Resume Critique
-
@scottalanmiller said in Resume Critique:
@jimmy9008 said in Resume Critique:
@scottalanmiller said in Resume Critique:
@jimmy9008 said in Resume Critique:
@scottalanmiller said in Resume Critique:
@jimmy9008 said in Resume Critique:
@scottalanmiller said in Resume Critique:
@jimmy9008 said in Resume Critique:
Why are you saying I'm comparing to failure? No failure here.
IT is business. Business buying fifteen servers to do the job of one is failure. Period. That's what failure means in business - not doing things that are good for the business. You are cherry picking a massive failure (wasting $150K for no reason) and using that failure assumption (where did that come from?) to compare against "what was done."
Buying sixteen servers to do the job of one is literally just like driving the taxi into the brick wall. It's insane, illogical and no one that knows how to drive would do it. So you don't use avoiding brick walls as the baseline for success. You don't use 16,000% overprovisioning as the baseline for success, either.
I didn't say but 16 to do the job of one. I said buy one, where 16 was proposed. Showing you can help a company and steer them in a better direction saving money is a great thing.
But how did sixteen get propose and why was the company talking to someone looking to screw them like that and why was that taken seriously? See the problem? To make the Hyper-V deployment sound "cool" we have to throw the company competence under the bus. And in doing so, we take any value proposition that we add to it along with it because we've only demonstrated that "business smarts" are what was missing.
If the goal is to show business smarts, you can't push business smarts in front of the bus.
Because, whatever reason for any bad project. Whoever can stop bad solution for far better, should say that. Stopping the bollocks up project and putting something better in place is a success.
Not success that you want to brag about to someone else. Telling them that the place you worked for was incompetent but that you were at least "less incompetent" is absolutely not what you want to be showing off on your CV. You want people to want to hire you, not want to avoid you.
Why less incompetent? How is that a thing here? This is saying on the CV that you stopped the team from being incompetent... By actually being competent.
No, it shows that you feel imcompetence is the base line. And it only shows "less incompetence", nothing in it demonstrates competence.
Yes it does.Getting things done the correct way, where they were going to be done the wrong way before you changed it... IS COMPETENCE.
-
@jimmy9008 said in Resume Critique:
So, we should assume all companies only ever make the correct decision and an IT employee never has to use their competence to steep a company in the correct direction, or discuss that they prevented the failure entirely, in SAM land? Crazy.
This not a logical point to have reached.
This shows how much the taxi and brick wall example holds. You feel that total incompetence isn't just common enough, but that avoiding it alone is enough to brag about.
-
@jimmy9008 said in Resume Critique:
@scottalanmiller said in Resume Critique:
@jimmy9008 said in Resume Critique:
@scottalanmiller said in Resume Critique:
@jimmy9008 said in Resume Critique:
@scottalanmiller said in Resume Critique:
@jimmy9008 said in Resume Critique:
@scottalanmiller said in Resume Critique:
@jimmy9008 said in Resume Critique:
Why are you saying I'm comparing to failure? No failure here.
IT is business. Business buying fifteen servers to do the job of one is failure. Period. That's what failure means in business - not doing things that are good for the business. You are cherry picking a massive failure (wasting $150K for no reason) and using that failure assumption (where did that come from?) to compare against "what was done."
Buying sixteen servers to do the job of one is literally just like driving the taxi into the brick wall. It's insane, illogical and no one that knows how to drive would do it. So you don't use avoiding brick walls as the baseline for success. You don't use 16,000% overprovisioning as the baseline for success, either.
I didn't say but 16 to do the job of one. I said buy one, where 16 was proposed. Showing you can help a company and steer them in a better direction saving money is a great thing.
But how did sixteen get propose and why was the company talking to someone looking to screw them like that and why was that taken seriously? See the problem? To make the Hyper-V deployment sound "cool" we have to throw the company competence under the bus. And in doing so, we take any value proposition that we add to it along with it because we've only demonstrated that "business smarts" are what was missing.
If the goal is to show business smarts, you can't push business smarts in front of the bus.
Because, whatever reason for any bad project. Whoever can stop bad solution for far better, should say that. Stopping the bollocks up project and putting something better in place is a success.
Not success that you want to brag about to someone else. Telling them that the place you worked for was incompetent but that you were at least "less incompetent" is absolutely not what you want to be showing off on your CV. You want people to want to hire you, not want to avoid you.
Why less incompetent? How is that a thing here? This is saying on the CV that you stopped the team from being incompetent... By actually being competent.
No, it shows that you feel imcompetence is the base line. And it only shows "less incompetence", nothing in it demonstrates competence.
Yes it does.Getting things done the correct way, where they were going to be done the wrong way before you changed it... IS COMPETENCE.
There is no suggestion that things were done in a good or correct way. Only that total, insane failure was avoided in one specific area.
But not totally avoided, because insane levels of "fixing bad planning" had to be done that even a moderately bad company would have avoided from the get go.
You are making leaps of logic from "avoiding disaster" to being equated to "success."
-
@scottalanmiller said in Resume Critique:
@jimmy9008 said in Resume Critique:
So, we should assume all companies only ever make the correct decision and an IT employee never has to use their competence to steep a company in the correct direction, or discuss that they prevented the failure entirely, in SAM land? Crazy.
This not a logical point to have reached.
This shows how much the taxi and brick wall example holds. You feel that total incompetence isn't just common enough, but that avoiding it alone is enough to brag about.
Yes it is. Avoiding incompetence and going things the correct way, when before you the incorrect way was planned... Is something to brag about. 100%
-
@jimmy9008 said in Resume Critique:
@scottalanmiller said in Resume Critique:
@jimmy9008 said in Resume Critique:
So, we should assume all companies only ever make the correct decision and an IT employee never has to use their competence to steep a company in the correct direction, or discuss that they prevented the failure entirely, in SAM land? Crazy.
This not a logical point to have reached.
This shows how much the taxi and brick wall example holds. You feel that total incompetence isn't just common enough, but that avoiding it alone is enough to brag about.
Yes it is. Avoiding incompetence and going things the correct way, when before you the incorrect way was planned... Is something to brag about. 100%
So literally you now agree with my taxi / wall example?
-
@jimmy9008 said in Resume Critique:
Yes it is. Avoiding incompetence and going things the correct way,
This isn't something you can say. Avoiding a bad decision isn't the same as making a good decision.
-
Right now, your suggestion for the CV is not to show success, but to show avoidance of total failure. Don't you see how those are not the same things?
Driving a taxi well, improving over baseline, doing things that aren't just expected as part of "showing up" - that's success in differing degrees.
Not driving into walls, people and lampposts is just "avoiding failure."
We brag about success, we don't brag about avoiding failure.
-
What happened to staying on topic?
-
Also, success is limited. Avoiding failure should be unlimited. The number of failures that are avoided every day have no limit. Take this example... not only did we not avoid buying 16 servers, we avoided buying 17, 18, 19..... the number of horrendous decisions that were not made are literally unlimited. Why pick this one failure that was avoided to brag about and not all of those?
-
@black3dynamite said in Resume Critique:
What happened to staying on topic?
We are totally on topic of who to write a CV.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Resume Critique:
@jimmy9008 said in Resume Critique:
@scottalanmiller said in Resume Critique:
@jimmy9008 said in Resume Critique:
So, we should assume all companies only ever make the correct decision and an IT employee never has to use their competence to steep a company in the correct direction, or discuss that they prevented the failure entirely, in SAM land? Crazy.
This not a logical point to have reached.
This shows how much the taxi and brick wall example holds. You feel that total incompetence isn't just common enough, but that avoiding it alone is enough to brag about.
Yes it is. Avoiding incompetence and going things the correct way, when before you the incorrect way was planned... Is something to brag about. 100%
So literally you now agree with my taxi / wall example?
No. The taxi/wall example was awful.
I'm disagreement with you. I'm saying sterile away from something bad to something good is worth bragging about.
You are saying it should have never remember bad to need to make that change. Well in a perfect world of course. But the world isn't perfect, an stopping the mistake is a success. And should be on the CV.
Saying that's not good as is should never have been wrong is just bollocks. Things go wrong, showing you can make them go the correct way is important.
-
What a hiring manager or new company cares about:
- That you know technical things or have skills and experience (e.g. I can do this thing.)
- That you make good decisions and have good understanding (e.g. I think well about things.)
-
@jimmy9008 said in Resume Critique:
@scottalanmiller said in Resume Critique:
@jimmy9008 said in Resume Critique:
@scottalanmiller said in Resume Critique:
@jimmy9008 said in Resume Critique:
So, we should assume all companies only ever make the correct decision and an IT employee never has to use their competence to steep a company in the correct direction, or discuss that they prevented the failure entirely, in SAM land? Crazy.
This not a logical point to have reached.
This shows how much the taxi and brick wall example holds. You feel that total incompetence isn't just common enough, but that avoiding it alone is enough to brag about.
Yes it is. Avoiding incompetence and going things the correct way, when before you the incorrect way was planned... Is something to brag about. 100%
So literally you now agree with my taxi / wall example?
No. The taxi/wall example was awful.
So is the cost savings in the Hyper-V scenario. I keep bringing up the taxi to show you how bad the Hyper-V example is.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Resume Critique:
Right now, your suggestion for the CV is not to show success, but to show avoidance of total failure. Don't you see how those are not the same things?
Driving a taxi well, improving over baseline, doing things that aren't just expected as part of "showing up" - that's success in differing degrees.
Not driving into walls, people and lampposts is just "avoiding failure."
We brag about success, we don't brag about avoiding failure.
No, it's to show success, an why it was a success.
-
@jimmy9008 said in Resume Critique:
I'm disagreement with you. I'm saying sterile away from something bad to something good is worth bragging about.
Like the taxi. You can't have it both ways.
-
@jimmy9008 said in Resume Critique:
Saying that's not good as is should never have been wrong is just bollocks. Things go wrong, showing you can make them go the correct way is important.
This doesn't make any logical sense. It doesn't show that at all. It shows that disaster was avoided. It doesn't show why or by whom. Only that the CV writer wasn't a cause of the disaster. We don't know who proposed the consolidation, why the failure was considered, who made the decision or based on what criteria. It shows nothing positive about the CV writer at all, only that they didn't sabotage the project themselves by refusing to consolidate.
-
@jimmy9008 said in Resume Critique:
@scottalanmiller said in Resume Critique:
Right now, your suggestion for the CV is not to show success, but to show avoidance of total failure. Don't you see how those are not the same things?
Driving a taxi well, improving over baseline, doing things that aren't just expected as part of "showing up" - that's success in differing degrees.
Not driving into walls, people and lampposts is just "avoiding failure."
We brag about success, we don't brag about avoiding failure.
No, it's to show success, an why it was a success.
There is no success in the example, only one specific failure avoided. Like I said, if you want to lower the bar for success to that degree - you've created exactly the situation that I hope to avoid - making the CV writer look terrible. The last thing you want in a CV is a "lowering of the bar".
-
Let's abstract it a different way. Here is what I think you are trying to say in super general terms:
"Many people are idiots, and many companies do foolish things. There was one specific possibility of a really idiotic thing at my last job. But it didn't actually happen. Therefore I'm less of an idiot than I might have been."
That's all that comes across and I think that that is actually what you are trying to say is a success. Nothing I never called the CV writer an idiot, just less of an idiot than might have been if they didn't avoid that one simple, obvious failure. We don't know how good they are, nothing tells us what they did right, only what they didn't do wrong. And that it is only because some companies and some people are so incredible idiotic that we need to point this out because otherwise, the assumption might be that the CV writing is one of those people.
Correct?
-
Or another way to look at it: "I worked for idiots, but I prevented some of their idiocy this one time. But it was a near thing, because they are idiots."
Using "I work for idiots but am not as idiotic as some of them" as a way to promote oneself just doesn't come across well. Imagine bragging about this at the bar..........
-
We do this all fo the time in IT. We are having drinks and we talk about how dumb things are at work. But it isn't bragging, it is relieving frustration. We talk about how they lack common sense or just do stupid things. It's not to make ourselves look good, because we can't in that context. We don't look smart by being smarter than idiots, we just deserve pity for having to put up with them.
When you are at the bar bragging to your mates about some amazing accomplishment, it is totally different. You have to beat the minimal industry baseline to sound impressive. Putting up with idiots in management or coworkers is just part of putting up with people that we do every day.
