A Story About The Trouble with Job Titles and Descriptions

forgottenpass · on May 12, 2015

There seems to have been miscommunication with the job description. That having been said, the idea that web dev positions that are a hybrid role of design and implementing webpages is not novel, it does not take a "unicorn".

The description undersold JavaScript as a requirement, the candidate continues to oversell "jQuery proficiency" and "I'm a designer/developer if there ever was one."

The employer wanted someone a step further towards the programming side of the spectrum. This person turned out to not be the right candidate, happens all the time. Why the rant?

seanmcdirmid · on May 13, 2015

It happens to designers a lot: company wants to hire a "designer", they really mean CSS/Javascript coder who can match colors and pixels in a way that isn't disastrous.

The difference between a real designer and a web dev that dabbles in a bit of design is huge.

dmak · on May 12, 2015

I didn't see the original job post, but based on the one she presented, it wasn't an Engineering role.

BinaryIdiot · on May 12, 2015

After reading the job description presented by the author I have to disagree to a degree. It states:

> Deliver engaging, innovative prototypes, and contribute to front-end development of our products.

That looks like development to me. Not as a primary role but development nonetheless.

navbaker · on May 12, 2015

Shouldn't this have the title of the linked blog post?

BinaryIdiot · on May 12, 2015

Initially probably but I don't think it's very representative of the content (not that OP's title is better; it's arguably worse).

flashman · on May 12, 2015

OP's title primes the reader to engage with the article in a negative, hostile way. Titles should carry and convey as little of an OP's baggage as possible.

dang · on May 12, 2015

Yes. We changed the title from "Designer applies for JavaScript job fails FizzBuzz then rants about job descriptions".