 10,000+ hours for senior level.
Re: 61% of “Entry-Level” Jobs Require 3+ Years of Experience
#280Until very recently I was frontend lead for a fairly large UK site, and one of the best hires I ever made was a 32 year old former-recruiter with no commercial programming experience, and no CS background.
However it was far from plain sailing. We had mutual friends and whilst chatting in a pub, and they won me over with their passion and enthusiasm for what I discovered was their dream job.
I brought them on as a jr, into a small talented team with measures in place to ensure there was the opportunity to learn on the job and appropriate tasks to work on, but it quickly became apparent they were out of their depth. I worked on mentoring in work and and pointed them in the direction of stuff they might look at outside of work to dodge the bullet.
My work started to suffer because I was spending so much time mentoring, fixing code that had become irrevocably tangled and trying to manage a very stressed & frustrated jr dev.
Eventually I had no choice but to move them into a different team where the work was less technically demanding and more html/css focused, with a small salary cut. Everybody was disappointed with the situation but the alternative was letting them go.
Three years later, that dev rejoined the core engineering team a more experienced developer, passion intact, and having learned their trade in a lower pressure environment, comfortable they could handle the role. I'm incredibly proud of them for the way they handled the situation and am absolutely confident this time will be a success.
That said, it'll probably be the last time I hire a dev with zero development experience. As an investment in an individual it's incredibly worthwhile, but despite the happy ending, the whole experience was fairly disastrous.