Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections
-
@scottalanmiller said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
@guyinpv said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
As for finding talent. I've seen some new marketplaces come up which help people in certain industries find jobs near and dear to their heart.
For example GitHub's job market. Or StackOverflow's market. Or CodePen's market.Yes, other industries have done this decently well. IT really suffers in trying to make this happen.
Could that be potentially because IT covers such a broad array of topics?
Edit: And the majority of the IT workers are still trying to figure out what area of the spectrum they fall under / want to work in?
-
@dafyre said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
@scottalanmiller said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
@guyinpv said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
As for finding talent. I've seen some new marketplaces come up which help people in certain industries find jobs near and dear to their heart.
For example GitHub's job market. Or StackOverflow's market. Or CodePen's market.Yes, other industries have done this decently well. IT really suffers in trying to make this happen.
Could that be potentially because IT covers such a broad array of topics?
Edit: And the majority of the IT workers are still trying to figure out what area of the spectrum they fall under / want to work in?
Partially, and also because IT tends to be so dramatically disconnected from one another.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
@guyinpv said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
This as opposed to hiring some veteran person stuck in their ways and has a hard shell for change.
I feel like this is more the opposite. You get stuck in your ways getting someone that has never left the one company. The only know one thing, they've only seen one thing, they've only done it one way, they know politics rather than IT, they move up normally because they know the system rather than their jobs (good people are less likely to move up compared to connected ones) and they tend to be change averse because that's why they didn't move on somewhere else.
It's people that have moved from company to company that are the least stuck in their ways. They have to be adaptable because they've been forced to adapt time and time again. They have broader perspective and are more likely, even at an older age, to adapt to changing needs, ideas and so forth.
I was talking with a co-worker last week about this. I'll never understand why years spent at a company is looked at as "loyalty." 99.9999999% of the time it's laziness and complacency. A person that's been at a company for a year and has actually done a ton of things is more loyal than someone who's been there for 20 years and does no work.
-
@stacksofplates said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
@scottalanmiller said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
@guyinpv said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
This as opposed to hiring some veteran person stuck in their ways and has a hard shell for change.
I feel like this is more the opposite. You get stuck in your ways getting someone that has never left the one company. The only know one thing, they've only seen one thing, they've only done it one way, they know politics rather than IT, they move up normally because they know the system rather than their jobs (good people are less likely to move up compared to connected ones) and they tend to be change averse because that's why they didn't move on somewhere else.
It's people that have moved from company to company that are the least stuck in their ways. They have to be adaptable because they've been forced to adapt time and time again. They have broader perspective and are more likely, even at an older age, to adapt to changing needs, ideas and so forth.
I was talking with a co-worker last week about this. I'll never understand why years spent at a company is looked at as "loyalty." 99.9999999% of the time it's laziness and complacency. A person that's been at a company for a year and has actually done a ton of things is more loyal than someone who's been there for 20 years and does no work.
Totally agreed. Just "not leaving" is a bad reason to reward someone.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
@dafyre said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
@scottalanmiller said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
@guyinpv said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
As for finding talent. I've seen some new marketplaces come up which help people in certain industries find jobs near and dear to their heart.
For example GitHub's job market. Or StackOverflow's market. Or CodePen's market.Yes, other industries have done this decently well. IT really suffers in trying to make this happen.
Could that be potentially because IT covers such a broad array of topics?
Edit: And the majority of the IT workers are still trying to figure out what area of the spectrum they fall under / want to work in?
Partially, and also because IT tends to be so dramatically disconnected from one another.
I am assuming here that you mean by siloed departments?
-
@dafyre said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
@scottalanmiller said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
@dafyre said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
@scottalanmiller said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
@guyinpv said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
As for finding talent. I've seen some new marketplaces come up which help people in certain industries find jobs near and dear to their heart.
For example GitHub's job market. Or StackOverflow's market. Or CodePen's market.Yes, other industries have done this decently well. IT really suffers in trying to make this happen.
Could that be potentially because IT covers such a broad array of topics?
Edit: And the majority of the IT workers are still trying to figure out what area of the spectrum they fall under / want to work in?
Partially, and also because IT tends to be so dramatically disconnected from one another.
I am assuming here that you mean by siloed departments?
Can be, but moreso company from company.
-
A CPA at a farm and one for a restaurant across town do essentially the same job and can fill in for each other easily. Two IT people at two different businesses might have careers that are nothing alike.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
A CPA at a farm and one for a restaurant across town do essentially the same job and can fill in for each other easily. Two IT people at two different businesses might have careers that are nothing alike.
This is true, but if they are snagged by a third company, it's not like none of their concepts and skills won't transfer.
-
@dafyre said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
@scottalanmiller said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
A CPA at a farm and one for a restaurant across town do essentially the same job and can fill in for each other easily. Two IT people at two different businesses might have careers that are nothing alike.
This is true, but if they are snagged by a third company, it's not like none of their concepts and skills won't transfer.
But they easily won't transfer. Bring the average generalist from the SW community into our shop and they'd not even be able to log in. The different in skills and knowledge between someone who is looking at a desktop GUI and clicking installer icons and a shop that is doing state files to manage automation is enough different than it's like comparing a chef to a dancer. Yeah, they both get dressed before going to work, but it pretty much stops overlapping there.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
@dafyre said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
@scottalanmiller said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
A CPA at a farm and one for a restaurant across town do essentially the same job and can fill in for each other easily. Two IT people at two different businesses might have careers that are nothing alike.
This is true, but if they are snagged by a third company, it's not like none of their concepts and skills won't transfer.
But they easily won't transfer. Bring the average generalist from the SW community into our shop and they'd not even be able to log in. The different in skills and knowledge between someone who is looking at a desktop GUI and clicking installer icons and a shop that is doing state files to manage automation is enough different than it's like comparing a chef to a dancer. Yeah, they both get dressed before going to work, but it pretty much stops overlapping there.
Can't this just be rolled up into the idea that most of the time, if not 100% of the time, any new hire in an IT position is going to need time to adjust and learn the architecture and systems in use and get some initial training?
I think the quality of an IT person is not that they studied everything under the sun and thus understand and know all systems everywhere, all hardware, all software, all network designs, all system management methods, techniques, and tools.
The quality is that an IT person is a nerd, and they like this stuff, and learning it comes relatively naturally and relatively quickly.
I've tried for 6 years to get people to understand that when one website doesn't work, they shouldn't run around the office saying "the Internet is down!" But they don't get it.
An IT person just "gets it". They have some kind of basic understanding of how tech works. Their brains don't go into shock with cognitive dissonance at the idea that left clicks and right clicks are two different things, and when to use them.I guess I'm just saying, it's one thing to demand a specific list of skills or experience with specific hardware or software; but on the other hand, most good IT people could learn a simple piece of software in an afternoon. Or the configuration of a simple piece of hardware in a week. Or if worse comes to worse, a more complex software or hardware in a matter of weeks or a few months.
In this light, it's better to find a person who has some level of nerdy intuition, who just loves technology, who can understand concepts quickly and can learn, rather than only looking for a person who already knows precisely your entire technology stack. Unless that is what the company absolutely needs.
I know it's not that simple, but it's not like a chef and a dancer. It's like, an Asian chef who has to learn Italian cuisine. Lots of learning, lots of new stuff, but they "get it", they "know food", so it won't be that bad of a learning experience.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
@dafyre said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
@scottalanmiller said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
A CPA at a farm and one for a restaurant across town do essentially the same job and can fill in for each other easily. Two IT people at two different businesses might have careers that are nothing alike.
This is true, but if they are snagged by a third company, it's not like none of their concepts and skills won't transfer.
But they easily won't transfer. Bring the average generalist from the SW community into our shop and they'd not even be able to log in. The different in skills and knowledge between someone who is looking at a desktop GUI and clicking installer icons and a shop that is doing state files to manage automation is enough different than it's like comparing a chef to a dancer. Yeah, they both get dressed before going to work, but it pretty much stops overlapping there.
Of course they wouldn't transfer if you're going from a Windows Shop to a Linux shop... or form actually doing installs to something like a state engine.
This is what you try to avoid by using whatever methods are available to a Fortune 1000 (a head hunter, or is that the wrong term here?) to not hire the wrong person. Ideally, Company C wouldn't hire a Windows admin and stick him in Linux infrastructure with no experience.
But if you take a Windows admin and move from Company A to Company C in a Windows admin role, the only new things that have to be learned would be the way Company C functions.
-
@dafyre said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
@scottalanmiller said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
@dafyre said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
@scottalanmiller said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
A CPA at a farm and one for a restaurant across town do essentially the same job and can fill in for each other easily. Two IT people at two different businesses might have careers that are nothing alike.
This is true, but if they are snagged by a third company, it's not like none of their concepts and skills won't transfer.
But they easily won't transfer. Bring the average generalist from the SW community into our shop and they'd not even be able to log in. The different in skills and knowledge between someone who is looking at a desktop GUI and clicking installer icons and a shop that is doing state files to manage automation is enough different than it's like comparing a chef to a dancer. Yeah, they both get dressed before going to work, but it pretty much stops overlapping there.
Of course they wouldn't transfer if you're going from a Windows Shop to a Linux shop... or form actually doing installs to something like a state engine.
This is what you try to avoid by using whatever methods are available to a Fortune 1000 (a head hunter, or is that the wrong term here?) to not hire the wrong person. Ideally, Company C wouldn't hire a Windows admin and stick him in Linux infrastructure with no experience.
You just assumed that the issues are Windows and Linux. But they are not. They are little SW shop and competent shop. In this example, it's a common model for startups (under 200 people, often below 20) in Silicon Valley. There is nothing "enterprise scale" in these solutions. It's just different assumed approaches in managing the same environments. Can be all Windows, the GUI shop might be the bigger one (often is.)
All of your assumptions are wrong from my real world examples in the last two years. Not that they don't happen as well, but they are not in any way the bases for the issue that different shops doing things completely different. To the point that people in one type just assume things about the other that are totally unfounded - like the tech or size we see here. That's how different it is between similar sized and types of shops, they don't even understand each other.
-
@dafyre said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
But if you take a Windows admin and move from Company A to Company C in a Windows admin role, the only new things that have to be learned would be the way Company C functions.
Nope, Windows Admins in one of the world's largest and most profitable financial firms in an IT department of 450 would be the GUI users in my example, and the state system is a Windows desktop environment with two IT guys in a non-profit.
Kind of shakes up your perception, right? But that's the real environment switch I did in 2014.
-
And the GUI guys were the Windows Server Admins, the state file advanced DevOps guys were the desktop ones, no servers.
