Why You Didn't Get The Interview, Part II • Hacker News Board

Re: Why You Didn't Get The Interview, Part II

#31

Post by fecak » Wed, Jul 10, 2013, 8:23 PM UTC

microtherion wrote: post #25

michaelochurch wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd name the law after the guy who told me this but I don't have explicit permission (he'd probably be OK with it, but I don't see him often and he's a well-known CS person) so let's just call it Smith's Nineteenth Rule: the quality of a candidate is inversely proportionate to the number or technologies listed on the resume. One startup idea I've had is a scarce resume system where people are limited to 7 technologie…

the quality of a candidate is inversely proportionate to the number or technologies listed on the resume. In some cases, maybe, but there are genuinely people who have worked in lots of technologies, and others who have stuck with the same stack (in other fields, this is also known as the fox vs. hedgehog paradigm). Making both types list the same number of technologies elides an useful distinction. I also find it so…

The difference here is people who have worked with a technology and people who are listing technologies that they have 2 weeks with in the same group as the technology they have 5 years in. I'd hope that you would somehow differentiate your expertise in C++ from your rusty Tcl/Tk. If you list them side by side with no differentiation, it almost serves as you misrepresenting yourself (not intentionally perhaps). If you are providing perspective as you say, you are not part of the problem here.

It is a bit naive to advise candidates to be selective when they know that a machine might be ranking their words. If candidates that have 9 page resumes and 2 pages of buzzwords stop getting phone calls and find out why, that will solve the problem eventually.

Re: Why You Didn't Get The Interview, Part II

#32

Post by throwaway420 » Wed, Jul 10, 2013, 9:09 PM UTC

michaelochurch wrote: post #5

tootie wrote: post #2

A lot of times I see a resume with a laundry list of skills at the top like languages, app servers, CMS systems etc. First I thing I do is check the experience and make sure the skills are actually mentioned as having been used on a project. Otherwise, I assume you are padding to meet the req.

I'd name the law after the guy who told me this but I don't have explicit permission (he'd probably be OK with it, but I don't see him often and he's a well-known CS person) so let's just call it Smith's Nineteenth Rule: the quality of a candidate is inversely proportionate to the number or technologies listed on the resume. One startup idea I've had is a scarce resume system where people are limited to 7 technologie…

Doesn't relying on people to accurately rate themselves make their rating sort of susceptible to the Dunning–Kruger effect?

Re: Why You Didn't Get The Interview, Part II

#33

Post by fecak » Wed, Jul 10, 2013, 9:37 PM UTC

throwaway420 wrote: post #32

michaelochurch wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd name the law after the guy who told me this but I don't have explicit permission (he'd probably be OK with it, but I don't see him often and he's a well-known CS person) so let's just call it Smith's Nineteenth Rule: the quality of a candidate is inversely proportionate to the number or technologies listed on the resume. One startup idea I've had is a scarce resume system where people are limited to 7 technologie…

Doesn't relying on people to accurately rate themselves make their rating sort of susceptible to the Dunning–Kruger effect?

Resumes suffer the same problem, which is why something like the product I'm working on GeekRez at least takes a bit of that effect away. References are also one part, but again it's easy for most people to get someone to say they are good.

On a resume you can say you are the best in the world. You control your self-assessment on a resume, but have no control over what someone thinks of your code or what someone thinks of your answers on Stack Overflow (reflected in your reputation).

Re: Why You Didn't Get The Interview, Part II

#34

Post by d23 » Thu, Jul 11, 2013, 3:17 AM UTC

xxpor wrote: post #21

d23 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you list more than 10 languages, all on equal footing, and you have no portfolio or explanation for all of them to back it up, I assume you're full of shit and your resume goes in the trash. These people generally have no cover letter or explanation for why they're even applying for the job in the first place either.

Do people usually send you cover letters? No one I know of (in my tiny personal bubble of EECS majors) ever writes a cover letter.

I don't expect a full formal letter, but something explaining briefly why you actually think you're good for this position or this company is the least one can do.

Re: Why You Didn't Get The Interview, Part II

#35

Post by tootie » Fri, Jul 12, 2013, 2:58 PM UTC

d23 wrote: post #16

tootie wrote: post #2

A lot of times I see a resume with a laundry list of skills at the top like languages, app servers, CMS systems etc. First I thing I do is check the experience and make sure the skills are actually mentioned as having been used on a project. Otherwise, I assume you are padding to meet the req.

If you list more than 10 languages, all on equal footing, and you have no portfolio or explanation for all of them to back it up, I assume you're full of shit and your resume goes in the trash. These people generally have no cover letter or explanation for why they're even applying for the job in the first place either.

I posted this because I had just been handed a resume with this pitfall. Asked him about mystery skills X & Y and he told he had done some training, but never used them on a project. Lesson is: don't lie.