If you believe this then I would encourage you to visit everyone's favorite job board. Monster came up with quite the tool to identify your career personality, and then of course conveniently links the results to their current job openings. Smart folks... I like it. Here are my results if you were interested:
Life as an INFJ (Intravert, Intuitive, Feeler, Judger)
People of this type tend to be creative, original and independent; thoughtful, warm and sensitive; global thinkers with great passion for their unique vision; cautious, deliberate and planful; organized, productive and decisive; reserved and polite. The most important things to INFJs are their ideas, and being faithful to their vision.
Great careers for INFJs
Special education teacher
Alcohol and drug addiction counselor
Universal design architect
Holistic health practitioner
Diversity manager / trainer
Speech / language pathologist
Career counselor
Therapist
Director of religious education
Editor / art director
Writer
Thursday, January 25, 2007
Monday, January 22, 2007
Hungry Hungry Hippos
At 10 years old, a visit was not complete to my childhood best friend's house without a greed-driven game of Hungry Hungry Hippos. We would perch on the floor behind our favorite colored hippo and pound the lever until all the white marbles were resting safely in the bellies of our beloved warrior. The tallying of the marbles began immediately to crown the triumphant hippo and the options were win, lose, or more often than not because of an even number of marbles... a tie. Ties were optimal because it meant no hurt feelings.
The image of those gobbling hippos enters my head when I find myself in the middle of negotiations between candidates and companies. Each party begins devouring with the mentality of feast or famine and unlike the board game, rarely does it end in a tie.
At the drop of the last marble companies open wide and attempt to consume as many negotiation points as possible leaving the candidate feeling like a pawn all the name of risk avoidance. This works when the market is saturated and the candidates are desperate, but when there is demand for their services these candidates continue to consider other options at places where they are not treated like commodities but rather an integral piece to a companies overall strategy. When offer time comes companies are naively surprised to find the candidate is no longer available because they found a company that valued, not exploited their experience.
There are also candidates out there dead set on leaving the recruiting table having to undo a notch in their belt to accommodate all their marbles. Companies offer a more than fair salary, excellent benefits, are reasonably accommodating and still it's not enough. They need MORE time to THINK about it. It's enough to make you want to draft your own Jerry Maguire mission statement. These candidates are able to do this now, but the market will more than likely change and they will find themselves with a slightly smaller mouth than they used to have. My advice to them is not not burn bridges while you still have the upper hand.
So how does a society raised on games like Hungry Hungry Hippo's transition into the CarMax version of a win-win when it comes to the hiring process? Is it feasible for a company and a candidate to tie? It may not be, however I think it should be the goal.
My humble advice to companies... if a candidate matches what you are looking for, do what it takes to bring them on board as soon as they are available to start at their requested salary if in range. It will show the candidate they impress you enough to act fast. It will also free up your recruiting resources to work on requisitions in the early stages that need maximum attention.
And candidates... try to avoid stretching out your decision period by nickle and diming in the hopes something better may surface. If you like the company, pull the trigger. It will show the company your strong decision making ability and perhaps allow the recruiter you are working with to sleep a little better that night.
The image of those gobbling hippos enters my head when I find myself in the middle of negotiations between candidates and companies. Each party begins devouring with the mentality of feast or famine and unlike the board game, rarely does it end in a tie.
At the drop of the last marble companies open wide and attempt to consume as many negotiation points as possible leaving the candidate feeling like a pawn all the name of risk avoidance. This works when the market is saturated and the candidates are desperate, but when there is demand for their services these candidates continue to consider other options at places where they are not treated like commodities but rather an integral piece to a companies overall strategy. When offer time comes companies are naively surprised to find the candidate is no longer available because they found a company that valued, not exploited their experience.
There are also candidates out there dead set on leaving the recruiting table having to undo a notch in their belt to accommodate all their marbles. Companies offer a more than fair salary, excellent benefits, are reasonably accommodating and still it's not enough. They need MORE time to THINK about it. It's enough to make you want to draft your own Jerry Maguire mission statement. These candidates are able to do this now, but the market will more than likely change and they will find themselves with a slightly smaller mouth than they used to have. My advice to them is not not burn bridges while you still have the upper hand.
So how does a society raised on games like Hungry Hungry Hippo's transition into the CarMax version of a win-win when it comes to the hiring process? Is it feasible for a company and a candidate to tie? It may not be, however I think it should be the goal.
My humble advice to companies... if a candidate matches what you are looking for, do what it takes to bring them on board as soon as they are available to start at their requested salary if in range. It will show the candidate they impress you enough to act fast. It will also free up your recruiting resources to work on requisitions in the early stages that need maximum attention.
And candidates... try to avoid stretching out your decision period by nickle and diming in the hopes something better may surface. If you like the company, pull the trigger. It will show the company your strong decision making ability and perhaps allow the recruiter you are working with to sleep a little better that night.
Tuesday, January 02, 2007
Putting the Resolute in Resolution
I love root words and more specifically root word origins. They force us to relinquish the mentality of arrogance Americans so easily fall into because of our current position in this world and realize we are but a young country who has formed a language around the words of those who have spoken before us. I am not a big events history person, but I find myself mentally devouring the words of speakers who dissect the literature and writings of historical authors. At the end of the talks or sermons my index and middle finger are cramped from my attempt to capture all I can, much like a child licking clean their fingers after a bag of Cheetos. So many "Ah ha!" moments of mine have come after dissecting a word and drawing conclusions from context of the origin of the work. As 2006 came to a close I found myself obsessed with the word "resolution" because of it's frequent use this time of year. I wondered if people knew what they were saying so I researched and well, I hope you have an "Ah ha!" moment because of it.
You cannot say or read the root word of resolution without thinking immediately of someone or something that is flat out immovable. A resolute person in the business world embraces a company's strategy and stays the course because of a firm belief in it's goals and objectives. There's honor and character associated with this trait. It inhabited no doubt our fore father's who founded this great nation which is why we struggle with the arrogance I spoke of earlier. These guys believed and sunk in their pilgrim buckle shoes and we are a free and democratic nation because of it. So then why is it that if we associate resolute with words like firm, steadfast, and fixed, you discover it's Latin origin (resolvere) means to relax and untie? I think it's because in order to be resolute on anything it is smart to first untie and analyze our thought processes before we take a stand on anything.
For many of you your resolution this year is to find another job. You feel under-appreciated and not utilized. You are not passionate about what you do. You salary is not the amount you believe you deserve. Based on these and many more cons on your pro/con list of what do to you have decided to MOVE on and are resolute in doing so. I encourage you before you begin to update your resume first untie the messy knots of your current situation and get to the heart of what is bothering you. If you are going to take a stand, don't do it half way and just because you are frustrated. I assure you before any successful leader did anything worth while they took some time to resolve before they became resolute. If you skip this step you have cheated the word resolution out of it's meaning and cheated yourself out of being successful.
That was fun!
You cannot say or read the root word of resolution without thinking immediately of someone or something that is flat out immovable. A resolute person in the business world embraces a company's strategy and stays the course because of a firm belief in it's goals and objectives. There's honor and character associated with this trait. It inhabited no doubt our fore father's who founded this great nation which is why we struggle with the arrogance I spoke of earlier. These guys believed and sunk in their pilgrim buckle shoes and we are a free and democratic nation because of it. So then why is it that if we associate resolute with words like firm, steadfast, and fixed, you discover it's Latin origin (resolvere) means to relax and untie? I think it's because in order to be resolute on anything it is smart to first untie and analyze our thought processes before we take a stand on anything.
For many of you your resolution this year is to find another job. You feel under-appreciated and not utilized. You are not passionate about what you do. You salary is not the amount you believe you deserve. Based on these and many more cons on your pro/con list of what do to you have decided to MOVE on and are resolute in doing so. I encourage you before you begin to update your resume first untie the messy knots of your current situation and get to the heart of what is bothering you. If you are going to take a stand, don't do it half way and just because you are frustrated. I assure you before any successful leader did anything worth while they took some time to resolve before they became resolute. If you skip this step you have cheated the word resolution out of it's meaning and cheated yourself out of being successful.
That was fun!
Friday, December 29, 2006
Tagged
5 things you probably don't know about me...
1)I got B's in my English classes in college. I'm not great at organized writing!
2)I drive a golf ball an average of 220 yards usually fairly straight.
3)I was born at home... intentionally.
4)I hope to write a book someday which more than likely will have a spiritual focus. If it doesn't I have sold out.
5)I grew up on a dairy farm in a town with a population of less than 2000... people, not cows.
1)I got B's in my English classes in college. I'm not great at organized writing!
2)I drive a golf ball an average of 220 yards usually fairly straight.
3)I was born at home... intentionally.
4)I hope to write a book someday which more than likely will have a spiritual focus. If it doesn't I have sold out.
5)I grew up on a dairy farm in a town with a population of less than 2000... people, not cows.
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
Just Say No
This word has long been in the minds and vocabulary of human beings. To many parents it seems to be the only word their two year old knows. It is the response we are taught as children to have when confronted with illegal and damaging behavior. Teenage boys fear it because of its potentially tight hold on their romantic confidence. It is the enemy of the people pleaser and the friend of the prudent. In a world of grey hues and fence riders it is one of the last remaining concretes that allows us to take a stand verbally. It takes our hand and leads us through every stage of our lives, yet many businesses are releasing it's grasp and clinging instead to the hand of the "yes man."
In my short and incredibly humble time as a contributer to society I have noticed this trend with many companies who are in growth mode either as a company or regionally. They are so desperate for business they take on unrealistic or unclear projects the client throws their way in an attempt to gain market share or professional respectability. If the contributors are not able to deliver however, the opposite unfortunately occurs. Time and resources are spent and after weeks of spinning and churning the product is frustrated contributors and an unhappy client. Had Mr/Ms Salesperson declined the project and continued to dig for more feasible opportunities would the company have been better off?
Let me be clear. My stand is not to look adversity in the face and quickly retreat. The '66 UTEP Miners and the '80 USA Hockey Team were both historical proof that perserverence through seemingly impossible circumstance can end in victory for the under dog. The imperative aspect however is those two teams had a definite time line of either success or failure. When the buzzer sounded they were either winners or losers. Time outs, half time, and periods were their opportunities to make adjustments.
Perhaps time limits and intermissions are the answer to the difficult decision of whether or not to take an opportunity on. Have the contributors give it their best for a set amount of time with an intermission half way through to reevaluate and if they do not deliver to the client's specifications when the time clock expires simply walk. Of course this theory is incredibly simplistic and naive. After all the fault could be in the contributors and I acknowledge that. However, if you find yourself with a team of contributors you trust and no results for the client, take it from Nancy Reagan and "Just Say No." If you have the killer instinct in you and want to swing for the fences atleast put a time line on it. After all, even baseball sends you back to the bench after three strikes.
In my short and incredibly humble time as a contributer to society I have noticed this trend with many companies who are in growth mode either as a company or regionally. They are so desperate for business they take on unrealistic or unclear projects the client throws their way in an attempt to gain market share or professional respectability. If the contributors are not able to deliver however, the opposite unfortunately occurs. Time and resources are spent and after weeks of spinning and churning the product is frustrated contributors and an unhappy client. Had Mr/Ms Salesperson declined the project and continued to dig for more feasible opportunities would the company have been better off?
Let me be clear. My stand is not to look adversity in the face and quickly retreat. The '66 UTEP Miners and the '80 USA Hockey Team were both historical proof that perserverence through seemingly impossible circumstance can end in victory for the under dog. The imperative aspect however is those two teams had a definite time line of either success or failure. When the buzzer sounded they were either winners or losers. Time outs, half time, and periods were their opportunities to make adjustments.
Perhaps time limits and intermissions are the answer to the difficult decision of whether or not to take an opportunity on. Have the contributors give it their best for a set amount of time with an intermission half way through to reevaluate and if they do not deliver to the client's specifications when the time clock expires simply walk. Of course this theory is incredibly simplistic and naive. After all the fault could be in the contributors and I acknowledge that. However, if you find yourself with a team of contributors you trust and no results for the client, take it from Nancy Reagan and "Just Say No." If you have the killer instinct in you and want to swing for the fences atleast put a time line on it. After all, even baseball sends you back to the bench after three strikes.
Thursday, November 30, 2006
A Quick Lesson in Egocentrism
I have the same knee jerk thought upon hearing of one of my fellow humans doing or saying something that is down right inappropriate. "Tonight we've arrested two suspects in the burglery of an 80 year old woman," or "Breaking news... police are asking for tips on what seems to be a car jacking of the local meals on wheels van." I am not sure what you are thinking after reading those two headlines, but my thoughts don't immediately go out to the victim, but rather the mom of the perp. Unless she's Ma Beagle she's dissapointed, crushed and wondering where she went wrong. Instead of her kiddo thinking of the consequences of his decision on the lives of other's, his mind was missile locked on his own selfish desires. This mentality transcends illegal behaviour and often times rests comfortably in the minds of many job seekers and employers. I will give you an example of both just to be fair.
It's decision time and you have two companies after you. After careful consideration you decide on Company A because of its onsite gym facilities knowing good and well you will more than likely never set foot in there. Instead of contacting Company B to tell them of your decision to "bulk up" you proceed to screen the company's call. You get that dip in your stomach when you see the familiar number and instead of taking it like a (insert gender) you SCREEN it. Of course time will erase that sinking in your stomach mostly because the company will stop calling, but I assure you, there's a dissapointed recruiter who is blaming themself and it could have been avoided had you owned up to your decision.
Fresh from a meeting with the heads of your departments you sit down to an email from a persistent candidate who desperately wants to know their status. You just had the VP of Finance tell you straight up they were no longer being considered because of their lack of experience but you hesitate to respond. No one likes to be the bearer of bad news so you wait days to respond an avoid the difficulty of telling someone no. What you may not realize is every day you wait is another day this financial analyst is picking apart every comment and conclusion they made in the interview. It's also feasible they are following the behavior of the candidate in the above scenario and screening the calls of less desirable Company B because they are waiting to hear from you.
Kind of like the old chicken and the egg delima. Who tipped the first dominoe in the bad communication train... the recruiter or the candidate? Finger pointing obviously gets people no where so the solution I believe is to simply act in a manner that would make your momma proud. Candidates, if you have an interview scheduled, don't cancel the day of. I am an avid believer in not slamming doors before you atleast walk through the threshold and an even bigger believer in being an individual of your word. Companies, follow Midas's favorite rule and treat these candidate appropriately. Perhaps if everyone considered the time and feelings of all parties potentially effected the whole recruiting process might be just a little more productive. Well that's my sappy idea anyway...
It's decision time and you have two companies after you. After careful consideration you decide on Company A because of its onsite gym facilities knowing good and well you will more than likely never set foot in there. Instead of contacting Company B to tell them of your decision to "bulk up" you proceed to screen the company's call. You get that dip in your stomach when you see the familiar number and instead of taking it like a (insert gender) you SCREEN it. Of course time will erase that sinking in your stomach mostly because the company will stop calling, but I assure you, there's a dissapointed recruiter who is blaming themself and it could have been avoided had you owned up to your decision.
Fresh from a meeting with the heads of your departments you sit down to an email from a persistent candidate who desperately wants to know their status. You just had the VP of Finance tell you straight up they were no longer being considered because of their lack of experience but you hesitate to respond. No one likes to be the bearer of bad news so you wait days to respond an avoid the difficulty of telling someone no. What you may not realize is every day you wait is another day this financial analyst is picking apart every comment and conclusion they made in the interview. It's also feasible they are following the behavior of the candidate in the above scenario and screening the calls of less desirable Company B because they are waiting to hear from you.
Kind of like the old chicken and the egg delima. Who tipped the first dominoe in the bad communication train... the recruiter or the candidate? Finger pointing obviously gets people no where so the solution I believe is to simply act in a manner that would make your momma proud. Candidates, if you have an interview scheduled, don't cancel the day of. I am an avid believer in not slamming doors before you atleast walk through the threshold and an even bigger believer in being an individual of your word. Companies, follow Midas's favorite rule and treat these candidate appropriately. Perhaps if everyone considered the time and feelings of all parties potentially effected the whole recruiting process might be just a little more productive. Well that's my sappy idea anyway...
Wednesday, November 15, 2006
Pop-A-Shot
BY FAR my favorite game at the arcade is pop a shot. The adrenaline of racing the clock, the challenge of a constantly moving rim and backboard, the feeling of accomplishment when tickets pour out of the machine, or the competitive nature in me that erupts when I get only a couple of tickets and quickly anty up for the next go. It's ironic that this scenario is appealing to me, yet I am completely deflated in a work environment when I encounter a task that is a moving target.
Employees face this challenge in every industry. IT project managers who work tirelessly to get a team cohesive and briefed and BAM "Mr/Ms PM, we have reevaluated and it's in our best interested to dissolve your team and go another way" or the Advertising Exec who pours their heart and soul into a campaign only to have it squashed at the last minute. After writing those two scenarios I am immediately mad for these fictional characters and have already have thoughts of what I would say in that situation. But why? Is it this so different than pop a shot? Why don't I immediately think "I can't wait to go back to the the drawing board and anty up my resources and knowledge and see if I can't win them over!"
I think it all lies in expectations. I know what is about to happen when I step up with a tiny rubber basketball in my hands and wait for the countdown to expire before I start firing. In work for some reason we have this unrealistic expectation that people are going to have ideas and opinions and keep them... FOREVER. It's like asking a child what they want in line at McDonalds and getting frustrated because at first they wanted the hamburger, but now it's chicken nuggets, but right before you order they scream "ice cream." Now granted in that situation I would not set myself up for frustration by asking a child's opinion, but in the work environment we don't have that luxury. We are forced to listen and adapt to the higher ups if we want to remain employed. There is of course the option of "chunking it all and starting your own think tank."
My advice to myself and of course any of you reading that share my frustration is to alter your expectations a bit. Acknowledge people and situations change and make your success about the experience and not necessarily the end result. After all more than likely I go back to pop a shot not because I win, but because I like basketball.
Employees face this challenge in every industry. IT project managers who work tirelessly to get a team cohesive and briefed and BAM "Mr/Ms PM, we have reevaluated and it's in our best interested to dissolve your team and go another way" or the Advertising Exec who pours their heart and soul into a campaign only to have it squashed at the last minute. After writing those two scenarios I am immediately mad for these fictional characters and have already have thoughts of what I would say in that situation. But why? Is it this so different than pop a shot? Why don't I immediately think "I can't wait to go back to the the drawing board and anty up my resources and knowledge and see if I can't win them over!"
I think it all lies in expectations. I know what is about to happen when I step up with a tiny rubber basketball in my hands and wait for the countdown to expire before I start firing. In work for some reason we have this unrealistic expectation that people are going to have ideas and opinions and keep them... FOREVER. It's like asking a child what they want in line at McDonalds and getting frustrated because at first they wanted the hamburger, but now it's chicken nuggets, but right before you order they scream "ice cream." Now granted in that situation I would not set myself up for frustration by asking a child's opinion, but in the work environment we don't have that luxury. We are forced to listen and adapt to the higher ups if we want to remain employed. There is of course the option of "chunking it all and starting your own think tank."
My advice to myself and of course any of you reading that share my frustration is to alter your expectations a bit. Acknowledge people and situations change and make your success about the experience and not necessarily the end result. After all more than likely I go back to pop a shot not because I win, but because I like basketball.
Thursday, November 02, 2006
Innotech
I spent the good part of yesterday at Innotech here in Austin as an attendee and have great things to report on my end. I thoroughly enjoyed my first session from Ciber on implementing SOA geared toward CEO's and executives. I scanned the room and realized I was probably the only person listening who could sing the lyrics to an entire N'Sync song. Originally I attended for the sole purpose of honoring my registration with them, for a free pass to the conference, but obligation definitely turned into a great learning opportunity.
The speaker, Dr. Khalid Mansour, did a wonderful job of presenting and certainly said a handful of things that added significantly to my understanding of Service Oriented Architecture. What struck a chord with me however wasn't his explanation of coupling, or reuse, or the importance of data, but rather his sidebar on the importance of a cohesive team during every phase from planning the roadmap to implementing the best practices. I got excited because that is precisely where I come in and have the potential to make a contribution to a service that is proven to add significant value to a business.
There was a time when I had the naive misconception that recruiting was a matter of matching skill sets to a well written job description. There are definitely industries that support this emphasis on sourcing, but as Dr. Mansour stated, successful SOA project aren't solely about finding candidates who know the language, database, or middleware the project requires. What is the stick in the spokes of this cut and dry method you ask? I would argue complacency. There is a world full of really smart people who simply walk around going through the motions without a passion or pursuit in the world. These candidates are excellent fits for certain positions that rely heavily on consistency and predictability, but from what I have gathered, that isn't the nature of SOA projects.
I think where the harmony comes is when each teammate respects the fervor of the person sitting next to them. They may not agree 100%, but they know their colleague has given serious consideration to what is coming out of their mouth, so odds are they're going to listen and respond back with equally thought provoking material. I definitely am still learning tips on determining early on who these people are by the questions I ask. Ideally I would love to get to the point where I can have a conversation with a candidate who may not be a perfect fit for the requirement I am working on, but can consistently direct them to companies, industries, and teams where they will thrive. In the mean time, I look forward to any insight into what I can do now to lay the ground work to get there.
The speaker, Dr. Khalid Mansour, did a wonderful job of presenting and certainly said a handful of things that added significantly to my understanding of Service Oriented Architecture. What struck a chord with me however wasn't his explanation of coupling, or reuse, or the importance of data, but rather his sidebar on the importance of a cohesive team during every phase from planning the roadmap to implementing the best practices. I got excited because that is precisely where I come in and have the potential to make a contribution to a service that is proven to add significant value to a business.
There was a time when I had the naive misconception that recruiting was a matter of matching skill sets to a well written job description. There are definitely industries that support this emphasis on sourcing, but as Dr. Mansour stated, successful SOA project aren't solely about finding candidates who know the language, database, or middleware the project requires. What is the stick in the spokes of this cut and dry method you ask? I would argue complacency. There is a world full of really smart people who simply walk around going through the motions without a passion or pursuit in the world. These candidates are excellent fits for certain positions that rely heavily on consistency and predictability, but from what I have gathered, that isn't the nature of SOA projects.
I think where the harmony comes is when each teammate respects the fervor of the person sitting next to them. They may not agree 100%, but they know their colleague has given serious consideration to what is coming out of their mouth, so odds are they're going to listen and respond back with equally thought provoking material. I definitely am still learning tips on determining early on who these people are by the questions I ask. Ideally I would love to get to the point where I can have a conversation with a candidate who may not be a perfect fit for the requirement I am working on, but can consistently direct them to companies, industries, and teams where they will thrive. In the mean time, I look forward to any insight into what I can do now to lay the ground work to get there.
Tuesday, October 31, 2006
Calling All Thought Leaders
I was giving heavy consideration this weekend to if I could step forward leaving a world full of slackers and sheep behind to answer the call of thought leadership. I am not referring simply to thoughts in general or extensive knowledge for that matter. If this were the case I would quickly make my way to the front if the topic for discussion were College Football, Gilmore Girls, or Jane Austin novels. As I mentioned however trivia buffs need not apply to this one because knowledge is meerly the first step in forward thinking.
This is the world I have found myself in as a technical recruiter for a provider of Service Oriented Enterprise consulting. Our practice managers have set the bar at gurus and evangelists and show no signs of adjusting the limbo poll. It gets really interesting when they add on a side of 75% travel, coupled with excellent communication, and spoon on some humility for good measure. Humble thought leader? I am checking now if Webster gives that phrase as an example under the over used word "oxymoron." I can confirm they don't.
So are these managers being unrealistic? I used to think so, but I have found some pretty close contenders. Service Oriented Architecture is doing amazing things to bridge the gap between business and technology services, but where I get excited is realizing the impact it is making on business and technology CANDIDATES. No longer are MBA's concerned solely with dollar signs and profitability and developers and architects are now right in the middle of a heated discussion concerning bugets and profitability. Hopefull this means there are less boardroom duals where 20 paces and two drawn pistols are what seperates business and technology from productivity. But how did we get here you ask?
I have thought quite a bit about what it was that caused these individuals to break out of their molds that college degrees had long cast. Perhaps Big Bang... or what some like to call the .com bust. Did the techies realize they needed to start placing eggs in other baskets in order to support their families and their new acquired expensive taste? What about the business and financial analysts? What got them to cross the boundaries of supply and demand into the unknown of C++ and Java? I have no idea. You tell me! I suppose that's what a blog is for.
Bottom Line... candidates continue to amaze and impress me. More amazing than anything are the number of candidates who give themselves a 10 out of possible 10 for SOA during my phone screens. I never realized there were so many "Fathers of SOA." For those of you who I have screened and are reading my blog wondering if you rated yourself 10, don't worry I more than likely gave you a 9 regardless of what you said to help your chances... that is if I liked you. In all seriousness I am encouraged by the quality of candidate I am seeing and look forward to the continued evolution of the IT candidate.
By the way if you're interested in applying for a job with MomentumSI we simply ask that you prove your membership in Mensa as well as provide us with a tape of your appearance on Jeopardy (don't bother unless you were atleast runner up).
This is the world I have found myself in as a technical recruiter for a provider of Service Oriented Enterprise consulting. Our practice managers have set the bar at gurus and evangelists and show no signs of adjusting the limbo poll. It gets really interesting when they add on a side of 75% travel, coupled with excellent communication, and spoon on some humility for good measure. Humble thought leader? I am checking now if Webster gives that phrase as an example under the over used word "oxymoron." I can confirm they don't.
So are these managers being unrealistic? I used to think so, but I have found some pretty close contenders. Service Oriented Architecture is doing amazing things to bridge the gap between business and technology services, but where I get excited is realizing the impact it is making on business and technology CANDIDATES. No longer are MBA's concerned solely with dollar signs and profitability and developers and architects are now right in the middle of a heated discussion concerning bugets and profitability. Hopefull this means there are less boardroom duals where 20 paces and two drawn pistols are what seperates business and technology from productivity. But how did we get here you ask?
I have thought quite a bit about what it was that caused these individuals to break out of their molds that college degrees had long cast. Perhaps Big Bang... or what some like to call the .com bust. Did the techies realize they needed to start placing eggs in other baskets in order to support their families and their new acquired expensive taste? What about the business and financial analysts? What got them to cross the boundaries of supply and demand into the unknown of C++ and Java? I have no idea. You tell me! I suppose that's what a blog is for.
Bottom Line... candidates continue to amaze and impress me. More amazing than anything are the number of candidates who give themselves a 10 out of possible 10 for SOA during my phone screens. I never realized there were so many "Fathers of SOA." For those of you who I have screened and are reading my blog wondering if you rated yourself 10, don't worry I more than likely gave you a 9 regardless of what you said to help your chances... that is if I liked you. In all seriousness I am encouraged by the quality of candidate I am seeing and look forward to the continued evolution of the IT candidate.
By the way if you're interested in applying for a job with MomentumSI we simply ask that you prove your membership in Mensa as well as provide us with a tape of your appearance on Jeopardy (don't bother unless you were atleast runner up).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
