Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What technical recruiters want from engineering candidates

keyvalues.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 212 posts

Re: What technical recruiters want from engineering candidates

#81

Post by alxlaz »

Androider wrote: post #68
alxlaz wrote: post #32

I was going to write a long and detailed post about how so many of these things are so very wrong from a technical standpoint, but basically, let me sum up the recruiting industry in a single quote from this material: > Watch for spelling and grammar. [..] After conducting my own A/B tests on this matter, the data showed that candidates who had untidy resumes faired less (sic!) than those with well written ones. Edit…

As someone who has done a lot of hiring, I've observed a strong correlation between spelling/grammar and the best programmers I've worked with. Details matter, and by failing to even read over your own submission you're showing you don't care about such details. Your commit messages and code isn't likely to impress anyone either. Being able to write really well can also make you stand out and do wonders for your care…

I absolutely agree. Every single good programmer I know is also exceptionally adept at written communication (and, indeed, really nice). They tend to be good at oral communication, too, but it's a little hard to get an accurate reading of that in an interview.

The part I quoted is representative of the recruiting industry because it has a spelling mistake. It's "fared", not "faired", and unless "fared less" is some strange idiom that I'm not familiar with (I'm not a native English speaker, and I'm more familiar with British English than with American English), I could swear it's fared worse (or less well, if you must).

This is... very representative of the recruiting industry, in my experience.

Re: What technical recruiters want from engineering candidates

#82

Post by danaliv »

Sir_Cmpwn wrote: post #30
falcolas wrote: post #22

In my opinion: - designing your resume - EQ - having a deep, enthusiastic, and genuine interest in some aspect of the company - Think of your resume like a poem - visual representation of their experience/resume These are great criteria for hiring a designer or marketing personnel, but these are TERRIBLE criteria for hiring a technical person. In my fantasy world, a technical resume is in a monospaced font and is emi…

A good balance between highly technical and creatively designed is to write your resume with TeX.

I used to think this was a good idea, but I see so many resumes done in TeX that they cease to stand out.

Re: What technical recruiters want from engineering candidates

#83

Post by EADGBE »

bitwize wrote: post #48

Crooters never seem to be asking a whole lot, as they always seem to think I'm a "great fit" for any company currently waving money under their nose. Of course it usually takes some prodding to discover that the crooter actually knows nothing about my background, is ill qualified to determine who is a fit, and I wouldn't want to work for their client anyway.

Upvote for "crooter"

Re: What technical recruiters want from engineering candidates

#84

Post by amorphid »

ken wrote: post #78

> It may seem like common sense, but having a deep, enthusiastic, and genuine interest in some aspect of the company (whether it’s the company’s mission, product, technical challenges, or its work environment) is important. This frustrates me so much. What if I can't find a company that offers any such thing? This seems like anti-common sense to me. If you have skills at carpentry, and do a professional job, you can…

The way I think of it is that we haven't yet figured out concrete ways to assess whether someone can or can't be an effective developer on a team. So if you want me to hire you, and I can't directly measure your skills (because I'm a suboptimal interviewer?), then I need data points that increase my confidence that you are more likely to work out.

This is a 100% contrived, but here's an example...

- I run a dev team largely using Microsoft tech

- You are a Java developer

- I had a Java developer try out the Microsoft stuff, and quit because they decided they didn't wanna go all in on C#

- If you're work experience in largely in Java, but I see you spending a lot of time writing C# in your personal time, or somehow demonstrating a passion for you, I'm more likely to think you'll be a fit.

Maybe asking people to demonstrate a passion for tech is related to feeling defensive about that tech. Plenty of back-end-y developers trash talk CSS and JavaScript. Someone who works on front-end stuff all day long might not like that trend, so they filter for people excited about JavaScript, and I can't say I'd blame them for that.

Re: What technical recruiters want from engineering candidates

#85

Post by AnimalMuppet »

s73v3r_ wrote: post #9
danesparza wrote: post #6

I would absolutely love to see a thoughtful 'what engineers want from technical recruiters' post.

Wouldn't that just say, "To be left alone"?

No. When you're thinking about leaving your current job anyway, the right phone call can be golden.

But, if I tell you that I'm not interested now, and probably won't be for at least the next six months, don't call me back next week.

Re: What technical recruiters want from engineering candidates

#86

Post by arthev »

cuddlypsycho wrote: post #49

"EQ and self awareness" What a crock of sh*t!! This is what happens when you pack HR departments with humanities and gender studies majors. Personally I do not read any resumes, all the hiring I've done was either by referral or through online websites like angelList. This is my process: - Check your linkedIn, look at your experience and education. Catchy schools and companies is good BUT also that you are not a bran…

>"Personally I do not read any resumes"

>"Check your linkedIn, look at your experience and education. Catchy schools and companies is good BUT also that you are not a branch hopper"

So... you read resumes?

Re: What technical recruiters want from engineering candidates

#87

Post by Sir_Cmpwn »

danaliv wrote: post #82
Sir_Cmpwn wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A good balance between highly technical and creatively designed is to write your resume with TeX.

I used to think this was a good idea, but I see so many resumes done in TeX that they cease to stand out.

Of course, just throwing TeX at your resume isn't enough. However, TeX gives you tools at an engineer's level which can be used to make your resume stand out.

Re: What technical recruiters want from engineering candidates

#88

Post by mixmastamyk »

commandlinefan wrote: post #71
falcolas wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My current resume has approximately 6 different fonts, left and right justified fields, bullet points, and tables just so it looks just good enough to get past the HR drones (many of whom are wonderful people despite being a resume gatekeeper). It was an agonizing process, but the end result is something that recruiters recognize as being well designed. I hate having to maintain it. That's what I mean by pretending.

> 6 different fonts Dear God, is that really what they're looking for? Tech hiring gets more ridiculous every day.

Don't believe 6 different fonts in a piece is considered good design.

Re: What technical recruiters want from engineering candidates

#89

Post by cuddlypsycho »

arthev wrote: post #86
cuddlypsycho wrote: post #49

"EQ and self awareness" What a crock of sh*t!! This is what happens when you pack HR departments with humanities and gender studies majors. Personally I do not read any resumes, all the hiring I've done was either by referral or through online websites like angelList. This is my process: - Check your linkedIn, look at your experience and education. Catchy schools and companies is good BUT also that you are not a bran…

>"Personally I do not read any resumes" >"Check your linkedIn, look at your experience and education. Catchy schools and companies is good BUT also that you are not a branch hopper" So... you read resumes?

It is different. An applicant is free to put whatever they want on a resume and I will have no way of verifying it without devoting a ton of time to the process.

On LinkedIn they are less likely to make stuff up. The public nature of the process keeps people a bit more honest.

So yes, if I get a .pdf/.txt/.word/etc resume emailed to me I will not read it.

Re: What technical recruiters want from engineering candidates

#90

Post by gervase »

alkonaut wrote: post #55

If someone has insight into recruiting, can you explain why contacts sound like sales pitches with vague language? “You’ll work with the core of our digital strategy” “You’ll work close to the systems” “You’ll have a central role” What systems? What is the company even doing ? What about fundamental things like - where is this? - exactly what is the work I’m supposed to be doing here? - What’s the team? 4 beginners?…

Partially, this is based on a disconnect between engineering and hiring. For example, the people who are writing the job descriptions got a 1-line email, "We need to expand the engineering team; could you take care of it? Thanks!", and so they're basically having to come up with all this on their own.

Their first stop is probably a Google search: "example job description software engineering"

Then, they replace the buzzwords with their own buzzwords, which they probably already know, and they're done. This takes much less time than scheduling time with the engineering team, and since they'll be doing the interviews anyway, what's the harm? Their part of the job is already done.

The second part is that companies are doing the same thing that applicants are doing with their resumes; they don't want to put any red flags out there, in order to keep their possible pool of matches as large as possible. There's a chance they can persuade you to ignore a red flag if they talk to you; if they list it in the job description, there's a 0% chance.

Examples of information that might be excluded:

> where is this?

- It's in the suburbs outside Reno, NV.

> exactly what is the work I’m supposed to be doing here?

- You'll be maintaining our undocumented, 12-year old legacy backend.

> What’s the team? 4 beginners? 4000 experienced devs?

- I literally have no idea, I was just given a budget and a number of slots to fill.

> What tech is used

- Something you've never heard of, running on top of PHP 4.

> what is it about my skill set that makes me a good fit?

- We will literally take anyone who can FizzBuzz.

Finally, there are some dog-whistle/shibboleth phrasing that seems perfectly clear to the person who wrote the description, but might not be clear to you. Examples:

> “You’ll work with the core of our digital strategy”

- You'll be working on our product that is the closest to making money (or actually makes some! who knows).

> “You’ll work close to the systems”

- You'll be doing some DevOps as well.

> “You’ll have a central role”

- We have a small team.

And so on.

Post reply on HN