 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 04.08.2012 15:44, schrieb Orchid Win7 v1:
> I did have one telephone interview with an actual employer. I very much
> doubt I got that job, and I don't particularly want it if I did.
> (There's a face-to-face interview plus a C++ coding test first. I'll
> presumably fail that.)
That's bullshit thinking. Stop that. From my experience, such "coding
tests" are merely there to filter out people who do know the syntax but
don't have the slightest clues about algorithm design, performance
issues and so forth.
For instance, they might ask you to write a small function to compute
factorials. Someone might program this as a recursion because he
happened to come across it as an example in the "programming for
dummies" section on recursion.
> I'm ambivalent as to whether this is actually the best strategy. On one
> hand, the more stuff I apply to, the more likely it is that somebody
> will call me. OTOH, if I apply for something totally unsuitable, and the
> recruiter phones me, they're not going to be amused at having their time
> wasted.
Best thing is if you do inform yourself about what the company actually
does, and which of your skills might be of interest to them. (And don't
just think "this particular job", but "this particular company" - they
might have other opportunities available.) Then, when applying,
emphasize those skills. (Don't forget the "soft skills"!)
> And than there's Network Rail. A friend
> of mine works there and insists it's the best job in the world... But
> they have ZERO computer jobs listed.
Ask your friend to dig around what they've got cooking wrt IT. Do apply
for a job at companies you'd probably enjoy working for, even if they
don't seem to offer jobs right now. They might just happen to ponder
hiring someone - or they may the moment they read your CV. You know, you
can't actually lose anything, can you?
And by all means, get rid of that "I'll probably fail" attitude. You
CANNOT LOSE at a job interview (or when sending in your CV, or whatever).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 04.08.2012 17:19, schrieb Orchid Win7 v1:
>> Graduate means just graduated, straight out of education with
>> little or no experience. At your age you are expected to have moved on.
>
> Sure. Anything that specifically says /graduate/ is unlikely to be open
> to me at this point. But I would have thought "trainee" would be fine...
What do you need to be trained for?
I've been a software developer for a decade, mostly getting my hands
dirty on code myself. Last job I applied for (and got) was as a
"software project coordinator", with my job being to coordinate between
the software developers, testers, customer and whoever else would be
involved, to get one particular product ready on time. It was a step
higher than I had aimed for, two steps higher than what I had been doing
until then, wouldn't let me touch any code myself, and I was seriously
worried if I'd be really fit for the task. But I did take the challenge,
and it turned out that I really did a great job at it.
The point I'm trying to make is this: When applying for a new job, don't
aim for what you've been doing until now. Aim higher. And don't expect
anyone to train you for that new challenge - instead, rely on what might
be your strongest soft skill: Your ability to teach /yourself/ whatever
new stuff you'll be facing. (Hey, you've taught yourself how to program
in /Haskell/ - what more proof do you need? :-P)
Let people know that you're not afraid of taking on new challenges, and
that you have what it /really/ takes for that: The will and ability to
learn.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 04/08/2012 5:28 PM, clipka wrote:
> I had been doing until then, wouldn't let me touch any code myself,
The way to go! Keep the project managers and coordinators off the tools. ;-)
and
> I was seriously worried if I'd be really fit for the task. But I did
> take the challenge, and it turned out that I really did a great job at it.
>
I am sure you did. :-D
> The point I'm trying to make is this: When applying for a new job, don't
> aim for what you've been doing until now. Aim higher. And don't expect
> anyone to train you for that new challenge - instead, rely on what might
> be your strongest soft skill: Your ability to teach /yourself/ whatever
> new stuff you'll be facing. (Hey, you've taught yourself how to program
> in /Haskell/ - what more proof do you need? :-P)
>
> Let people know that you're not afraid of taking on new challenges, and
> that you have what it /really/ takes for that: The will and ability to
> learn.
Andrew, these are words of wisdom, take heed.
We are rooting for you.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8/4/2012 9:03, clipka wrote:
> are merely there to filter out people who do know the syntax but don't have
> the slightest clues about algorithm design, performance issues and so forth.
They work pretty well for filtering out people who, amazingly, have been
programming for 20+ years and can't (for example) write a program to print
out the first 50 prime numbers. We wouldn't have fizzbuzz if we were
filtering out people who knew syntax but not algorithms.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
"Don't panic. There's beans and filters
in the cabinet."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8/4/2012 6:44, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> In the past, the problem I've always had is being utterly unable to find any
> jobs even remotely worth applying for. Everybody says "Computer jobs? Oh,
> that's easy! Jump onto the Internet and get searching. There are *millions*
> of IT jobs!" Well, uh, no there aren't.
As you've learned, you need to go to some of the sites where the people who
aren't drones go to advertise jobs. Craigslist is another good example, at
least in the USA.
> I'd log in to Monster.com and spend hour after hour wading through thousands
Because everyone knows of Monster.com, so everyone who doesn't know anything
about hiring goes to monster.com to advertise.
> In short, it has always been a completely mystery to me how anyone, anywhere
> on Earth, *ever* finds any jobs at all to apply to. All I seem to find is
> utter crap.
You know someone, and they recommend a position for you. If you were willing
to move to where someone on p.o-t lives, there would probably be people
offering you jobs based on what they know of you here.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
"Don't panic. There's beans and filters
in the cabinet."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka <ano### [at] anonymous org> wrote:
> Let people know that you're not afraid of taking on new challenges, and
> that you have what it /really/ takes for that: The will and ability to
> learn.
I've always wondered about this. I would think that most every applicant for an
IT position, especially those with limited formal training or experience in the
specific technologies required for the job, will make this claim. How do you
provide evidence that, in your case, you're not wildly exaggerating or outright
lying about having this skill?
Does the IT job application process allow submitting a portfolio of your work?
For example, I have no formal training in any programming language. I could
list URLs to a few web applications I've written for my own amusement using PHP,
JavaScript, SVG, and CSS (the last three now known collectively as HTML5),
provide a research-quality Octave/MatLab engineering application, and provide a
(beta version) production-quality Fortran 95 plugin for a commercial
application. I could even show them a patch to add some functions to POV-Ray in
C, and a whole lot more, attempting to demonstrate that I can program in just
about anything, despite having held down only one "real job" for about two of
the past twenty-five years.
How does one work this into the process without coming off as a lying jerk?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Let people know that you're not afraid of taking on new challenges, and
>> that you have what it /really/ takes for that: The will and ability to
>> learn.
> I've always wondered about this. I would think that most every applicant for an
> IT position, especially those with limited formal training or experience in the
> specific technologies required for the job, will make this claim. How do you
> provide evidence that, in your case, you're not wildly exaggerating or outright
> lying about having this skill?
This.
The fact that fizzbuzz even needs to exist in the first place... scares me.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> You know someone, and they recommend a position for you. If you were willing
> to move to where someone on p.o-t lives, there would probably be people
> offering you jobs based on what they know of you here.
>
This. Looking back on it, most of the positions I've held, including those
while I was active duty in the military, I got through word-of-mouth referral,
despite the fact that I suck at networking.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 04/08/2012 09:09 PM, waggy wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>> You know someone, and they recommend a position for you. If you were willing
>> to move to where someone on p.o-t lives, there would probably be people
>> offering you jobs based on what they know of you here.
>>
> This. Looking back on it, most of the positions I've held, including those
> while I was active duty in the military, I got through word-of-mouth referral,
> despite the fact that I suck at networking.
...right... so given that I don't know anybody, I should just give up
now? Is that what you're saying?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> (There's a face-to-face interview plus a C++ coding test first. I'll
>> presumably fail that.)
>
> That's bullshit thinking. Stop that. From my experience, such "coding
> tests" are merely there to filter out people who do know the syntax but
> don't have the slightest clues about algorithm design, performance
> issues and so forth.
>
> For instance, they might ask you to write a small function to compute
> factorials. Someone might program this as a recursion because he
> happened to come across it as an example in the "programming for
> dummies" section on recursion.
/Sometimes/ it's a trivial test. Sometimes it's very intense. It's
difficult to know until you get there.
I'm sure I told you guys about the SQL test I took once. The one with
tasks such as "list all customers in alphabetical order"...
>> I'm ambivalent as to whether this is actually the best strategy. On one
>> hand, the more stuff I apply to, the more likely it is that somebody
>> will call me. OTOH, if I apply for something totally unsuitable, and the
>> recruiter phones me, they're not going to be amused at having their time
>> wasted.
>
> Best thing is if you do inform yourself about what the company actually
> does, and which of your skills might be of interest to them. (And don't
> just think "this particular job", but "this particular company" - they
> might have other opportunities available.) Then, when applying,
> emphasize those skills. (Don't forget the "soft skills"!)
When you see a job advertised, you don't know who the company is. (If
you did, you could just phone them up, and then the agency wouldn't get
As to whether trawling jobs websites for advertised positions is the
best option... well, that remains to be seen.
I am on a mission to stalk the OU. (Fat lot of good it's done me so
far...) Oh, and Google. Because, you know, it's Google. But /everybody/
wants to work there, so there's no particular reason to believe they'll
ever hire me.
>> And than there's Network Rail. A friend
>> of mine works there and insists it's the best job in the world... But
>> they have ZERO computer jobs listed.
>
> Ask your friend to dig around what they've got cooking wrt IT.
She says "keep looking". Uh, yeah. That's not much help.
> Do apply
> for a job at companies you'd probably enjoy working for, even if they
> don't seem to offer jobs right now. They might just happen to ponder
> hiring someone - or they may the moment they read your CV. You know, you
> can't actually lose anything, can you?
Finding good companies to work for is nontrivial. Figuring out how to
apply to them when nothing is advertised is intractable. If you send
them a letter, they'll just be like "why didn't this guy bother to look
at what's advertised?"
> And by all means, get rid of that "I'll probably fail" attitude. You
> CANNOT LOSE at a job interview (or when sending in your CV, or whatever).
Last I heard, /most/ people fail at /most/ interviews. It takes many
hundred thousand interviews before a hire occurs. Which, given that so
far I've been to 2 interviews this lifetime, doesn't bode well...
(Unrelated: Apparently Bode is also the name of a type of chart used in
signal processing, invented by Hendrik Wade Bode...)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
