
The Startup Resume - dwynings
http://justinkan.com/the-startup-resume
======
Swizec
This is the resume that has gotten me at least a call-back from every startup
I have ever sent it to: [paraphrased since I type the email every time anew]

Hi,

I'm a coder from Slovenia.

I like writing JavaScript and Python. I'm learning Haskell.

Here is my github: <http://github.com/Swizec>

I have a blog at <http://swizec.com>

Most recently I did cool thing X <relevant link, this changes every couple of
months>

Cheers, ~Swizec

~~~
rexreed
Has it worked? Which startup are you with now? I see from your blog you are
interviewing with Google (not a startup anymore), but still not bad. Are you
still open to finding the right fit with a startup? Are you "startup friendly"
(appropriate expectations of work hours, pay, and equity)? I find the latter
to be the biggest hangup in folks that we're looking to add to our team. They
like the tech challenge, but can't really grok the startup work environment.

~~~
jmspring
I'm not sure why but the phrase "Are you 'startup friendly' (appropriate
expectations of work hours, pay, and equity)?" just rubs me the wrong way.

Joining a startup is a two way street. If you are considering joining one, you
should do as much diligence (or even more) than they are doing on you. I,
personally, love startups -- the energy, the diversity of problems, the
ability to learn and grow. But, I've also been bitten by all the glitz (early
in my career during bubble one) as well as people that thing "it's a startup"
is an excuse to demand above and beyond efforts on a regular basis.

In general, you are going to work more at a startup, you may or may not get
paid less, and you will need to weigh the whole work/life balance thing, most
likely. You might be asked to make a tradeoff between equity and salary.

The tangibles you have control over (salary, time you are willing to commit,
etc) are the ones you need to weigh. But, you also need to understand as much
as you can about the expectations of those in management.

Poor planning, for instance, should never be excuse by "this is a startup" --
I don't mean pivoting, I don't mean tweaking as new information comes along, I
mean those people that can't make up their mind on what constitutes the
expected deliverable by a particular date.

~~~
rexreed
I think you have it reverse -- I'm not in search to join a startup, I'm in
search of others to join me. Basically, what I'm finding is that many of the
candidates I'm interviewing have entirely the wrong expectations for joining a
startup... at least in my geographic region (mid-Atlantic US). I'm sure it's
different in your locale. But around these parts, many candidates for the
startup positions simply aren't "startup friendly".

------
kevingadd
Am I correct in interpreting this post as saying that generalists don't get
hired at startups, and that you should optimize your resume to look like a
specialist? That seems pretty counter-intuitive, since at an early stage
startup, employees end up wearing many hats.

~~~
justin
Generalist programmers get hired all the time at startups; as someone else
mentioned, requirements are always changing and it often doesn't make sense to
specialize immediately. At Justin.tv, we hired a ton of generalists before we
ever hired any specialists.

What I meant in the post was that if you are going to be programming then you
need to demonstrate that you are a good programmer, hopefully with some
specific abilities or experience that demonstrates you'll be able to work on
the actual problems of the company. We hire people all the time that don't
have massive experience in web development, but they demonstrate skill in some
related way (e.g. maybe they talk about how they've used Python for scripting
in their phd work). Anyways, the point is that even a generalist has specific
projects that demonstrate they are a good programmer, and this goes beyond
just listing a ton of languages they've dabbled in. Good programmers are
generally very good at specific stuff they have experience in, and aren't
necessarily good yet but can become good in other areas.

~~~
tmurray
I read your post and this comment as arguing for resumes to focus on
achievements ("this awesome thing is my fault") rather than tasks ("I did
thing X as a means to an end while in role Y"). Is that a fair summary?

If so, I think you're off the mark a bit when you say this applies only to
startups; I think this applies when you are applying to specific roles at a
company, regardless of the company's size. I don't work at a startup at all,
but resumes with lists of papers with no direct relevance where the candidate
is one of 10 co-authors, academic honors, TA positions that are irrelevant to
the job at hand, lots of description about a former team's job rather than
what the candidate did, etc. make my brain glaze over. I have to spend more
time looking for the core nuggets of achievement buried within, and that's
generally not time I have. It's not necessarily a killer for someone's
interview process, but it's certainly not fun and drains my time.

Meanwhile, people I encounter outside of the normal resume-submission process
who simply point out something really cool they've done? If it's something
really awesome, they get recruited, no real resume required.

------
zackzackzack
Sounds like an excellent in-comment writing exercise.

Zack's Resume (ala Justin Kan):

If I could, I would spend all day rolling around in data. I have fond memories
of spending a weekend graphing the comments of top posters on Hacker News[0].
In the next week or two, I will be opening a pull request for d3.js for an
easy way to do fisheye distortions on geographic maps[1]. I got a beating over
winter break trying to convert the R project into JavaScript via
emscripten[2].

Hire me so I can make your data beautiful[3].

[0]<https://github.com/zmaril/HN-Visual-Comments>

[1]<http://mbostock.github.com/d3/>

[2]<https://github.com/zmaril/emscripten/tree/herecomesdrtran>

[3]<https://www.odesk.com/users/~~80bea7ba2750c34b> (Shameless misdirecting
plug)

~~~
mattdeboard
That's a cover letter.

You're not helping an overworked/exasperated resume reader by writing prose in
your resume, IMO (for what it's worth...). Resume should be bulletized
chronological work history with most relevant/interesting stuff getting a
sentence or two of explanation.

Leave long-form prose to the cover letter. And that is a pretty good cover
letter, zackzackzack.

~~~
jsprinkles
Sometimes I'd much rather have a little bit of detail on an accomplishment or
point than a couple sentences of a bullet point. If I end up confused because
of someone sticking to this rule, I get annoyed.

~~~
mattdeboard
Yeah but it's so hard to tell when it's appropriate. It's subjective. I think
everyone just has to find what works for them and go with it, hopefully
achievements speak for themselves (with the help of a good cover letter).

------
6ren
Your cover letter (i.e. email) is far more important. Four short (1-2
sentences) paragraphs:

    
    
      1. why you are choosing *them*
      2. your basic competence for the job
      3. what special talent you bring, that makes you outstanding
      4. why you'll get along with them, be a good fit socially

------
claudiusd
As the CTO hiring my first developers, I'm looking for people who will
integrate with my company and my tech stack with the least amount of friction
possible. This means that (a) you're a full-stack RoR/JS programmer, (b)
you're smart as hell, and (c) you're not annoying.

The only thing that's really going to come through on a resume is (a), and I
might be able to glean some of (b) and (c) from your cover-letter. It's rare
enough to see full-stack RoR programmers on the job hunt though, so (a) alone
is enough to get a call from me. Your resume almost doesn't matter, as long as
it doesn't violate (c).

For me at least, just put together a generic resume and write a frank,
friendly email/cover-letter. Even though I'll probably call you regardless of
the cover-letter, a good one may give me enough confidence to skip right to on
on-site (or coffee).

------
codeonfire
Programmers: you should be founding not applying. Don't waste your time on
other people's ideas. Bag groceries if you have to. As an employee you will
probably get nothing or some small token amount if the company is sold.

------
rexreed
What happens to the resumes that don't make the cut? I know that I'm always in
search of some great additions to our team and while the resumes might not be
a fit for you, they might be a great fit for me, and YCombinator is an amazing
magnet / funnel that attracts a relatively higher quality of candidate,
regardless of whether or not they made the cut. Around these parts, it's hard
to convince tech talent to join a startup at all, their skills
notwithstanding.

I know that resumes are probably shared with a reasonable expectation of
privacy, but perhaps you can let it be known that there are other, non-YC
startups that might be interested in these resources if you would be willing
to share and float a few other boats with those that weren't a good fit.

Just a thought.

------
mwhite
Also worth reading: <http://andrewhy.de/resumes-for-startups/>

------
angelbob
The principle applies elsewhere, too. He's right - tailor your resume.

Also, make sure what you rock at is big and clear and up-front and featured.
Because you _hope_ your resume is being read by somebody who doesn't just read
resumes all day.

Then put keyword soup at the bottom for recruiters, if you need to.

~~~
davidcuddeback
I've been reading Land the Tech Job You Love [1] recently, and he says the
same thing about putting "keyword soup" at the bottom. But he also recommends
naming the section something like "Buzzwords" so that human readers know to
skip that section. "Oh, this is obviously to satisfy the automated resume
screeners." I'm not so keen on the idea, but probably because I usually apply
to companies that are too small to use the automated resume screeners.

[1] <http://pragprog.com/book/algh/land-the-tech-job-you-love>

~~~
petdance
It's not for the human readers to skip the section so much as to simply
acknowledge that you're doing it for the machines.

If I'm a human and I'm reading a skills section that includes PostgreSQL,
PL/pgSQL, SQL and RDBMS, I might think "Aw, she's padding her resume, those
are all related." But if I slap a "Buzzwords" section on there, now it's clear
why it's there.

And I do think that's important. Say you've got an HR drone who is told to
look for candidates who know SQL. He might see a resume including Oracle,
Postgres and DB/2. We all know those require knowing SQL, but the HR guy
doesn't. He won't see the magic word "SQL", so there's a good chance your
resume will get ignored.

That example is also why I suggest that no hiring manager ever let HR screen
resumes. It's just too important to be left to a filter that doesn't have the
proper knowledge set. Sure, your recruiters at Google and Microsoft and other
big operations know these tech things. But most tech jobs aren't at tech
companies like that.

~~~
davidcuddeback
_> It's not for the human readers to skip the section so much as to simply
acknowledge that you're doing it for the machines._

Yes, exactly. That's a much better way of wording it.

------
jaredsohn
One thing to keep in mind is that the resumes looked at were for YC's "Work At
A Startup" event. This means that while it is possible to tailor your resume
based on the kind of job you want or your strengths, you can't at this stage
tailor it to a specific company.

------
redguava
The irony of having three separate points that all say the same thing... and
that thing is keep it brief, don't use filler.

