
The Infuriating Truth About Getting Hired - excid3
http://www.articulateventures.com/thoughts-on-being-an-employer/getting_hired/
======
steven777400
I work for a government agency and I can confirm this. It's maddening. When
ranking resumes, we are only allowed to consider whether or not they say they
have the skill we want. We aren't allowed to consider how well written the
resume, how compelling the described experience is, external source
repositories, etc.

So someone who puts "used C sharp on projects" gets the same "yes" as someone
who describes, in detail, their extensive C# projects at various
organizations, large and small.

And, no, we don't even get "5%" for opinion.

The reason is, according to the HR contact who so directed me, almost every
hire ends in at least one lawsuit from a candidate not selected, claiming
unfair hiring practice.

~~~
jiggy2011
Interesting, I'd be curious to know whether any of these lawsuits were
successful and to what extent changing the hiring process reduced them?

I can imagine that regardless of your hiring procedure you may get people who
feel sour about not being picked and will take some action.

As far as I was aware in most jurisdictions you can reject a candidate for
basically any reason you like as long as it isn't related to race , gender or
one of the other protected classes.

Rejecting a candidate because their resume is poorly written (suggesting poor
communication skills or poor attention to detail) doesn't seem like it should
be something which would be controversial and I'd certainly be curious what
argument could be made to a court that it should be otherwise?

~~~
steven777400
I have a feeling it's more of a CYA from the HR folks than something that is
actually necessary. I don't know for sure.

edit: I worked at another government agency in this same state before, and the
hiring procedures were not quite as strict (we could evaluate resumes more
holistically), so I think it's probably just this HR department.

------
tibbon
All of these points sound like great filters- not for the company, but for me
in determining that I probably don't want to work there. A place with thin
margins, HR bureaucracy and a cover-your-ass attitude? No thanks. I do say
this however as someone both privileged and experienced enough to really not
need to scrape for a job too hard at this point in my life. YMMV.

~~~
jpdoctor
> _HR bureaucracy and a cover-your-ass attitude?_

Most folks don't realize it, but the phrase above is redundant. Intrinsically,
the function of HR is CYA for the company. By the time you have full-blown HR,
CYA is present.

One example: Need to fire someone? Trained HR folks will help you navigate the
minefield of legalities.

~~~
potatolicious
There's legal CYA and there's CYA ingrained in the everyday operation of the
company. I think the CYA OP is talking about is the sort where employees
(managers, devs, designers, what have you) deliberately act suboptimally to
protect themselves.

Making a suboptimal recommendation knowing it will harm someone else more than
it will harm you. Diffusing responsibility. Inflating estimates. etc etc.

~~~
jpdoctor
> _There's legal CYA and there's CYA ingrained in the everyday operation of
> the company._

Maybe other people have different experiences, but I've never met an HR person
who did one and not the other.

~~~
potatolicious
HR is CYA by definition, but you can have a HR department without having the
whole company behave like said HR department.

~~~
jonnathanson
True, and you can also have an HR department that goes beyond CYA. Some
companies treat Recruiting & HR functions as strategic parts of the business.
I'm not talking about lip service, like "Chief People Officer" titles, and
things of that nature, which are usually just a whole lot of signaling and
little else. Rather, I mean companies wherein recruiting and developing people
is part of the hiring manager's job responsibility, and he or she has skin in
the game. To the extent that HR is a self-contained silo, completely removed
from the hiring manager's organization, it's bound to lose touch and turn into
a simple, CYA-esque meat grinder.

Additionally, good HR strategy includes implementing events, training
programs, talent development strategies, etc., so that retention and promotion
of existing employees is just as important as recruitment of new ones.

A reasonable KPI, in this case, is turnover (both by volume and by average
employee timespan). The ability to find world-class talent by the bucketload
is all but wasted if existing employees tend to bounce after 6 months to a
year.

------
moron4hire
The advent of HR departments as gate keepers rather than employee facilitators
is probably a significant factor in the ever growing incompetency in corporate
America. You have people who have no domain knowledge about the job trying to
select resumes out of a hat, essentially. Both the systems they have created
and the abysmal results are inevitable.

------
PeterisP
Well, it's not about getting hired, it's about getting to an interview - which
is a separate filter with very different criteria.

However, it may be everything that matters for _writing a CV_ \- as when
you're in the interview, everybody (hopefully) will be looking at you and your
real skill description, not the CV.

------
manishsharan
And this is precisely why one should be an independent contractor. Nobody
expects or wants contractors to fit in -- they want to get their shit done in
time or have a whipping boy in case things go south. And big cos ( your
banks/funds etc.) are willing to pay well for that service. As a contractor in
Canada, where healthcare costs are not a problem, there is really really no
incentive for me to subsume myself to a bureaucracy not to mention that I am
too accented and overly pigmented to ever look like the hiring manager's
cousin.

~~~
Articulate
Independent contractors can get pretty beat up in situations like this- there
are really strict rules about the price increases a contractor can ask for
from one year to the next- and often it is less than 5% and those contractors
aren't able to complain because the alternative to to just not renew the
contract- which is the right of the organization- being a contractor in many
ways leaves you with less security (especially to do stuff like speak up when
a regular employee is doing bad work) and less pay.

~~~
r00fus
This depends - in a truly independent contracting situation - ie, the
contractor has a corporation (usu. S-corp) and manages their own P.O. with the
client company, there is incredible freedom and ability to negotiate - you
are, however, effectively re-negotiating very often (sometimes daily if the PO
is running low).

If you happen to be a contractor working for Volt, Adecco, Robert Half or some
other staffing firm, then you are in a different league and are often in a
worse position than as an established employee or a truly independent
contractor... you might have some basic benefits and 401k, but this is body-
shop territory and it's advisable to consider this situation as non-permanent.

------
NateDad
Why would you want to get hired by a company that hires this way?

~~~
hkmurakami
You're a new grad w/o enough practical skills or real work experience to get
hired by a smaller, more nimble company that has modern hiring practices. In
this case applying to a mega-corp is often your only realistic choice.

~~~
armored_mammal
Nope, because mega-corps only do internships or '3-5 years' experience.

~~~
eshvk
Factually incorrect, if you are talking about software engineering positions.

Source: College career fairs. BigCos come and recruit people in hordes. Around
60-70% of people graduating from UT, Austin went to a BigCo (Google, MS,
Amazon etc)

~~~
joonix
Yes, but not everyone gets into the college recruiting gravy train. You either
didn't go at a target school, or you didn't make the cut. Then you graduate
and you're basically hung out to dry unless you know someone. This applies to
many areas besides software engineering.

------
excid3
Cached version:
[http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://www.articulateventures.com/thoughts-
on-being-an-employer/getting_hired/)

------
Eduardo3rd
As someone who has an Hispanic heritage, point number 3 is pretty frustrating.
I'd like to think that the accomplishments I've made in my life are more
impacted by the results of the work I've done, but there's always this nagging
feeling that I'm just there to pad the diversity stats.

I've talked to other minority students during my time in undergrad and grad
school and it's pretty crazy how many of us are plagued by impostor syndrome.
I'm talking about incredibly high performing individuals who are near the top
of their field at a prestigious university that don't know if they are there
because of their abilities or their skin color.

~~~
groby_b
Given the fact that minorities are still under-represented in tech, I suggest
you think of this differently: You've gotten to where you are wearing the
additional burden of being a minority. You've clearly out-performed
expectations.

~~~
nerdzero
It would be silly to say we should make sure that people with green eyes are
not under-represented in tech but why is it okay to say the same thing
regarding skin color?

I think the reality is that these days being a minority is not a "burden",
it's an advantage, and an unfair one. It would be better if it was just a non-
issue but I guess we're just not there yet.

~~~
groby_b
Let me guess - you're a white male, aren't you?

Being a minority is a _long_ cry from being an advantage. I agree with you
that I'd prefer it to be a non issue, but we're definitely not there yet.

Oh, and I'd expect that overall, the distribution of eye color in the tech
world would be overall roughly equivalent to to the normal population, yes.
And if there were people running around, actively complaining how green eyes
give you an unfair advantage while green-eyed people are under-represented,
and yet other people telling us how green-eyed people are stupid, couldn't
possibly do tech, are a threat to the American Way Of Life(tm), and should in
general not be so uppity, then yes, we should look at that.

~~~
nerfherder
I wouldn't.

You might be able to make an argument for the tech workforce reflecting the
demographics of people with CS/engineering degrees, but not of the population
as a whole.

Leaving eye color aside it's a simple fact that members of some groups are
much more likely to go to college than others. Black males, for example, are
more likely to go to jail than college. Of those who do go to college
relatively few study computer science. Are we supposed to be surprised that
there are few black coders? Is my company racist because I don't hire non-
existent black computer science graduates? Give me a break. There wasn't a
single black person in my CS program in college but there were several East
Asians and at least one Indian.

Who are these people who think that companies are racist against blacks and
Mexicans but not Indians or Chinese? Ever work in tech? Ever notice how many
Indians there are? That's some mighty selective racism.

------
austingunter
This is why the resume is broken, and why I drew a line in the sand for myself
shortly after graduating college in 2009 that I would never get a job using a
resume again. I would only find jobs via my reputation, connections, and by
pitching the work that I thought needed to be done, and why I was the person
to do it. Now, I was working the Austin, Texas startup community, and built a
group of 120 startups at a local accelerator, so it's safe to say that I
wasn't setting my career up for jobs that would have an HR manager.

That said, I broke my rule the next year, sent in a resume and went through a
grueling process to ultimately get hired at a small consulting firm. Breaking
my rule was a terrible decision, but fortunately its affects were quick to
take effect, and short-lasting.

It was an awful job for me, but the company had a round of layoffs 90 days
later that I was caught in.

My foot hit the pavement that day, and I realized it was the best thing that
had ever happened to me.

I'm currently at a fast-growing, profitable startup. I got the job by pitching
work and writing my own job description. I joined the company as employee #12.
Not once did anyone ever ask me for a formal resume. All they cared about were
results.

I have a beautiful resume somewhere on my hard drive. But I have even better
results that you can see in my actual work.

------
1wheel
> Therefore if you are a minority, or from an under represented gender it will
> work to your advantage to signal that to the HR Officer, be subtle though.

<http://www.nber.org/digest/sep03/w9873.html>

~~~
pessimizer
Thanks for posting this before me.

>if you are a minority, or from an under represented gender it will work to
your advantage

This is part of the bizarre myth of black privilege that's been part of the
culture since Reagan's race baiting. It's really rarely to your advantage to
be black (or even have a name that sounds black), unless the environment
you're being hired for is lily-white and has recently had a discrimination-
based legal scare.

edit: to be fair to the article - it is describing exactly the time when being
black is advantageous in hiring. But to correct the article - at a lot of
business, the _only_ time that they hire black people is when their racial
balance has been criticized. So overall, any indication that you are black is
not going to work well at a company who would be criticized about their racial
mix, unless that company's problem is lack of applicants - if it's in Colorado
or something.

------
tseabrooks
This is a good place to put the reminder; Write a unique resume for each job.
Resumes need to be written to match the culture of the company you're applying
to.

Try to understand the mindset of the people you expect to be looking at your
resume and create something that will get you into the interview room. An
example is that the "resume" for my current job was a casual email that didn't
include any normal stuff that would be in a resume.

~~~
colkassad
This is difficult to do sometimes. I just interviewed at a small company that
does defense contracting. The person I spoke with by email was very military-
sounding in his diction so I assumed the culture was a bit formal and
well...stuffy. When I went in for the interview dressed in a suit, everyone
was fairly casual, people had pony tails and tousled hair, and we spent a good
portion of the interview discussing video games.

~~~
epoxyhockey
_When I went in for the interview dressed in a suit, everyone was fairly
casual_

It's a bit of a double standard, but they might have been expecting you to be
dressed in a suit anyway. Good luck with the job!

~~~
wuest
> It's a bit of a double standard, but they might have been expecting you to
> be dressed in a suit anyway.

I've encountered this. My current workplace has a notoriously laid back and
straight-forward culture. Knowing this, I asked the interviewer who was
inviting me to interview if I should dress up, or dress appropriately for the
company culture. "I would recommend you dress up a little, and hope it's the
last time you have to wear those clothes," was the response.

Showing that you are familiar with the culture into which you're walking is
worth a lot in such situations.

------
mbesto
_To the HR Officer, your resume matters only matters if it meets their needs._

Furthermore - whatever reduces the risk of that HR officer losing their job,
or that of the manager. You can't get fired for hiring a person with 10 years
of experience as opposed to one with 2 years, even if the person with 2 years
experience may be a much better employee.

------
Tloewald
To the extent this article might be true about some companies or organizations
-- you don't want to work there.

I've never worked anywhere with priorities like this, not even in the
Australian Public Service (which certainly has cretinous hiring practices, but
not like this). To begin with, most HR departments only lightly filter resumes
submitted against a position -- if you get tossed out of the mix by the person
in recruiting it's probably for a dumb reason (e.g. your CV lacks a crucial
buzzword) but again, not these reasons.

------
fnordfnordfnord
Related content for job seekers.

>Why your tech CV sucks. And here's how we can help. By Dominic Connor
<http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/11/10/your_cv/>

>Think your CV is crap? Your interview skills are worse. Really, why do you
even bother... By Dominic Connor
[http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/11/17/connor_on_interviews...](http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/11/17/connor_on_interviews/)

~~~
jgoney
Looking forward to his follow up "You are useless. You should consider
suicide."

~~~
rm445
I think you skipped a few. The logical next step is, "Think your CV is crap?
And your interview skills are worse? No, they accurately represent your
terrible job performance!"

------
niggler
"Error establishing a database connection"

I'm wondering if this is a meta statement (where database connection is
interpreted as having a real life social connection to someone at the firm you
wish to join)

~~~
nkozyra
Error establishing employment connection.

------
chrisbennet
I suddenly have a lot more sympathy for HR. At least the ones that are trying
to hire good people.

------
lsiebert
That's why I favor an HR Technocracy to an HR Bureaucracy.

------
kami8845
if they're seeing your CV and then based on that they either move forward or
not you're applying to the wrong company.

~~~
yen223
We shouldn't expect companies to hire based on your CV? What should it be
based on then?

~~~
jaredsohn
I think you meant to write "we shouldn't expect companies to decide to
interview based on your CV? What should it be based on then?"

------
duiker101
database error.

