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

Having no experience can be better than having the wrong experience

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 215 posts

Re: Having no experience can be better than having the wrong experience

#31

Post by eastbound »

svnt wrote: post #15

In my experience, very high-performing teams are not rare outside of prestige employers, but the distribution is longer-tailed. Employees at prestige employers don’t want to consider that they might not be the best, or might not have to put up with all the corporate bureaucracy, so they erect barriers. For recruiters, recommending prestige resumes is just the equivalent of “nobody ever got fired for buying IBM”. Nobo…

Cue a random example: 2-people company bought for millions by Atlassian or 18-people company bought for billions by Facebook (Wasn’t Whatsapp 18 people?).

Re: Having no experience can be better than having the wrong experience

#32

Post by wulke »

This was also true in the military:

At basic training, our drill instructors often said that recruits with no experience shooting weapons were easier to train than other recruits who had experience because it was much easier to teach best practices to someone who was a "blank slate" than it was to retrain best practices to someone who learned improper methods.

I haven't exactly seen this idea like-for-like in the "corporate" world, but I believe the general premise is accurate.

Re: Having no experience can be better than having the wrong experience

#33

Post by antonymy »

I think it's also about the "culture fit" that these high prestige tech companies look for. Young people fresh out of school will not have been "tainted" by the workplace culture of other companies. Moreover, young people in general, but especially those still in the highly social school mindset, tend to be influenced by peers more easily than adults, especially jaded adults. This all makes young people fresh out of school much more easily molded to the company culture.

Re: Having no experience can be better than having the wrong experience

#34

Post by d--b »

> When I tried to get my first programming job, I got zero responses from major software companies.

> I accidentally did the right thing when I took a hardware job I was referred into at Google, because having a prestigious company on my resume was the right programmer class marker.

Yeah... Not everyone gets referred into Google.

Re: Having no experience can be better than having the wrong experience

#35

Post by eastbound »

madrox wrote: post #4

As a hiring manager, I've found entry level roles to be the hardest to fill well. No metric is a guarantee of a quality candidate. I loathe whiteboard programming, but for entry level jobs it's at least a signal that they're putting in the work to figure out how to be successful within a structure. Beyond that, I want a narrative for the candidate's career...both where they've been and where they want to go. It helps…

I’d love to have a candidate who tells me “I love creating products”. I’ve hired a 100% junior, no school (formerly teacher), he kicks ass, I’ve increased his salary by 10% every 2 months since 8 months. He just loves the art of creating a product, maintaining it in prod, interviewing customers…

You are correct, it’s incredibly hard to detect.

Re: Having no experience can be better than having the wrong experience

#36

Post by cupofpython »

thaumaturgy wrote: post #25

I'm experiencing this now and it's taking some energy to not become disillusioned with the industry. Generalists, or people with a "wide T", are also a lot less valuable than specialists. For any given technology or stack right now, some company out there is doing something cool with it, and they only want to hire people who are already familiar with their particular configuration. The couple of tech interviews I've…

> you have to make big decisions early on about what you're most interested in and then pursue a deep specialization in it

I am seeing similar trends to you wrt Generalists, and this is annoying but good advice.

Even when hired, generalists tend to get stuck with all the most tedious work from every department that simply no one wants to do. You end up being a one-stop shop for all intern and junior related work, with the added bonus of being invited to a lot of meetings and not getting credit (appropriate $ compensation) for your influence in those meetings.

I've settled on the belief that general knowledge is something you do for yourself, and to help set you apart from other specialists. It doesn't pay you directly. I've got almost a decade of general business and analytics knowledge, and always seems to stall out on the climb in ways you describe (not dropping the right software name brand). Time to make a bet

Re: Having no experience can be better than having the wrong experience

#38

Post by nnoitra »

darth_avocado wrote: post #11

It is definitely true for the most part. I took a software engineering job in A software firm that’s considered on of the OG Silicon Valley company after I graduated. Unfortunately, I very quickly realized that whenever I applied to FAANG or other “SV cool kids” companies, I would not get an opportunity, meanwhile, new grads from my same Uni kept getting those jobs. You don’t get interviews because you work at a non…

What should a new grad do to avoid starting at the wrong company? Stay unemployed?

Re: Having no experience can be better than having the wrong experience

#39

Post by dilyevsky »

strgcmc wrote: post #18
heavenlyblue wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "I work for the highest bidder" Uhm, I find people like these are actually the easiest to keep. They know their price and define it. You know what to expect.

There is a difference between (A) a skilled expert who takes pride in their craft, and understandably goes with whichever employer appreciates their skills and compensates accordingly, vs (B) a middle-of-the-pack journeyman who just DGAF about their work and treats all jobs as equally disposable and replaceable (these are also the types of people who are likely to try out /r/overemployed, cuz why not). We may all pre…

> As an employer, it makes total sense to invest in and pay more for (A)'s, but you're throwing money away to try and woo (B)'s

By that same logic most managers also fall into B just like ICs. So that statement is incorrect - Bs are perfect material for empire building and As are usually not

Post reply on HN