On Wed, 02 Dec 2009 09:41:14 +0000, Invisible wrote:

>>>> Fact:  People get paid to write programs in Haskell.
>>> Yes. In the entire world, there are approximately 50 of them, I would
>>> estimate.
>> 
>> That estimate is based on what....?
> 
> The size of Galios, Well Typed and the Haskell division of MSRC, plus a
> few percent for random people and companies scattered around the world
> that might also be using it.

You might find it is a larger number than you think.

>> You could probably get a tech job with Nokia if you actually applied
>> for one.
> 
> Do *you* have any evidence whatsoever to back up such a bold claim?

I can guarantee you won't get a job there if you don't apply.

> They don't let just anybody work for Nokia, after all...

Right, they only let people who actually apply for jobs there work there.

>>> I would think my level of skill and experience would be a far bigger
>>> problem. It's not exactly like I live in some small village in the
>>> middle of nowhere...
>> 
>> What you've demonstrated here is a fair amount of skill.  Experience
>> comes with time.  Nobody leaves school or their first job with massive
>> amounts of experience.
> 
> Well Warp seems fairly convinced that I'm a rubbish programmer - and,
> AFAIK, he's the only person here who writes programs for a living. My
> total inability to spell properly is the stuff of legend. I'm pretty
> hopeless with mathematics too... What makes you think I have skills?

Warp is one person.  You've written code I couldn't have written with the 
skills I've developed over the years.

As for your writing - your spelling could be improved, yes - but so can 
mine, and I've been a professional writer.  Big F'ing Deal.  Nobody 
writes perfect copy 100% of the time.  I read your blog regularly, and I 
find it generally well-written and interesting.  I track it with Google 
Reader and every time you write a new post, I see it.

As for your maths skills, you understand a lot more about mathematics 
than I do, and I took a couple of calculus courses in pursuit of a 
engineering degree (a degree that I didn't earn because I couldn't hack 
the integral calculus class).

>> Bingo, that's my point.  Some people can't expect to be employed near
>> where they live because where they live may not be near the jobs
>> they're able to do.
> 
> Erm... like I say, I don't know of anybody who had to move just to find
> work.

But you also admit that you don't know that many people.  I do know 
people who have moved for work and who have had to move for work.

>> If you really want to be a programmer, then fix that point.  If staying
>> in MK is more important, then fix that point and get a job bagging
>> groceries & stocking shelves at the local Tesco or Safeway. 
>> Personally, I get the impression that you would be happier programming,
>> but it's YOUR life and not mine - so if the desire to stay in MK is
>> that strong for you, then stay there and find a job - any job - in the
>> area.
> 
> Amusingly - or perhaps not? - I hear Benny's teenage son who's still at
> school earns more money than me stacking shelves part-time at Tesco.
> Which is slightly ridiculous, considering I spent 6 years of my life in
> higher education...

Different jobs pay different rates; the manufacturing company I worked at 
I actually started working on the assembly line building the widgets they 
make.  Some of the people who worked the line had done so for 20+ years, 
and I learned very quickly that it was a mistake to think of it as 
unskilled labor - it's pretty highly skilled labor, and many of those 
people made as much money then (I'm talking about the late 80's here) as 
I make today doing what I do.  I was always amazed to drive into the 
parking lot and see a lot of very expensive cars and then realise that 
they weren't the office workers' vehicles, but the shop staff's 
vehicles.  Mercedes, BMW, etc - not uncommon in that parking lot at the 
time.

> Anyway, I'm not looking at stacking shelves just yet. I'm thinking about
> system administration - basically, doing a job like the one I currently
> do, but for money. Let's face it, at least I can walk into the room and
> say "I have *actually done this* for the last 7 years. I can prove I
> know how to do this."

That's a step in the right direction, to be sure.  So apply for sysadmin 
jobs in the area - don't concern yourself too much with what the company 
does - or pick a company that works in an industry you're interested in.  
Working in IT does give a lot of flexibility because systems admin work 
is pretty much the same everywhere, but it gives you an opportunity to 
learn something about the business you work for as well.  I did sysadmin 
work in companies that did manufacturing, retail, pharmacies, benefits 
administration, and a call centers (some of the jobs covered multiple 
areas; the benefits administration company operated a call center, so I 
got to learn about how those work).  I started each of those jobs with no 
prior experience in the industry.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

>>>>> Fact:  People get paid to write programs in Haskell.
>>>> Yes. In the entire world, there are approximately 50 of them, I would
>>>> estimate.
>>> That estimate is based on what....?
>> The size of Galios, Well Typed and the Haskell division of MSRC, plus a
>> few percent for random people and companies scattered around the world
>> that might also be using it.
> 
> You might find it is a larger number than you think.

I can't actually think of a real reliable way to get the real number, 
actually... Might be interesting.

>>> You could probably get a tech job with Nokia if you actually applied
>>> for one.
>> Do *you* have any evidence whatsoever to back up such a bold claim?
> 
> I can guarantee you won't get a job there if you don't apply.

This is self-evident. But that's not the statement you made. ;-)

>> They don't let just anybody work for Nokia, after all...
> 
> Right, they only let people who actually apply for jobs there work there.

Heh, that got a chuckle.

> You've written code I couldn't have written with the 
> skills I've developed over the years.
> 
> As for your writing - your spelling could be improved, yes - but so can 
> mine, and I've been a professional writer.  Big F'ing Deal.  Nobody 
> writes perfect copy 100% of the time.  I read your blog regularly, and I 
> find it generally well-written and interesting.  I track it with Google 
> Reader and every time you write a new post, I see it.
> 
> As for your maths skills, you understand a lot more about mathematics 
> than I do, and I took a couple of calculus courses in pursuit of a 
> engineering degree (a degree that I didn't earn because I couldn't hack 
> the integral calculus class).

I guess what it comes down to is that there isn't actually any objective 
way to determine how good I am at any of these things, so we're stuck 
with my subjective opinion. (And this varies depending on my mood...)

>> Erm... like I say, I don't know of anybody who had to move just to find
>> work.
> 
> But you also admit that you don't know that many people.  I do know 
> people who have moved for work and who have had to move for work.

Maybe it's different outside the UK or something? IDK.

>> Anyway, I'm not looking at stacking shelves just yet. I'm thinking about
>> system administration - basically, doing a job like the one I currently
>> do, but for money. Let's face it, at least I can walk into the room and
>> say "I have *actually done this* for the last 7 years. I can prove I
>> know how to do this."
> 
> That's a step in the right direction, to be sure.  So apply for sysadmin 
> jobs in the area - don't concern yourself too much with what the company 
> does - or pick a company that works in an industry you're interested in.  
> Working in IT does give a lot of flexibility because systems admin work 
> is pretty much the same everywhere, but it gives you an opportunity to 
> learn something about the business you work for as well.  I did sysadmin 
> work in companies that did manufacturing, retail, pharmacies, benefits 
> administration, and a call centers (some of the jobs covered multiple 
> areas; the benefits administration company operated a call center, so I 
> got to learn about how those work).  I started each of those jobs with no 
> prior experience in the industry.

Well, as I said, I think this will have to wait for the new year, but 
this is the next stage in my plan.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

>> Most of the stuff I do has no useful function. 
> 
> I don't believe that's true.  Just because you feel it has no useful 
> function doesn't mean it has no useful function.  You need to stop 
> substituting your view of the world for the way the world works and then 
> assume that because you think something is useless (or that it is useless 
> to you), that it's useless for everyone.

If you know of a commercial application for Mandelbrot plotters, I'd be 
interested in hearing about it...

> I've been most successful at applying for jobs not through the front 
> door, but through a side door.  Find an advantage and USE IT.

Fair enough.

>> Ah yes, nothing like somebody telling you that all your hard work "isn't
>> really trying" to motivate you to continue.
> 
> Tell me what you've done in the last 30 days, then.

To be honest, I completely gave up on the job hunt a few months ago. It 
seems so utterly fruitless. As I've indicated, I'm planning to start 
again in the new year, looking in the direction of sysadmin rather than 
programmer to see if that gets me any further.

> Only you can motivate you.  I can't do it, nobody can do it.  Hell, I 
> can't even provide you with an incentive to make a change.  I'm telling 
> you what I'm seeing from over here - you fill out an application or send 
> in a CV and then you wait to hear something.

As far as I know, that's how people get jobs. I don't really know what 
else there is to do.

I know you hear of people who such a ridiculously superhuman level of 
self-confidence that they just walk into a building and say "I think you 
should hire me", and it sometimes actually works. But, obviously, this 
is beyond my capabilities.

> You do not persist in 
> trying to make a change.  That's what I'm seeing - so if that's not 
> accurate, then correct my perception.

It's one part not knowing what the hell to try, and two parts just 
lacking the motivation to keep going in the face of unending rejections.

>> Ah, I see. So what you're saying is I should read this:
>>
>>    "Candidates are expected to have a relevant PhD in Finance,
>> Economics, Mathematics or Computing Science. In exceptional cases we may
>> consider candidates with outstanding degree grades."
>>
>> as meaning this:
>>
>>    "We will accept anybody who applies."
>>
>> Sure, seems completely plausible to me. :-P
> 
> Very often that *is* the case, yes.

...OK, well I guess there's really little point in bothering to read the 
job description then. o_O

> You've got nothing to lose by applying for a job that you'd like to have 
> regardless of the requirements.  The worst that happens is it's not a 
> good fit.  The best that happens is you get the job.

Or rather, the worst that happens is some guy phones me up and asks me 
what the hell I'm playing at daring to apply for a job I'm clearly not 
qualified for, and I get to spend the rest of the day feeling like crap...

> It depends on how badly they need to fill the position as well.

Well, that's true too. I only got my current job because they were 
absolutely desperate, and I was cheap.

> But you're getting tied down in the details instead of hearing what I'm 
> saying in a more general way:  If you see a programming position that 
> looks interesting to you, apply for it.  Don't read the detailed 
> requirements over other than to see if it's an area that you're 
> interested in.  Demonstrate the ability to apply programming skills to a 
> problem (which is something you can do).

I suppose. Trouble is, you can't really show them anything unless you 
can get them to actually talk to you. I usually don't get that far.

>>> Why should they hire you?  Because if you're applying for the job, you
>>> have some passion in the area (because you wouldn't apply for a job you
>>> didn't have passion for, right?) and because you know your skills will
>>> grow as you learn the job.
>> By that metric, they should just hire anybody who actually applies.
> 
> That's not what I said, and you know that.

No, it actually looks to me like you're saying anybody who applies for a 
job must be really movatived, and that's reason enough to hire them. 
That doesn't make a lot of sense.

> But you seem to think that it 
> works by having 100% of the skills requested (you think "requested" = 
> "demanded") going in.  *THAT* is NOT how it works.

As you say, nobody is a 100% fit. But I *do* expect that you'd need to 
be, say, an 80% fit in order to get hired. If you aren't, somebody else 
will be.

> Your assumptions and knowledge are based on the experience of being hired 
> once.  My assumptions and knowledge are based on having worked in several 
> jobs in several different industries.  Why do you continue to insist that 
> you know better what I'm talking about than I do?

> 4.  Lack of good references:

Ooo, that reminds me... My CV claims that I have references. I'd better 
go find some. o_O

> 5.  Lack of specific credentials:

So somebody can get not hired for not having a Cisco certificate, but if 
you don't have a PhD certificate that's no problem?

>>> Formal education is overrated.
>> Pity. That's about the only good thing I've got going for me.
> 
> I would disagree.  You've got an extensive informal education that shows 
> that you are a motivated self-learner, and that you have curiosity about 
> things and are willing to research those things that interest you.

Heh. Does anybody else here think I should just get Jim to tell 
employers about me rather than me tell them? The way you talk, you make 
it sound as if I'm somehow worth having...

> You're still insisting on making the decision for the prospective 
> employer to not hire you.  That's THEIR decision to make and not yours!   
> I'm going to KEEP saying that until you demonstrate that you understand 
> it.

Well, I *did* apply anyway, didn't I?

>>> Don't let life happen to you - take control!
>> You say this as if it's actually physically possible.
> 
> It *is* possible.  I forget who it is who said "I've been very lucky in 
> my life - and it takes a lot of work to be as lucky as I have been", but 
> it's a very true statement.
> 
> Contrary to your apparent belief, you're not a hot air balloon being 
> pushed around by winds you cannot control.  If you don't take control of 
> your life, then someone else will, and you'll feel like you're not in 
> control.  It's your life, and you need to take control and make things 
> happen.

This is contrary to everything I have ever experienced in my life, so 
excuse me if I don't immediately believe it. No disrespect, but every 
single time I've tried to get somewhere in life, I have failed 
spectacularly. It seems that no matter how much energy I expend, nothing 
happens. So when people say to me "take control of life", my resonse is 
"dude, like, HOW?! It can't be done."

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 02 Dec 2009 21:56:27 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

>> You might find it is a larger number than you think.
> 
> I can't actually think of a real reliable way to get the real number,
> actually... Might be interesting.

There may not be a reliable way to get the real number.  Besides, the 
number of actual jobs doesn't matter that much - only the ones you apply 
for are really the ones that matter.

>>>> You could probably get a tech job with Nokia if you actually applied
>>>> for one.
>>> Do *you* have any evidence whatsoever to back up such a bold claim?
>> 
>> I can guarantee you won't get a job there if you don't apply.
> 
> This is self-evident. But that's not the statement you made. ;-)

Yes, I said you could probably get a job with them.  I believe that is a 
true statement - maybe in systems administration.  You won't know until 
you try - and even then, in the event they decline to hire you for that 
job, there's nothing that says you can't keep applying until they do hire 
you.  Like I said, it took me three interviews in three different 
departments before I got a job at Novell - and today I'm not doing what 
they originally hired me to do.

>>> They don't let just anybody work for Nokia, after all...
>> 
>> Right, they only let people who actually apply for jobs there work
>> there.
> 
> Heh, that got a chuckle.

Well, that's good - I was more or less aiming for a laugh there, while 
still making a serious point. :-)

>> You've written code I couldn't have written with the skills I've
>> developed over the years.
>> 
>> As for your writing - your spelling could be improved, yes - but so can
>> mine, and I've been a professional writer.  Big F'ing Deal.  Nobody
>> writes perfect copy 100% of the time.  I read your blog regularly, and
>> I find it generally well-written and interesting.  I track it with
>> Google Reader and every time you write a new post, I see it.
>> 
>> As for your maths skills, you understand a lot more about mathematics
>> than I do, and I took a couple of calculus courses in pursuit of a
>> engineering degree (a degree that I didn't earn because I couldn't hack
>> the integral calculus class).
> 
> I guess what it comes down to is that there isn't actually any objective
> way to determine how good I am at any of these things, so we're stuck
> with my subjective opinion. (And this varies depending on my mood...)

And I keep telling you that your subjective opinion of your own skills 
isn't important.  It's the prospective employer's subjective opinion that 
matters.

I've said it before and I'll say it again:  Most people who have very 
deep knowledge have a hard time  understanding that they've got 
significant expertise, because they know it off the top of their heads 
and it seems so easy and intuitive that they assume anyone can learn it.  
I spent years thinking I was "nothing special" because I knew my subject 
matter (directory services) as well as some of the developers who wrote 
the code.  It seemed easy and intuitive to me, and that is something that 
can be demotivating.  Even today - maybe 5 years after I stopped working 
with the technology daily - I've probably forgotten more than most people 
ever learn about the technology.  I don't say that to brag, but I say 
that because I still don't really think of myself as an expert in that 
field, but I still have people come up to me at conferences and ask me 
about the technology, and I still can pull up answers.  And not just end 
users or system administrators, but sometimes still the engineering folks 
from India seek me out to ask my opinion on things they're working on.

It feels good and at the same time feels really strange, because it 
doesn't seem that difficult to me.  But I have learned over several years 
that the reason it's easy for me is because I've spent a LOT of time 
studying it, reading about it, and even reviewing code that implements it.

What you need to do is what I do when it comes to directory technology - 
which is that I state that I've got 'x' years experience working with it 
and have studied it extensively both as part of the job and on my own.  
Then I let them decide if my knowledge was what they were looking for.

That's how I got the job with Novell, in fact.  I was hired to teach 
about the technology, and I thought "I could probably do that, even 
though I've never taught in an adult classroom setting before"; I had to 
give a 10 minute presentation on a subject of my choosing (related to the 
job I was applying for, naturally) and was evaluated on my presentation 
skills.  I actually didn't do very well in the presentation (I had 
presented at conferences before, but that's very different from teaching 
a class with labs and whatnot), but they liked my knowledge and said they 
could get my presentation skills to where they needed to be.

The job description was a Certified Novell Instructor with strong 
eDirectory skills and a few years' teaching experience.  I met one of 
those three criteria and got the job.  I had the knowledge.  I had no 
certifications and no teaching experience to speak of (I remembered after 
I was hired that I had taught a couple of classes in college and had done 
some TA work during summer school when I was younger).

>>> Erm... like I say, I don't know of anybody who had to move just to
>>> find work.
>> 
>> But you also admit that you don't know that many people.  I do know
>> people who have moved for work and who have had to move for work.
> 
> Maybe it's different outside the UK or something? IDK.

I know people inside the UK who have moved for their jobs as well.  My 
point is it's not that unusual for it to happen and isn't something to be 
feared.  Is it a risk?  Sure.  But life is generally a series of risks.

>>> Anyway, I'm not looking at stacking shelves just yet. I'm thinking
>>> about system administration - basically, doing a job like the one I
>>> currently do, but for money. Let's face it, at least I can walk into
>>> the room and say "I have *actually done this* for the last 7 years. I
>>> can prove I know how to do this."
>> 
>> That's a step in the right direction, to be sure.  So apply for
>> sysadmin jobs in the area - don't concern yourself too much with what
>> the company does - or pick a company that works in an industry you're
>> interested in. Working in IT does give a lot of flexibility because
>> systems admin work is pretty much the same everywhere, but it gives you
>> an opportunity to learn something about the business you work for as
>> well.  I did sysadmin work in companies that did manufacturing, retail,
>> pharmacies, benefits administration, and a call centers (some of the
>> jobs covered multiple areas; the benefits administration company
>> operated a call center, so I got to learn about how those work).  I
>> started each of those jobs with no prior experience in the industry.
> 
> Well, as I said, I think this will have to wait for the new year, but
> this is the next stage in my plan.

It seems a reasonable step.  Doing more sysadmin work - especially in a 
team environment (which I can tell you is great for being able to take 
time off - something very hard to do when you're the only one doing the 
work) is a good stepping stone into other areas.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 02 Dec 2009 21:03:49 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

>>> My total inability to spell properly is the stuff of legend.
>> 
>> Mainly because you forget to use and/or install a spelling checker.
>> Again writing has many more sides than spelling alone.
> 
> [It's not really related to this discussion, but I have tried several
> times to get Thunderbird's spell checker to work... Apparently it just
> hates me or something.]

You could ask for help.  I'm sure there's someone here who uses it who 
might be able to give you some tips.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 02 Dec 2009 22:19:36 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

>>> Most of the stuff I do has no useful function.
>> 
>> I don't believe that's true.  Just because you feel it has no useful
>> function doesn't mean it has no useful function.  You need to stop
>> substituting your view of the world for the way the world works and
>> then assume that because you think something is useless (or that it is
>> useless to you), that it's useless for everyone.
> 
> If you know of a commercial application for Mandelbrot plotters, I'd be
> interested in hearing about it...

Have you looked at acedemia for something like this?  But what little 
I've read about fractals, that type of maths comes in handy with 
rendering realistic organics, so that might be an area where you could 
make some cash - someplace that does visual effects.

>> I've been most successful at applying for jobs not through the front
>> door, but through a side door.  Find an advantage and USE IT.
> 
> Fair enough.

You have to assume that everyone is looking for advantages to use it - 
doing things the way the company expects (or not even expects, but tells 
you to do it) puts you at a disadvantage.

>>> Ah yes, nothing like somebody telling you that all your hard work
>>> "isn't really trying" to motivate you to continue.
>> 
>> Tell me what you've done in the last 30 days, then.
> 
> To be honest, I completely gave up on the job hunt a few months ago. 

I hate to say it, but there you go. :/

> It
> seems so utterly fruitless. As I've indicated, I'm planning to start
> again in the new year, looking in the direction of sysadmin rather than
> programmer to see if that gets me any further.

That's good, and of course it can take time, especially in a down economy 
- just don't give up and look for those advantages.

>> Only you can motivate you.  I can't do it, nobody can do it.  Hell, I
>> can't even provide you with an incentive to make a change.  I'm telling
>> you what I'm seeing from over here - you fill out an application or
>> send in a CV and then you wait to hear something.
> 
> As far as I know, that's how people get jobs. I don't really know what
> else there is to do.

Well, I've already given you some ideas - don't deal with recruiters who 
won't give you the company contact info - deal with the companies 
directly.  Things like that help.

> I know you hear of people who such a ridiculously superhuman level of
> self-confidence that they just walk into a building and say "I think you
> should hire me", and it sometimes actually works. But, obviously, this
> is beyond my capabilities.

Well, I don't think it's beyond your capabilities, but it also doesn't 
ever really happen that way - not in larger companies, anyways.  I did it 
once about 18 years ago, and that was moving from assembly line work to 
the MIS department (so it wasn't walking into a business I had never been 
in before).

>> You do not persist in
>> trying to make a change.  That's what I'm seeing - so if that's not
>> accurate, then correct my perception.
> 
> It's one part not knowing what the hell to try, and two parts just
> lacking the motivation to keep going in the face of unending rejections.

Well, you can ask here for ideas of what to try.  As for motivation in 
the face of continued rejection, all I can say is to think about how much 
you dislike your current boss/job/coworkers and let that motivate you to 
keep trying.

>>> Ah, I see. So what you're saying is I should read this:
>>>
>>>    "Candidates are expected to have a relevant PhD in Finance,
>>> Economics, Mathematics or Computing Science. In exceptional cases we
>>> may consider candidates with outstanding degree grades."
>>>
>>> as meaning this:
>>>
>>>    "We will accept anybody who applies."
>>>
>>> Sure, seems completely plausible to me. :-P
>> 
>> Very often that *is* the case, yes.
> 
> ...OK, well I guess there's really little point in bothering to read the
> job description then. o_O

You need to know what the job entails, but that's really all I tend to 
read into job descriptions myself.  You do need to know if you're 
applying for a job to bus tables or to empty the trash, but beyond that, 
if it sounds interesting, there's nothing to lose.

>> You've got nothing to lose by applying for a job that you'd like to
>> have regardless of the requirements.  The worst that happens is it's
>> not a good fit.  The best that happens is you get the job.
> 
> Or rather, the worst that happens is some guy phones me up and asks me
> what the hell I'm playing at daring to apply for a job I'm clearly not
> qualified for, and I get to spend the rest of the day feeling like
> crap...

Rarely if ever happens, and if it does, just thank them for calling to 
let you know that they're not interested in you as an applicant and ask 
them to keep you in mind if a better fit does apply.

Then hang up the phone and laugh at what an asshole they are for not even 
bothering to find out more about you as a candidate, and consider 
yourself lucky to have not been offered a job working for people who 
would behave so dickishly towards someone they know nothing about.

>> It depends on how badly they need to fill the position as well.
> 
> Well, that's true too. I only got my current job because they were
> absolutely desperate, and I was cheap.

And from the job you've gained some experience, which helps you with the 
next job.

>> But you're getting tied down in the details instead of hearing what I'm
>> saying in a more general way:  If you see a programming position that
>> looks interesting to you, apply for it.  Don't read the detailed
>> requirements over other than to see if it's an area that you're
>> interested in.  Demonstrate the ability to apply programming skills to
>> a problem (which is something you can do).
> 
> I suppose. Trouble is, you can't really show them anything unless you
> can get them to actually talk to you. I usually don't get that far.

It takes persistence and sometimes takes trying a number of different 
companies.  It also takes varying your approach if an approach you're 
using doesn't seem to be working.  Scott was right about tailoring your 
CV for a particular position - that does help.  It doesn't have to be 
completely new, but (for example) adjusting the objective to better fit 
the job you're applying for can be helpful.

>>>> Why should they hire you?  Because if you're applying for the job,
>>>> you have some passion in the area (because you wouldn't apply for a
>>>> job you didn't have passion for, right?) and because you know your
>>>> skills will grow as you learn the job.
>>> By that metric, they should just hire anybody who actually applies.
>> 
>> That's not what I said, and you know that.
> 
> No, it actually looks to me like you're saying anybody who applies for a
> job must be really movatived, and that's reason enough to hire them.
> That doesn't make a lot of sense.

People are motivated to apply for different reasons.  Some apply because 
it lets them continue collecting unemployment benefits - and they have no 
interest in actually getting the job.  You have to show interest in the 
position and an aptitude (in their judgment, not yours) for the job.

>> But you seem to think that it
>> works by having 100% of the skills requested (you think "requested" =
>> "demanded") going in.  *THAT* is NOT how it works.
> 
> As you say, nobody is a 100% fit. But I *do* expect that you'd need to
> be, say, an 80% fit in order to get hired. If you aren't, somebody else
> will be.

Well, like I said in another post written earlier, the job that got me in 
at Novell I feel I was about 33% qualified for (one requirement out of 
three).  But I got the job.

>> Your assumptions and knowledge are based on the experience of being
>> hired once.  My assumptions and knowledge are based on having worked in
>> several jobs in several different industries.  Why do you continue to
>> insist that you know better what I'm talking about than I do?
> 
>> 4.  Lack of good references:
> 
> Ooo, that reminds me... My CV claims that I have references. I'd better
> go find some. o_O

That would be a good idea. :-)

>> 5.  Lack of specific credentials:
> 
> So somebody can get not hired for not having a Cisco certificate, but if
> you don't have a PhD certificate that's no problem?

It all depends on the job requirements (CNI isn't Cisco, BTW, it's a 
Novell instructor certification - and yes, I got hired to teach Novell 
classes even though I didn't have the *required* certification).

>>>> Formal education is overrated.
>>> Pity. That's about the only good thing I've got going for me.
>> 
>> I would disagree.  You've got an extensive informal education that
>> shows that you are a motivated self-learner, and that you have
>> curiosity about things and are willing to research those things that
>> interest you.
> 
> Heh. Does anybody else here think I should just get Jim to tell
> employers about me rather than me tell them? The way you talk, you make
> it sound as if I'm somehow worth having...

Well, I have some experience in self-marketing.  That is what a CV is - a 
marketing document.  I also happen to believe that you do have real 
skills and would be an asset to anyone who hired you.  I see a lot of 
potential in your abilities that you don't seem to see in yourself, and 
there is a certain amount of moulding that could be done to really make 
you shine.  If I was in a hiring position and had something that I felt 
you could do, I'd be making a suggestion for you to apply for it; sadly, 
Novell is not in a position to hire right now, and our development and 
sysadmin jobs aren't in the UK.  I've been keeping an eye out, but I 
don't hear a lot about jobs in the UK because I'm not there.

If you were willing to be more mobile, that would make it easier for me 
to keep an eye open for something that you might find interesting.

>> You're still insisting on making the decision for the prospective
>> employer to not hire you.  That's THEIR decision to make and not yours!
>> I'm going to KEEP saying that until you demonstrate that you understand
>> it.
> 
> Well, I *did* apply anyway, didn't I?

Yes, you have at times applied.  But you didn't follow up the way I would 
have done, and that's one significant difference.  A big part of the 
reason is that you don't know how because you haven't had to do that kind 
of follow-up before.  Not your fault, but you need to be willing to learn 
how.

>>>> Don't let life happen to you - take control!
>>> You say this as if it's actually physically possible.
>> 
>> It *is* possible.  I forget who it is who said "I've been very lucky in
>> my life - and it takes a lot of work to be as lucky as I have been",
>> but it's a very true statement.
>> 
>> Contrary to your apparent belief, you're not a hot air balloon being
>> pushed around by winds you cannot control.  If you don't take control
>> of your life, then someone else will, and you'll feel like you're not
>> in control.  It's your life, and you need to take control and make
>> things happen.
> 
> This is contrary to everything I have ever experienced in my life, so
> excuse me if I don't immediately believe it. No disrespect, but every
> single time I've tried to get somewhere in life, I have failed
> spectacularly. It seems that no matter how much energy I expend, nothing
> happens. So when people say to me "take control of life", my resonse is
> "dude, like, HOW?! It can't be done."

I can understand why you feel the way you do; I did for many years 
myself.  It takes persistence to push past it, and it also (in my 
experience) means not taking life so seriously.  Someone doesn't call you 
back - so what?  (Yes, I know how hard that is - BTDTGTTS).

At the same time, though, you've done a lot in the past few years (that 
I've seen up here) that has expanded your horizons; you've been skiing 
more (it seems); you took up dance classes and really seem to enjoy them 
immensely.  I've seen you fight back in discussions up here (including a 
couple of times where I provoked you into a pretty strong response - and 
I have to say I was *impressed* with how well you held your ground in 
those instances), which is something you hadn't done before.  You're 
learning to stand up for yourself, and that's a GOOD thing.

Applying that in an online forum is a good first step.  Applying it in 
'meatspace' is the next step.  I'm fairly certain you can do it 
successfully, probably in your place of employ - like the next time 
someone demands something from you that you judge to be unreasonable; 
telling them to "do it themselves" if it's so easy that they judge you 
should be able to do it in no time at all when in fact the request is 
much more complex than they understand.  Might they complain to your 
boss?  Probably.  Might your boss have words with you about it?  You can 
almost certainly count on it.  But I've seen you stand up here to similar 
criticism and hold your own very well - and I'm sure you could explain to 
your boss that the user was giving you attitude about how you do your job 
with no understanding of what that actually entails or of what their 
request was - and they "pushed me past my limit", so rather than argue 
with them, you told them to do it themselves and walked away from it to 
cool off.

Then ask your boss how you should deal with unreasonable demands from end 
users - what you should do when they ask for something that's ridiculous 
or impossible.  They have their areas of expertise, and you have yours.  
You don't tell them how to run a centrifuge, and they shouldn't tell you 
how to fix their workstation - because if they know how to fix it, then 
they damned well SHOULD fix it themselves.  (Maybe not in those words, 
but you get my meaning).

Jim

Post a reply to this message

>> Simply discovering three or four jobs *per month* that I can actually
>> apply for would be a significant feat, BTH.
> 
> You can apply for any job you might want.

And finding jobs I want is one of the problems.

> You keep doing the employer's 
> filtering for them by looking for reasons why you're not qualified and 
> not applying.

I suppose arguably that's the other half...

Post a reply to this message

>>> Only you can motivate you.  I can't do it, nobody can do it.  Hell, I
>>> can't even provide you with an incentive to make a change.  I'm telling
>>> you what I'm seeing from over here - you fill out an application or
>>> send in a CV and then you wait to hear something.
>> As far as I know, that's how people get jobs. I don't really know what
>> else there is to do.
> 
> Well, I've already given you some ideas - don't deal with recruiters who 
> won't give you the company contact info - deal with the companies 
> directly.  Things like that help.

 From what I've seen recruiters are utterly useless... I don't know if 
they're any use to the company paying for their services, but they're no 
use at all to the people trying to get hired.

>> It's one part not knowing what the hell to try, and two parts just
>> lacking the motivation to keep going in the face of unending rejections.
> 
> Well, you can ask here for ideas of what to try.  As for motivation in 
> the face of continued rejection, all I can say is to think about how much 
> you dislike your current boss/job/coworkers and let that motivate you to 
> keep trying.

Yeah, but that doesn't really work. It would be wonderful if I won 
several million on the lottery, and I could just retire to my stately 
home with a built-in custom recording studio. BUT IT'S IMPOSSIBLE! So 
thinking about my current bank balance doesn't motivate me to buy a 
lottery ticket any more than the current trainwreck of a job I have 
motivates me to look for another one - it seems equally impossible.

>>> It depends on how badly they need to fill the position as well.
>> Well, that's true too. I only got my current job because they were
>> absolutely desperate, and I was cheap.
> 
> And from the job you've gained some experience, which helps you with the 
> next job.

I don't think I really gained anything useful from this job - other than 
being able to _claim_ that I have commercial experience now...

>>> 4.  Lack of good references:
>> Ooo, that reminds me... My CV claims that I have references. I'd better
>> go find some. o_O
> 
> That would be a good idea. :-)

...which brings us back to "I don't know anybody". :-/

Besides, I gather the rules of these things are such that it's supposed 
to be somebody who knows you on a professional capacity? That's going to 
be even more of a problem...

>> Heh. Does anybody else here think I should just get Jim to tell
>> employers about me rather than me tell them? The way you talk, you make
>> it sound as if I'm somehow worth having...
> 
> Well, I have some experience in self-marketing.

[Understatement.]

> That is what a CV is - a marketing document.

Indeed.

> I also happen to believe that you do have real 
> skills and would be an asset to anyone who hired you.

Well, that's kind of the problem. I *like* playing with equations, but 
I'm not actually very *good* at it, unfortunately. And it's also not a 
very useful thing to do anyway. The long and short of it is... I'm not a 
very useful employee. Secondly, even if I had useful skills, I don't 
have any "proof". There's nothing I can easily show to somebody that 
will prove to them that I'm not just talking out of my arse.

> I see a lot of 
> potential in your abilities that you don't seem to see in yourself.

Apparently.

>>> You're still insisting on making the decision for the prospective
>>> employer to not hire you.  That's THEIR decision to make and not yours!
>>> I'm going to KEEP saying that until you demonstrate that you understand
>>> it.
>> Well, I *did* apply anyway, didn't I?
> 
> Yes, you have at times applied.  But you didn't follow up the way I would 
> have done, and that's one significant difference.

The job I was referring to is about the one job where I *did* actually 
follow up (not that it helped), but anyway...

>> This is contrary to everything I have ever experienced in my life, so
>> excuse me if I don't immediately believe it. No disrespect, but every
>> single time I've tried to get somewhere in life, I have failed
>> spectacularly. It seems that no matter how much energy I expend, nothing
>> happens. So when people say to me "take control of life", my resonse is
>> "dude, like, HOW?! It can't be done."
> 
> I can understand why you feel the way you do; I did for many years 
> myself.  It takes persistence to push past it.

I think part of it is having nobody around me to encourage me to 
continue. When I apply for a job, nobody says "well done". When I don't 
apply for a job, nobody says "you need to try harder". Either way, it's 
just me, sitting in an empty room, staring at my computer thinking "now, 
do I spend 4 hours on a pointless and utterly depressing task, or shall 
I go read about non-Euclidian geometry for a while?" You can see how 
that one's going to turn out most of the time.

Unfortunately, as far as I can tell, to actually get a job you have to 
apply for several hundred trillion jobs. Given that under optimum 
conditions, I might be able to find maybe 3 agency adverts to apply for 
after several soul-destroying hours of searching, it's going to take 
several human lifetimes for me to apply to even a hundred, never mind a 
billion.

> I've seen you fight back in discussions up here
> which is something you hadn't done before.  You're 
> learning to stand up for yourself, and that's a GOOD thing.

On the contrary, now it seems people just think I'm an opinionated idiot.

> Applying that in an online forum is a good first step.  Applying it in 
> 'meatspace' is the next step.

Nah. Telling a bunch of glyphs on a screen "you're wrong" is one thing. 
Telling that to a 300-pound gorilla of a man standing on front of you 
holding a baseball bat? Not so easy.

> I'm fairly certain you can do it 
> successfully, probably in your place of employ - like the next time 
> someone demands something from you that you judge to be unreasonable; 
> telling them to "do it themselves" if it's so easy that they judge you 
> should be able to do it in no time at all when in fact the request is 
> much more complex than they understand.  Might they complain to your 
> boss?  Probably.  Might your boss have words with you about it?  You can 
> almost certainly count on it.  But I've seen you stand up here to similar 
> criticism and hold your own very well - and I'm sure you could explain to 
> your boss.

The irony is, *my boss* is usually the guy who's being unreasonable at 
me. ;-)

Like, currently I'm waiting for the site GM to return from... wherever 
the hell he is right now, so that I can talk to him about that email I 
got. Basically I was told I have to be trained on the procedure document 
explaining how the scientists in the laboratory in Oregon manage and 
maintain their lab water purification system. I decided (and the local 
QA manager agrees) that this is utterly irrelevant to my job. I'm never 
even going to set foot on Oregon, why *the hell* do I care how their 
water system works?! But my boss is adamant that I have to be trained on 
everything on the list he gave me. Of course, I'm just some nobody, so 
no one's going to listen to me, but the QA manager is the kind of guy 
that people sit up and listen to. (He's in QA, after all. These people 
are feared everywhere.) So we'll see how that one works out...

Did you know, the company has a set of 14 "core values". And value 11 is 
"I support the hiring of people who are smarter than me". I feel that in 
the case of the Director of IT, that shouldn't be a difficult task. :-P

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 03 Dec 2009 09:11:57 +0000, Invisible wrote:

>>> Simply discovering three or four jobs *per month* that I can actually
>>> apply for would be a significant feat, BTH.
>> 
>> You can apply for any job you might want.
> 
> And finding jobs I want is one of the problems.

That could be, and may well be a matter of scoping differently.

>> You keep doing the employer's
>> filtering for them by looking for reasons why you're not qualified and
>> not applying.
> 
> I suppose arguably that's the other half...

Ayup.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 03 Dec 2009 09:53:04 +0000, Invisible wrote:

>>>> Only you can motivate you.  I can't do it, nobody can do it.  Hell, I
>>>> can't even provide you with an incentive to make a change.  I'm
>>>> telling you what I'm seeing from over here - you fill out an
>>>> application or send in a CV and then you wait to hear something.
>>> As far as I know, that's how people get jobs. I don't really know what
>>> else there is to do.
>> 
>> Well, I've already given you some ideas - don't deal with recruiters
>> who won't give you the company contact info - deal with the companies
>> directly.  Things like that help.
> 
>  From what I've seen recruiters are utterly useless... I don't know if
> they're any use to the company paying for their services, but they're no
> use at all to the people trying to get hired.

Ding ding ding ding ding!  So relying on recruiters is a bad way to try 
to find a job.  Basically, you're outsourcing your job search to someone 
with no real interest or motivation to help you out.

>>> It's one part not knowing what the hell to try, and two parts just
>>> lacking the motivation to keep going in the face of unending
>>> rejections.
>> 
>> Well, you can ask here for ideas of what to try.  As for motivation in
>> the face of continued rejection, all I can say is to think about how
>> much you dislike your current boss/job/coworkers and let that motivate
>> you to keep trying.
> 
> Yeah, but that doesn't really work. It would be wonderful if I won
> several million on the lottery, and I could just retire to my stately
> home with a built-in custom recording studio. BUT IT'S IMPOSSIBLE! So
> thinking about my current bank balance doesn't motivate me to buy a
> lottery ticket any more than the current trainwreck of a job I have
> motivates me to look for another one - it seems equally impossible.

Then the motivation simply isn't strong enough - and you're content 
enough with the job that you have to not change the status quo.

>>>> It depends on how badly they need to fill the position as well.
>>> Well, that's true too. I only got my current job because they were
>>> absolutely desperate, and I was cheap.
>> 
>> And from the job you've gained some experience, which helps you with
>> the next job.
> 
> I don't think I really gained anything useful from this job - other than
> being able to _claim_ that I have commercial experience now...

You've learned a bit about the bad kind of corporate politics (and thus 
you know that's something you want to try to avoid if you can); you've 
learned about meeting government regulations for data retention and such 
- how to deal with government auditors - there's plenty that you've 
learned.  But you don't recognize it because you're "inside" your own 
head, so you think what you've learned is no big deal.

>>>> 4.  Lack of good references:
>>> Ooo, that reminds me... My CV claims that I have references. I'd
>>> better go find some. o_O
>> 
>> That would be a good idea. :-)
> 
> ...which brings us back to "I don't know anybody". :-/

Who's someone at work who you have helped who has not responded 
overwhelmingly negatively?  What's the best response you got for helping 
a user out?

> Besides, I gather the rules of these things are such that it's supposed
> to be somebody who knows you on a professional capacity? That's going to
> be even more of a problem...

Not necessarily.  You can have business references and personal 
references on most job applications.

>>> Heh. Does anybody else here think I should just get Jim to tell
>>> employers about me rather than me tell them? The way you talk, you
>>> make it sound as if I'm somehow worth having...
>> 
>> Well, I have some experience in self-marketing.
> 
> [Understatement.]

It's an important skill to cultivate.  I hate marketing in general, but 
it's one of those things that is necessary if you want to get ahead.

>> I also happen to believe that you do have real skills and would be an
>> asset to anyone who hired you.
> 
> Well, that's kind of the problem. I *like* playing with equations, but
> I'm not actually very *good* at it, unfortunately. And it's also not a
> very useful thing to do anyway. The long and short of it is... I'm not a
> very useful employee. Secondly, even if I had useful skills, I don't
> have any "proof". There's nothing I can easily show to somebody that
> will prove to them that I'm not just talking out of my arse.

You don't *think* you're good at it.  That's an important difference from 
not being good at it.

My mum has always thought that she was awful at maths.  But for *decades* 
she's sewed (she's self-employed now), and has been able to take a 
pattern and rescale it to fit specific individuals.  She doesn't consider 
that math - but it very much is, and she's able to not only work it out 
on her own, but she does it intuitively (not by sitting down and working 
out the measurements with a calculator).

But she refuses to see that she's actually quite good at math - but 
largely only when she doesn't think of it *as* math.

>> I see a lot of
>> potential in your abilities that you don't seem to see in yourself.
> 
> Apparently.

So trust what those of us who say you have good abilities and potential 
are telling you.  We have nothing to gain (or lose) by telling you that - 
it's an honest assessment, so take it as such.

>>>> You're still insisting on making the decision for the prospective
>>>> employer to not hire you.  That's THEIR decision to make and not
>>>> yours! I'm going to KEEP saying that until you demonstrate that you
>>>> understand it.
>>> Well, I *did* apply anyway, didn't I?
>> 
>> Yes, you have at times applied.  But you didn't follow up the way I
>> would have done, and that's one significant difference.
> 
> The job I was referring to is about the one job where I *did* actually
> follow up (not that it helped), but anyway...

A follow-up doesn't guarantee that you'll get the job, but it increases 
the chances.  Since you're still learning what works and what doesn't, 
you got some experience out of that follow-up, and you should be proud of 
taking that additional step forward.

>>> This is contrary to everything I have ever experienced in my life, so
>>> excuse me if I don't immediately believe it. No disrespect, but every
>>> single time I've tried to get somewhere in life, I have failed
>>> spectacularly. It seems that no matter how much energy I expend,
>>> nothing happens. So when people say to me "take control of life", my
>>> resonse is "dude, like, HOW?! It can't be done."
>> 
>> I can understand why you feel the way you do; I did for many years
>> myself.  It takes persistence to push past it.
> 
> I think part of it is having nobody around me to encourage me to
> continue. When I apply for a job, nobody says "well done". When I don't
> apply for a job, nobody says "you need to try harder". Either way, it's
> just me, sitting in an empty room, staring at my computer thinking "now,
> do I spend 4 hours on a pointless and utterly depressing task, or shall
> I go read about non-Euclidian geometry for a while?" You can see how
> that one's going to turn out most of the time.

Well, look at it from this side of the screen; we've told you repeatedly 
when you do things that help move you forward that you're doing well, 
even in the face of rejections.  When you don't apply for a job, we DO 
tell you that you need to try harder, and you say "gee, great, thanks, 
way to motivate me by telling me I suck!" - makes it kinda hard to 
provide feedback when you seem to ignore the positive feedback and when 
we tell you that you need to try harder you punch us in the face and say 
"yeah, like THAT'S helping".  We can and do provide encouragement, but 
only you can motivate yourself.  You want your circumstance to change, 
and you are the one who has to make that happen.

We can advise and help you out in some ways, but ultimately, it's your 
life and your situation should be what motivates you.  As I said before, 
none of us "out here" are in a position to even provide incentive, much 
less motivation.

When you look at your situation and you say "this sucks", the response 
you need to train yourself to have is "I'm going to DO something about 
the fact that it sucks" rather than "I'm just going to ignore it and hope 
it goes away".  You've been ignoring it for years and it hasn't gone 
away.  What's more, if the job you have goes away, then you're back to 
being the balloon that's buffeted by the winds.  It's your life and you 
need to take control - once you do that, you WILL be happier.

Start by setting some goals.  I don't even mean things like "I want a job 
at Nortel" or whatever, but higher level goals like "I want to move into 
my own flat in 3 years" or "I want to make x GBP per year" (though with 
that one, you need to be careful to not set a goal that's truly out of 
your reach - 10 million would be nice, but when setting goals, they need 
to be something achievable - a stretch is nice, but achievable is a 
must.  So if you're at 21K right now, say you'd like to be at 30K in 5 
years - if you do better than that, great.)

Once you've set some goals, then find people who have accomplished 
similar goals and look at what they did.  *Most* people have to work 
fairly hard to achieve their goals, and nobody starts out with the 
experience that got them to where they are.  So look at how they gained 
their experience, what mistakes they made, what things they did right, 
and see if those things that helped are things that you can do - and 
learn from their mistakes.

> Unfortunately, as far as I can tell, to actually get a job you have to
> apply for several hundred trillion jobs. Given that under optimum
> conditions, I might be able to find maybe 3 agency adverts to apply for
> after several soul-destroying hours of searching, it's going to take
> several human lifetimes for me to apply to even a hundred, never mind a
> billion.

Now you're exaggerating again.  Part of the reason it takes you so long 
is because you take everything extremely personally.  It's not - it's 
business.  So when a rejection comes along, just forget about it and move 
on to the next one - after thanking them for their time and asking that 
they contact you if an opportunity comes up.  They may never do so, but 
you need to remember some advice I got from a VP of marketing - if you 
can't have them leave you with a positive view, have them leave you with 
a neutral view.  You want to do everything you can to ensure you don't 
leave a bad impression, because that guarantees they'll never call you 
back.  But if you accept their decision to not employ you with grace, the 
next time they have a job you might be interested in, they'll remember 
that you acted professionally in the face of being turned down, and that 
type of professionalism is something that is desirable.

>> I've seen you fight back in discussions up here which is something you
>> hadn't done before.  You're learning to stand up for yourself, and
>> that's a GOOD thing.
> 
> On the contrary, now it seems people just think I'm an opinionated
> idiot.

Wrong.  But people can't help you taking things in the worst possible way 
- that's something you do and is a bad habit you need to break.

>> Applying that in an online forum is a good first step.  Applying it in
>> 'meatspace' is the next step.
> 
> Nah. Telling a bunch of glyphs on a screen "you're wrong" is one thing.
> Telling that to a 300-pound gorilla of a man standing on front of you
> holding a baseball bat? Not so easy.

First of all, how often are they literally holding a baseball bat?

Second of all, you seem to forget that I've *been there*.  Is it easy?  
No.  Is it possible?  Damned right it is.  In my early and mid 20's, I 
hated dealing with people.  I frequently would say that I would *always* 
work with computers and technology because they didn't punch back when 
you hit them.

In my most recent performance review (just a few weeks ago), I was 
complimented by my manager and my director for my people skills - 
particularly my ability to respond to people acting in an emotional 
manner to something I personally care about very much (things I have a 
personal interest in) in a way that doesn't inflame the situation and 
make it worse.

If you'd taken that performance review feedback to me 10 years ago and 
said "this is what your performance review for 2009 will be", I'd 
probably have said you were a f-ing liar because there's no way I would 
ever deal with people in that way.  I *really* hated dealing with people 
professionally - and even the suggestion that I'd be dealing with people 
first and technology second would've sounded like the stupidest thing 
ever and had about a 0% chance of happening.

>> I'm fairly certain you can do it
>> successfully, probably in your place of employ - like the next time
>> someone demands something from you that you judge to be unreasonable;
>> telling them to "do it themselves" if it's so easy that they judge you
>> should be able to do it in no time at all when in fact the request is
>> much more complex than they understand.  Might they complain to your
>> boss?  Probably.  Might your boss have words with you about it?  You
>> can almost certainly count on it.  But I've seen you stand up here to
>> similar criticism and hold your own very well - and I'm sure you could
>> explain to your boss.
> 
> The irony is, *my boss* is usually the guy who's being unreasonable at
> me. ;-)

BTDTGTTS.  One of my bosses who was like that was ex-Army, served in the 
first Gulf War, and he actually carried a gun with him (not in the 
office, but he kept one in his car - had some problems with unsavory 
types following him around or something).  I had no problem telling him 
he was being an idiot when he was being an idiot.  I *was* asked to 
resign after a few months of problems with him (which culminated in me 
going over his head and discussing his total lack of management skills 
with his boss, but my presentation came across as a power grab on my part 
- say the boss is a poor manager and then respond to "I suppose you want 
the job instead" with "Not really, but I would be willing to try if you 
felt I could do the job effectively" - to that particular director, that 
certainly came across as "I could do the job better than the current 
boss, just give me the chance to prove it").

A more recent boss would constantly slam me for little things (like not 
providing regular reports on stuff that the boss didn't indicate a need 
for), and rarely gave praise for doing good things.  It got so bad that I 
started looking for ways to get that boss removed.  End result was they 
were - to a non-management position.

My point is that your situation isn't unique - lots of people have had 
similar experiences and have survived them.  Learn from those who have.

> Like, currently I'm waiting for the site GM to return from... wherever
> the hell he is right now, so that I can talk to him about that email I
> got. Basically I was told I have to be trained on the procedure document
> explaining how the scientists in the laboratory in Oregon manage and
> maintain their lab water purification system. I decided (and the local
> QA manager agrees) that this is utterly irrelevant to my job. I'm never
> even going to set foot on Oregon, why *the hell* do I care how their
> water system works?! But my boss is adamant that I have to be trained on
> everything on the list he gave me. Of course, I'm just some nobody, so
> no one's going to listen to me, but the QA manager is the kind of guy
> that people sit up and listen to. (He's in QA, after all. These people
> are feared everywhere.) So we'll see how that one works out...

So how did it work out?  They may actually have reasons for training you 
on it that haven't been made clear.

It sounds like the QA manager might be a good mentor and someone you 
could use as a reference.  Maybe ask that individual if they'd mind if 
you came to them for advice when dealing with things that are beyond your 
experience.

I actually did that fairly recently with my director (my boss and I are 
good friends and he also is happy to advise when I have difficulty) - the 
reaction I got from my director was "absolutely - I'd be more than happy 
to help out" - she recognized (I think) that if I'm more able to do my 
job, then it makes her look better because she has a more effective 
staff.  At the same time, she has noticed huge changes in how I do my job 
in the past year, and part of the reason for that is because of her 
mentoring me as I ran into problems, because rather than react to the 
problem immediately, I'd ask for advice, and then my response to the 
problem would be much more measured and - in some cases - even more 
appropriate than just reacting.

When I talk about being "in control", that's the sort of thing I'm 
talking about.  I'm quite difficult in the workplace to provoke now into 
an emotional response (not that it doesn't happen occasionally).  Being 
able to do that has increased people's respect for what I can do and my 
ability to get my job done has improved significantly.

> Did you know, the company has a set of 14 "core values". And value 11 is
> "I support the hiring of people who are smarter than me". I feel that in
> the case of the Director of IT, that shouldn't be a difficult task. :-P

LOL, I hear ya there.  I do work with some people who seem to be 
delusional as well - or just not very bright at times.

BTW, there was an interesting article on Slashdot earlier today (I think, 
might've been yesterday) on Google's hiring practices.  That particular 
story was about the fact that sometimes Google doesn't hire the best 
person for the job - and they apparently do that intentionally.  You 
might have a look at that (not the /. story, but the story behind the 
story there) - you might find some interesting and useful insights there.

Jim

Post a reply to this message