Category: Interview tips
I Heard That Company Was Horrible (three years ago) – Truth in Company Reputation
Let’s start with a brief exercise.
- First, name three companies in your area that you have heard negative details about from other software engineers (sweatshop, poor code base, horrible software processes, buggy product, low salaries, etc.). Places you would probably never work.
- Got it? Now name three companies in your area that you have heard stories about, and you would classify them as great places to work. Places that you would pick up and leave your job for tomorrow.
If I had to guess I would say that the first question was probably much easier to answer than the second, and the obvious reason is that bad news is sticky and tends to travel fast. There is evidence of why this happens – read about the availability heuristic as an example. Your ability to recall a co-worker saying his former employer was ‘pleasant’ is lower than your ability to recall him saying that ‘the place was a sweatshop’. Casual sports fans will know OJ Simpson or Kobe Bryant more about them from tabloid headlines than their impressive athletic statistics. The same goes for anecdotal evidence about technology companies, and unfortunately some technologists miss out on great opportunities based on what is often dated or inaccurate information.
When I start a search for software engineering talent with a new client company, I know that it is only a matter of time before I will hear a candidate telling me that he/she has heard that my client has flaws. No company is immune, and I always dig deeper to find out what the candidate has heard. Sometimes the information is so outlandish that it can be immediately dismissed, but more often than not there is some truth in the dirt, and it’s important to find out as early as possible about any skeletons in the closet.
When presented with patterns of information that paint my client in an unflattering light, I go to the client with the ‘word on the street’ and ask if there is any merit to the stories. Most shops own up to past sins and how they remedied the situation, or sometimes they say that the issue is still an issue.
Part of the problem is a general mistrust of the messenger (recruiters) by the tech community, with the prevailing thought that recruiters lie. Some do. Another potential issue is that companies looking to hire tend to describe their environment as they would like it to be and not as it actually is. Self-assessments of work environment, the quality of an engineering team, and internal development process will often be at least slightly biased. Lastly, the web is a tremendous resource for finding negative opinions on companies from disgruntled former employees, but probably not a great tool for honest company reviews.
The inspiration for this blog post was a discussion I had last week with a candidate. I was giving him details on a new client company and the candidate told me that he had heard a few years ago that they suffered from high turnover, poor technical leadership, and the engineering staff was overworked. I told him I would look into this as I had not heard any of it before, and this candidate told me that at this point he was not interested in pursuing the opportunity.
I immediately contacted an engineering director at the client and asked about the feedback. The manager responded that their turnover was about industry average and provided numbers for the past year. He told me that there indeed were two managers who were ineffective and they had been released earlier in the year, and the managers that replaced them have received positive reviews from their engineering teams. Lastly, the manager described several improvements they have made over the past two years to try and appease the development staff. These changes included the creation of an application support group that would tackle client issues and bug fixes that the development team had previously handled, upgrading the physical office space and equipment, and redesigning the floor plan to increase developer collaboration.
I was quite pleased with this response, as it answered all of my candidate’s concerns while acknowledging that there was some historical truth to the information. When I shared this information with the candidate, he felt that he would like to pursue the opportunity. I don’t know if he will or won’t get the job at this point, but his ability to keep an open mind at least gives him the chance to compete for a good career opportunity.
Simply put, a bad reputation or stereotype is difficult for any organization to overcome, even if the information is old or completely inaccurate. Many companies are able to change with the times and make improvements over time, and technology companies are perhaps more adept at reinventing themselves just based on the ever-changing world of software development. If you don’t want to miss a potential great opportunity, weigh the evidence you have seen and keep an open mind.
How Employers Measure Passion in Software Engineering Candidates (and how to express your passion in resumes and interviews)
Over the past few months I have had some exchanges with small company executives and hiring managers which have opened my eyes to what I consider a relatively new wrinkle in the software development hiring world. I have been recruiting software engineers for 14 years, and I don’t recall another time where I’ve observed this at the same level. Here are two examples.
The first incident was related to a candidate (‘A’) resume that I submitted to a local start-up. A was well-qualified for the position based on the technical specifications the client gave me, and I anticipated that at worst a phone screen for A would be automatic. I even went as far as to share A’s interview availability. A day after hitting ‘send’, I received feedback that the hiring manager was not interested in an interview. A large part of the manager’s reasoning was related to the fact that A had taken a two year sabbatical to pursue a degree in a non-technical discipline and subsequently took a job in that field for a brief stint, before returning to the software world a few years ago. I clarified information about A to be sure that the manager had full understanding of the situation, and the verdict was upheld – no interview.
My second anecdote involves another candidate (‘B’) that I presented for a position with a different client company. B was someone I would classify as a junior level candidate overall and probably ‘borderline qualified’ for the role. B had roughly the minimum amount of required experience with a few gaps, and I was not 100% confident that B would be invited in. B was brought in for an interview, performed about average on the technical portions, and shined interpersonally.
As this company does not make a habit of hiring average engineers, I was at least a bit surprised when an offer was made. I was told that a contributing factor for making the offer was that B’s ‘extracurricular activities’ were, according to my client, indicative of someone that was going to be a great engineer (though B’s current skills were average). B’s potential wasn’t being assessed as if B were an entry level engineer with a solid academic background, but rather the potential was assessed based on B’s interest in software.
There are obviously many other stories like these, and the link between them seems obvious. Software firms that are hiring engineers (smaller shops in particular) appear to be qualifying and quantifying a candidate’s passion with the same level of scrutiny that they use in trying to measure technical skills and culture fit. Historically, companies have reviewed resumes and conducted interviews to answer the question, ‘Can this candidate perform the task at hand?‘. For my purposes as a recruiter of engineers, the question can be oversimplified as ‘Can he/she code?’. It seems the trend is to follow that question with ‘Does he/she CARE about the job, the company, and the craft?’.
If you lack passion for the industry, be advised that in future job interviews you may be judged on this quality. Whether you love coding or not, reading further will give you some insight. Engineer A is a cautionary tale, while B is someone the passionate will want to emulate. Let’s start with A.
Candidate A never had a chance, and I’ll shoulder partial responsibility for that. A was rejected based solely on a resume and my accompanying notes, so theoretically A could be extremely passionate about software engineering without appearing to be so on paper. Applicants do take some potential risks by choosing to include irrelevant experience, education, or even hobbies on a resume, and I will often warn my candidates of items that could cause alarm. In this case, A’s inclusion of both job details and advanced degrees in another discipline were judged as a red flag that A might decide to again leave the software industry. A similar conclusion could have been reached if A had listed hobbies that evidenced a deep-rooted drive toward something other than engineering (say, studying for a certification in a trade).
Another related mistake on resumes is an Objective section that does not reflect the job for which you are applying. I have witnessed candidates being rejected for interviews based on an objective, and the most common example is when a candidate seeking a dev job lists ‘technical lead’ or ‘manager’ in the objective. Typical feedback might sound like this: ‘Our job is a basic development position, and if she only wants to be in a leadership slot she would not be happy with the role’. Listing the type of job that you are passionate about is essential if you are going to include an objective. I prefer that candidates avoid an objective section to avoid this specific danger, as most job seekers are open to more than one possible hiring scenario.
Since the search starts out with the resume, be sure to list all of the details about you that demonstrate your enthusiasm. This should include relevant education, professional experience, and hobbies or activities that pertain to engineering. When listing your professional experience, emphasize the elements of your job that were the most relevant to what you want to do. If you want to strictly do development, downplay the details of your sys admin or QA tasks (a mention could be helpful, just don’t dwell). When listing your academic credentials, recent grads should be sure to provide specifics on classes relevant to your job goals, and it may be in your best interest to remove degrees or advanced courses unrelated to engineering.
In my experience, the most commonly overlooked resume details that would indicate passion are:
- participation in open source projects
- membership in user groups or meetups
- conference attendance
- public-speaking appearances
- engineering-related hobbies (e.g. Arduino, personal/organizational websites you built or maintain, tech blogging)
- technical volunteer/non-profit experience
If any of the above are not on your resume, be sure to include them before your next job search.
Assuming that you get the opportunity to interview, try to gracefully and tactfully include some details from the bulleted list above. Your reading habits and technologies you self-study are best mentioned in interviews, as they may seem less appropriate as resume material.
Conclusion: Most candidates should feel free to at least mention interests that are not engineering related if the opportunity presents itself, as companies tend to like hiring employees that are not strictly one-dimensional. Just be sure not to overemphasize interests or activities that could be misinterpreted as future career goals. Passion alone won’t get you a job, but it can certainly make a difference in a manager’s decision on who to hire (candidate B) and who not to even interview (candidate A). Make sure you use your resume and interview time to show your passion.
If you found this post useful, you may find my ebook Job Tips For GEEKS: The Job Search very helpful. You can also follow Job Tips For Geeks on Facebook, Twitter, and Google +.
Job Tips For Geeks 