Well, it took almost 13 months, but I found a job with some folks that not only get it, they see through the smoke and mirrors. I start on Monday.
Over the last 13 months, I have seen the craziest, outlandish, silly, stupid and counter-productive people, practices and processes ever.
Don't get me wrong. There are some people who know what they're doing. But they're so few and far between. And in all but a couple of circumstances, economic necessities forced them to cancel the gig.
When IT was booming, companies had to go to recruiting firms to get the people needed for projects and work. The company's HR recruiters didn't know how to talk to an IT professional or assess his or her background. I remember when I wasn't in IT and the College of DuPage gave them about 50% more than I was for the same level job- which is one of the reasons I got into IT. Fine. I get that. But that was 15 years ago. Do you think that after that length of time the HR Generalist curricula could address this? It must be me.
Now you have recruiters working on commission that barely speak the language. I'm not impolite, usually, but after asking someone four, count 'em, four times to repeat their company's name, I hang up. Why would I want to work with or through a company that bad in screening their people or those who consistently use the subjunctive case in recruiting e-mails? I am not anti-immigrant. I think Lou Dobbs is an idiot and a bigot. But if you're in this country, learning the freaking language! I did when I went to your country.
And its not a requirement. It's a job. The requirement(s) is/are part of the job posting.
One recruiter called me to ask me not to apply at his firm anymore! Seems his software saved all applicants and he was spending extra money having a clerk scan my resume into his system every time I applied for a job. He says it cost him about $10 each time. Since I'd apply for four or five openings about twice a month, I was costing him $50 a month. He then assured me he'd have a job for me within six months- in fact, Scot, just last week your score almost reached the top in my system and I almost called you. Yeah, I'll wait around for you. You bet. Like anyone with such a system wouldn't check for dupes. It's me, right?
I 've sent out at least 2 thousand resumes. I know the companies are inundated. Excuse me, but isn't that part of the cost of doing business? And aren't you looking for the best possible candidate? I know they're allegedly scanning stuff into databases all over the world. But they don't know how to use the technology.
On no less than 15 occasions, a recruiter called me about an opening and had no clue: 1. my information was already in his system and 2. I'd already met with one his firm's recruiters (in person).
So, I'm real impressed with all the Taleo and Brass Ring reminders that my information will be kept on file for 12 months and if anything comes up, they'll contact me. I'm holding my breath.
And how about that Taleo snag that demands you enter a source for the job listing, but there's no source field...much less a pull down. I'm thinking we can either use this as a 'what not to do' for User Experience Design students or have your manager apply for a really cool gig...and then snort and chortle for the rest of the day. It's on a gazillion company-Taleo sites now.
And I couldn't get work.
Once in a while you see an ad on Craig's List that looks pretty good. Then you see there's no e-mail address and they want paper submissions. This is for an IT gig. And they want paper. Right. I'll get right on that for you.
Of the 2,000, most of the job sites wil acknowledge receipt. Then the ambiguous black hole. Am I in? Am I out? Nothing, Nada, Zip, Zero, Zilch. You have no phone number or e-mail for the contact (because you went through a job board) and no recourse.
Meanwhile, commission recruiters are calling you for the McDonalds, Sears, Allstate or JP Morgan gig you applied for through Dice- but one recruiter says her firm is a preferred vendor (does that mean they get to drink in a cool special area at the airport before heading out to the Bahamas for a 'business meeting?'). You figure maybe they'd be able to get your resume to the right person, so you say yeah.
Just then. an HR Representative at McDonald's activates the database for the first time since they moved it over from the IBM Mainframe on DB2 to SQL Server 6.0. And your resume pops out. Two resumes and therefore at McDonald's. Sorry, we can't hire you because you applied twice.
Hunh?
At least they replied. I appreciated companies telling me when an opening closed. I could take them off my list. But they rarely tell you anything other than "we decided to go a different route," (d we just get on a bus?) or "we found a better qualified candidate" (give me a hint, better qualified how?) or "we really liked you but <fill in a platitude here> so please continue looking at our website so we can double the sting and humiliation of rejecting you in a couple of weeks when the turkey we just hired quits or we fire her and that's why you've seen this add three or four times."
Or, the HR gamesmanship. The company wants to promote someone from inside to the gig but its EEOC numbers are skewed. Have HR post the job and ignore anything that comes through on #BA34262.
Then there's the recruiting firms that sweet talks you and offers to 'submit' you after you've spent six or seven hours doing three or four resume 'tweaks.' Then, nothing until you call.
When you call, they say that had no feedback from the client. What they don't tell you is your resume was sent over with five or six hundred others in the recruiting company's bid to strike the hiring manager with its ability to generate numbers and a wide selection of lovely parting gifts. Which wastes my time and the hiring manager's time.
On one direct application, I made it to the phone screen and didn't hear squat until I'd left the six message on the HR Rep's voice mail. The next day I got an e-mail saying they were gouing a different route (which is strange since they're right on an expressway). Which is fine, but tell me why and how I can improve my presentation the next time. The reply was "it's our policy not to provide feedback." Wow. Either lawyers and liability issues are now into self-improvement or that phone screen went horribly wrong and I didn't know it.
Then there's the one thing that may turn me into a Libertarian.
My name is Scot and I'm in a protected class. In the 1970s, the U.S. Government stopped companies from firing highly paid, experienced workers in favor of lesser experienced and more poorly paid workers. The idea was to help us old farts keep our jobs. The idea was great. But being protected, I have to assume, got in the way of most of the gigs for which I applied. Companies get nervous if they hire you and can't fire you without a reason or as part of a larger lay-off. Never mind that I've never brought suit or that I understood each time I've been laid off its because the sales guys didn't do their jobs well enough.
And even if it was because of my previous salaries, I never got the chance to tell the employer I'd be willing to take a salary cut to get work for a company that might provide future growth. Either that, or the now required salary field on the website automatically disqualifies us older, experienced folks.
Let's assume I'd jump ship when the economy came out of the crapper. You'd rather have a kid just out of school who's never faced a pissed off client than someone experienced? You'd rather do a web application design three or four times rather than right the first time? You wouldn't want to employ someone with extensive skills and abilities that you can pretty much slap into any slot you need because you're worried I'd leave in 1-2 years instead of using me? No wonder the economy tanked. I wouldn't want to work there anyway with that kind of group think.
And let's discuss this process everyone seems to be using to "get the best person for the job."
Our applicant and his/her recruiter spend an inordinate amount of time 'tweaking' the applicant's resume (which is, in my experience, adding lies and hyperbole).
The resume is supposed to get me the interview (I know because my Mom was a job counselor in the 70s and I read What Color Your Parachute, which is probably the dumbest books I've ever read). I'm told I won't even get the phone screen if it isn't perfect. Sounds to me like the hiring manager is hiring off the resume, folks. And no matter how many superlatives the recruitering company's Account Manager sticks in my resume, if there's no immediate fit or interest, there's no immediate fit or interest.
Then we get either the HR Generalist (who doesn't know the difference between a Use Case and a Crank Case) or a technical sort on the phone with the applicant. The idea here is to separate the men from the boys. TMy trick is to step on my tongue and not interrupt, have one really good question about the company and answer the tech questions as competently as possible. The interviewer then mulls over all the audio and selects two or three to come in for a face to face interview... sometimes more (if the Director/VP is having lunch with a friend and left early and didn't tell the hiring manager so you're gonna have to come back if we're interested). Then the same questions are reapplied to the process because once wasn't good enough.
And from all that 'information,' the person making the hiring decision makes the decision.
Then there are the downtown Chicago companies which; a. don't have the slightest idea about the difference between a BA and a Business Systems Analyst, b. figure its a buyers market and take advantage of everyone by putting the kitchen sink into the competencies/certifications and experience necessary for the job, c. Use the economyas an excuse to cut pre-2008 contract rates by 40-60% (while accepting government stimulus money), d. the financial whiz kids who decided an hourly rate wasn't good enough for its newest consultants and not only cut the rate, but imposed a 'weekly rate' that allowed it to work consultants 10 hours a day for five days before any recompense kicked in, and e. the huge company that wanted you to work for $25/hour as a BA/Tech Writer/Project Manager- of course, that company always wanted to pay you less than $30/hour for your work.
Not once during this process did anyone test the Business Analyst to see if s/he could do the job. Smart companies do that with developers and pretty much make the hiring decison based on the test result and whether the applicant didn't tie his shoes together or had tomato sauce on her blouse.
In the 13 months I was looking, I took one test. At a recruiter's office. Very low level test. The recruiter had me take two parts over again because no one had ever scored that high in so short a time. I say this not to impress you with my credentials, but to underline hiring manager expectations.
At Geneca, I helped develop a quick and easy test. We had the applicant take 20 minutes or so to create a Use Case- not a complete Use Case, but enough to check writing skills and familiarity with the concept. Then we'd ask the applicant a question that forced him or her to give us a good estimate about something we assumed they knew nothing about This gave us an idea of how well the person could abstract, deduce and describe the process. That was to see how they thought and how well they through on their feet.
The other great test I took was for a web-based company, It had all its applicants write requirements for a simple feature. I got through to the phone screen. But it was with a developer and I didn't make it to the end.
To those others, I gave the url to my profile website with real, honest to gosh work product (cleaned up of proprietary detail, of course)- Use Cases, User Stories, Iteration Feature Lists, QA Management, Project Management, flow charts, diagrams, wireframes and more. I think I got 3 or 4 hits until the last folks to interview me kept going up there and downloading pretty much everything that was there.
So. You tell me. Software scanners, keyword hits (actually 'buzzwords'), phone screens and face to face interviews? Or a screening test of actual knowledge and ability followed by a real face to face interview about the real job?
Even if it's contract, I'm glad to be back to work. This job hunting's for the birds.
Over the last 13 months, I have seen the craziest, outlandish, silly, stupid and counter-productive people, practices and processes ever.
Don't get me wrong. There are some people who know what they're doing. But they're so few and far between. And in all but a couple of circumstances, economic necessities forced them to cancel the gig.
When IT was booming, companies had to go to recruiting firms to get the people needed for projects and work. The company's HR recruiters didn't know how to talk to an IT professional or assess his or her background. I remember when I wasn't in IT and the College of DuPage gave them about 50% more than I was for the same level job- which is one of the reasons I got into IT. Fine. I get that. But that was 15 years ago. Do you think that after that length of time the HR Generalist curricula could address this? It must be me.
Now you have recruiters working on commission that barely speak the language. I'm not impolite, usually, but after asking someone four, count 'em, four times to repeat their company's name, I hang up. Why would I want to work with or through a company that bad in screening their people or those who consistently use the subjunctive case in recruiting e-mails? I am not anti-immigrant. I think Lou Dobbs is an idiot and a bigot. But if you're in this country, learning the freaking language! I did when I went to your country.
And its not a requirement. It's a job. The requirement(s) is/are part of the job posting.
One recruiter called me to ask me not to apply at his firm anymore! Seems his software saved all applicants and he was spending extra money having a clerk scan my resume into his system every time I applied for a job. He says it cost him about $10 each time. Since I'd apply for four or five openings about twice a month, I was costing him $50 a month. He then assured me he'd have a job for me within six months- in fact, Scot, just last week your score almost reached the top in my system and I almost called you. Yeah, I'll wait around for you. You bet. Like anyone with such a system wouldn't check for dupes. It's me, right?
I 've sent out at least 2 thousand resumes. I know the companies are inundated. Excuse me, but isn't that part of the cost of doing business? And aren't you looking for the best possible candidate? I know they're allegedly scanning stuff into databases all over the world. But they don't know how to use the technology.
On no less than 15 occasions, a recruiter called me about an opening and had no clue: 1. my information was already in his system and 2. I'd already met with one his firm's recruiters (in person).
So, I'm real impressed with all the Taleo and Brass Ring reminders that my information will be kept on file for 12 months and if anything comes up, they'll contact me. I'm holding my breath.
And how about that Taleo snag that demands you enter a source for the job listing, but there's no source field...much less a pull down. I'm thinking we can either use this as a 'what not to do' for User Experience Design students or have your manager apply for a really cool gig...and then snort and chortle for the rest of the day. It's on a gazillion company-Taleo sites now.
And I couldn't get work.
Once in a while you see an ad on Craig's List that looks pretty good. Then you see there's no e-mail address and they want paper submissions. This is for an IT gig. And they want paper. Right. I'll get right on that for you.
Of the 2,000, most of the job sites wil acknowledge receipt. Then the ambiguous black hole. Am I in? Am I out? Nothing, Nada, Zip, Zero, Zilch. You have no phone number or e-mail for the contact (because you went through a job board) and no recourse.
Meanwhile, commission recruiters are calling you for the McDonalds, Sears, Allstate or JP Morgan gig you applied for through Dice- but one recruiter says her firm is a preferred vendor (does that mean they get to drink in a cool special area at the airport before heading out to the Bahamas for a 'business meeting?'). You figure maybe they'd be able to get your resume to the right person, so you say yeah.
Just then. an HR Representative at McDonald's activates the database for the first time since they moved it over from the IBM Mainframe on DB2 to SQL Server 6.0. And your resume pops out. Two resumes and therefore at McDonald's. Sorry, we can't hire you because you applied twice.
Hunh?
At least they replied. I appreciated companies telling me when an opening closed. I could take them off my list. But they rarely tell you anything other than "we decided to go a different route," (d we just get on a bus?) or "we found a better qualified candidate" (give me a hint, better qualified how?) or "we really liked you but <fill in a platitude here> so please continue looking at our website so we can double the sting and humiliation of rejecting you in a couple of weeks when the turkey we just hired quits or we fire her and that's why you've seen this add three or four times."
Or, the HR gamesmanship. The company wants to promote someone from inside to the gig but its EEOC numbers are skewed. Have HR post the job and ignore anything that comes through on #BA34262.
Then there's the recruiting firms that sweet talks you and offers to 'submit' you after you've spent six or seven hours doing three or four resume 'tweaks.' Then, nothing until you call.
When you call, they say that had no feedback from the client. What they don't tell you is your resume was sent over with five or six hundred others in the recruiting company's bid to strike the hiring manager with its ability to generate numbers and a wide selection of lovely parting gifts. Which wastes my time and the hiring manager's time.
On one direct application, I made it to the phone screen and didn't hear squat until I'd left the six message on the HR Rep's voice mail. The next day I got an e-mail saying they were gouing a different route (which is strange since they're right on an expressway). Which is fine, but tell me why and how I can improve my presentation the next time. The reply was "it's our policy not to provide feedback." Wow. Either lawyers and liability issues are now into self-improvement or that phone screen went horribly wrong and I didn't know it.
Then there's the one thing that may turn me into a Libertarian.
My name is Scot and I'm in a protected class. In the 1970s, the U.S. Government stopped companies from firing highly paid, experienced workers in favor of lesser experienced and more poorly paid workers. The idea was to help us old farts keep our jobs. The idea was great. But being protected, I have to assume, got in the way of most of the gigs for which I applied. Companies get nervous if they hire you and can't fire you without a reason or as part of a larger lay-off. Never mind that I've never brought suit or that I understood each time I've been laid off its because the sales guys didn't do their jobs well enough.
And even if it was because of my previous salaries, I never got the chance to tell the employer I'd be willing to take a salary cut to get work for a company that might provide future growth. Either that, or the now required salary field on the website automatically disqualifies us older, experienced folks.
Let's assume I'd jump ship when the economy came out of the crapper. You'd rather have a kid just out of school who's never faced a pissed off client than someone experienced? You'd rather do a web application design three or four times rather than right the first time? You wouldn't want to employ someone with extensive skills and abilities that you can pretty much slap into any slot you need because you're worried I'd leave in 1-2 years instead of using me? No wonder the economy tanked. I wouldn't want to work there anyway with that kind of group think.
And let's discuss this process everyone seems to be using to "get the best person for the job."
Our applicant and his/her recruiter spend an inordinate amount of time 'tweaking' the applicant's resume (which is, in my experience, adding lies and hyperbole).
The resume is supposed to get me the interview (I know because my Mom was a job counselor in the 70s and I read What Color Your Parachute, which is probably the dumbest books I've ever read). I'm told I won't even get the phone screen if it isn't perfect. Sounds to me like the hiring manager is hiring off the resume, folks. And no matter how many superlatives the recruitering company's Account Manager sticks in my resume, if there's no immediate fit or interest, there's no immediate fit or interest.
Then we get either the HR Generalist (who doesn't know the difference between a Use Case and a Crank Case) or a technical sort on the phone with the applicant. The idea here is to separate the men from the boys. TMy trick is to step on my tongue and not interrupt, have one really good question about the company and answer the tech questions as competently as possible. The interviewer then mulls over all the audio and selects two or three to come in for a face to face interview... sometimes more (if the Director/VP is having lunch with a friend and left early and didn't tell the hiring manager so you're gonna have to come back if we're interested). Then the same questions are reapplied to the process because once wasn't good enough.
And from all that 'information,' the person making the hiring decision makes the decision.
Then there are the downtown Chicago companies which; a. don't have the slightest idea about the difference between a BA and a Business Systems Analyst, b. figure its a buyers market and take advantage of everyone by putting the kitchen sink into the competencies/certifications and experience necessary for the job, c. Use the economyas an excuse to cut pre-2008 contract rates by 40-60% (while accepting government stimulus money), d. the financial whiz kids who decided an hourly rate wasn't good enough for its newest consultants and not only cut the rate, but imposed a 'weekly rate' that allowed it to work consultants 10 hours a day for five days before any recompense kicked in, and e. the huge company that wanted you to work for $25/hour as a BA/Tech Writer/Project Manager- of course, that company always wanted to pay you less than $30/hour for your work.
Not once during this process did anyone test the Business Analyst to see if s/he could do the job. Smart companies do that with developers and pretty much make the hiring decison based on the test result and whether the applicant didn't tie his shoes together or had tomato sauce on her blouse.
In the 13 months I was looking, I took one test. At a recruiter's office. Very low level test. The recruiter had me take two parts over again because no one had ever scored that high in so short a time. I say this not to impress you with my credentials, but to underline hiring manager expectations.
At Geneca, I helped develop a quick and easy test. We had the applicant take 20 minutes or so to create a Use Case- not a complete Use Case, but enough to check writing skills and familiarity with the concept. Then we'd ask the applicant a question that forced him or her to give us a good estimate about something we assumed they knew nothing about This gave us an idea of how well the person could abstract, deduce and describe the process. That was to see how they thought and how well they through on their feet.
The other great test I took was for a web-based company, It had all its applicants write requirements for a simple feature. I got through to the phone screen. But it was with a developer and I didn't make it to the end.
To those others, I gave the url to my profile website with real, honest to gosh work product (cleaned up of proprietary detail, of course)- Use Cases, User Stories, Iteration Feature Lists, QA Management, Project Management, flow charts, diagrams, wireframes and more. I think I got 3 or 4 hits until the last folks to interview me kept going up there and downloading pretty much everything that was there.
So. You tell me. Software scanners, keyword hits (actually 'buzzwords'), phone screens and face to face interviews? Or a screening test of actual knowledge and ability followed by a real face to face interview about the real job?
Even if it's contract, I'm glad to be back to work. This job hunting's for the birds.
Powered by ScribeFire.
Posts
Wow, sounds familiar. And discouraging.
ReplyDelete