Scott wrote about his recent experience with job applications and what he had to do to get a response to a cover letter, even if that response was "Don't ever talk to me that way again".
He has his own theory on why and how people get hired, but I think it's all about being docile. Employers aften say that they want creative people who can think on their feet and have excellent skills, but I've never really found that to be true. Employers want somebody they can control. They especially want someone who will defer to them, which is why Scott got the reply he did. They need applicants who will fit into the power structure.
Scott's problem came out because he followed up his application with another letter. In real life, employers want their employees to keep track of the progress of their work and projects. In application land, however, they don't want to hear from all the applicants. In employed land, they want engaged employees who are excited about work, but in application land, they want to be left alone because they don't want to waste time on people they aren't going to hire.
In short, being the sort of person that gets things done and stays on top of things is just the sort of thing that can kill a job application. It reminds me of "Hassler Syndrome" which I read about in an article about MBA program applications. They interpret this sort of behavior as needy. I say it's "Let's get this done and move on." Employers really want someone who will be a pain in the ass to other people, but not them.
Employers don't want to see your skills in action before they hire you, and if you do have mad ski11z (CPAN author, book author, etc), they know they can't own you so they aren't interested.
Once you start down the path of independence, you'd better be ready to stay on it. :)
s/employers/some employers/g and most of that is true.
I've been a hiring manager many times (mostly in Silicon Valley startups). I've never looked for docile developers, but in high-pressure situations where everyone is stretched, candidates who wave an "I'm emotionally needy" or "I'm a smart cat who is going to need a lot herding" don't fare well.
More often, sadly, candidates are mistreated due to time pressure. A large pile of resumes comes in, and has to be culled while the project is ongoing. In the midst of fallout from the Sales folks selling stuff your product doesn't do yet, and pressure to build it fast coming down from on high, you plow through the resumes--many of which have been shotgunned at you by people who have no qualifications--and schedule a few people in for interviews. It'd be a nice, civil, human thing to do to dash off a note to the people who sent resumes that don't make the cut, but HR is no help, and it often comes down to a choice between staying late(r) to send more email and a chance at getting home before the rest of the family is asleep (again).
The startup I'm with now (as a developer, not a manager) most certainly does not hire sheep, and we most certainly do run candidates through their paces, including pair programming with us if they make it that far into the process. But then being a startup, we're not representative of the world of employers as a whole.
Re:Don't ever speak to me this way again
brian_d_foy on 2005-06-06T16:04:44
Who the hell do you think you are?:)
An hour a day is a lot of time. If I had another hour in the day, I'd be happy.
I think you, and the original employer, miss the point because you are taking things to literally and automatically going into "pissing contest" mode. Like I said in my post, I see that as a symptom of the power relationship. In short, get over yourself.:)
Scott's query was tongue-in-cheek, and could have been worded a bit better, but why not send it anyway? What's the worst that can happen? He doesn't get the job that he probably isn't being considered for anyway? Given the chance that the employer did reply and Scott missed the email, or that the employer somehow missed his resume, he might get another chance.
But, as I said, this is the sort of thing employers want their employees to do: follow-up on projects and bug people to get things done. They just don't want to be the person to be bugged.Re:Don't ever speak to me this way again
Adrian on 2005-06-07T22:36:55
But, as I said, this is the sort of thing employers want their employees to do: follow-up on projects and bug people to get things done. They just don't want to be the person to be bugged.Tosh
:-) If I got a message like that the CV would immediately hit the bin. Not because I don't like being nagged (because I do
:-). Not because I have huge control issues and hate people who show any kind of free will (I love it - it's a prequisite for the agile development methods I find most effective.) It would hit the bin because if that's the tone of a message he'd send to (I assume) a stranger he's trying to get a job off. Somebody he's presumably trying to demonstrate competence too, god knows what kind of message he's going to send to clients!
What if the employer didn't get the e-mail? What if they hadn't got around to reading yet? What they had been sick for the last two weeks? Is it really an appropriate response?
Sure I want the people I work with to be proactive and chase people. But I want them to have the brains to do it in a polite and civil manner.
I'm sure Scott's a lovely chap. But if the only thing I've got is an e-mail like that then he'd never get an interview because he sounds like an arrogant SOB.
If this was a rant against employers who don't respond to CVs then I'd be all for it. Hell yeah - it's rude. But the idea that they didn't like him because they wanted a submissive and docile employees is just laughable.
