Christian Sepulveda's Blog

September 23, 2005
Guidelines for Being a Strong Job Candidate

I have interviewed a lot of people over the years. (I've hired over 50 people, interviewed hundreds, phone screened many more and read thousands of resumes.) While I don't claim to be any sort of recruiting expert, there are two things I can intelligently (as much as I can for anything else) speak of: trends in resumes / candidates and guidelines for being stronger on both.

The single most important fact to understand as a job seeker is: A prospective employer has no attention span whatsoever.

Your goal is to get the attention of the person who will actually decide to hire you and make clear why you are different from all the other candidates she comes across. Employers must sift through many resumes (there were times I would look at 100 resumes a day) and frequently cannot afford to spend a lot of time on a resume. Assume you must communicate in 10 seconds a reason that the employer should continue reading. Recruiters, internal or external, are not your target audience. While you may need get past them to reach the actual employer, never forget that your message should be targeting the actual employer.

While this sounds obvious, you are selling yourself to an employer. However, most resumes I see are not selling but reporting. Listing the details of each job, tool, language, API, or activity from your entire experience is not effective.

A general sales adage is a product should be made easy to buy, not simply easy to sell. When faced with buying something that is a "no-brainer", there is no selling. A candidate should always consider the perspective of the employer; what would make it a "no-brainer" to hire me?

There are many different approaches and considerations for how a candidate can position herself as an obvious choice. Ultimately, I think it can be summarized by two questions (from the point of view of the employer): What can this candidate do for me? How does this help me? The first question is about the results the candidate can achieve or deliver. The second is about the match of these skills for the employer's context.

The following are some guidelines for candidates:

Overall

Have a 30 second elevator pitch.
Know what your strengths are. Know what results you have achieved. What makes you special and stand out?
Know your professional goals.
What are your career plans? Where do you want to be in one year? Five years?
Have a career plan.
The goals are a strategic concern; your plan is tactical. You should be able to describe the role you want to perform, with detailed functions and responsibilities. Be able to describe an ideal work day, month, or year.
Know your strengths, weaknesses and what affects them.
More importantly than what you do well or poorly are the factors that enhance your skill set and those that detract from it. These are critical to selecting the right position.

Resume

A resume makes the first impression. It must get someone's attention immediately and should answer the two most important questions above for the employer.

1 page only. No exceptions.
I don't read 7 pages resumes; if the person can't be brief, it implies they are disorganized and cluttered. I will note one caveat to this: your resume should be one page. It is an introduction and summary. If there are details that are important to communicate, include an addendum or appendix (which should be never more than 2-3 pages) and make it clear that this is extra, not part of the resume. You can title it "Project Details" or something, but it should have it's own header and not be confused as part of the resume.
Lead with the elevator pitch.
Your 30 second elevator pitch should be communicated immediately in a "Professional Profile" or similar section.
Focus on results and achievements
When I read that a candidate was on a project that tripled company revenues, I am interested to continue reading.
Highlight technical qualifications
Do not list every three letter acronym you know, even if you are an expert. Focus on your core strengths and the technologies you want to work with or that are relevant to the employer. If you know C++ but are looking for job doing Java, don't mention you know C++.

Almost 100% of the resumes I read look the same. They all share the same subset of technical jargon references and technologies. There are many, many J2EE, .NET, C++, etc. developers. It is almost impossible to differentiate yourself in this category. Though a technical profile is obligatory, as a technical worker, it should be brief and contain highlights. I suggest putting it at the end of the resume.

The technical profile of a resume is the source of the largest mistakes in candidate positioning, so I will babble and rant about this a bit. I think the reason for these mistakes are:

  • technical people focus on technology
  • many recruiters encourage listing all your technical experience
  • employers may screen based on the content of technical profile

The first point is probably pretty obvious and I won't discuss it. The second is also common, though I discourage it. The last reason is the most significant: frequently resumes are so poor (or there are so many) that employers have little choice than to screen based on technical profiles. However, I think there are a few mistakes being made here. First, candidates try to keep as many options open as possible and this actually hurts them. Few people are experts in the large lists of technologies, languages and tools commonly listed on resumes. Even if you are, simplify. For example, if you've worked with many Web Service / SOAP technologies, write in your technical profile something like "SOAP / Web Services expert (worked with Axis, WebMethods, BlueTitan ...) instead of listing the 20 different Web Service related frameworks you know. Alternatively, if your goal is to work on web services, only list the web service frameworks you know and omit the other items such as object relational mappers, databases, etc.

Listing too many elements in a technical profile has the risk of implying indecision and insecurity. Don't list technologies you don't really want to work with. Also, a candidate that doesn't care what technologies they work with (when they are listing many, unrelated technologies) seems to have little career focus. Finally, it may convey insecurity in the candidate; it can make a candidate look desperate and thus undesirable. Less is more.

Phone Screens

In over 90% of the phone screens that I do, I know if I will pursue a candidate in the first two minutes of the phone screen. A phone screen is intended to serve answer one question: Should I invest the time to formally interview this candidate? Formal interviews are generally very expensive to conduct and therefore most organizations don't do them lightly. There are a few things to keep in mind at this point.

Research the company
I hope this is obvious, but it amazes me how many people do not do this. Look at the companies website, competitor websites and industry websites for the employer. Learn as much as you can.
Be prepared
Know your own experience well, such that you can communicate succinctly. Learn how to be brief and focus on highlights. Interviewers will ask follow-up questions when interested and will appreciate brevity. Also, give thought to typical questions and know your answers. Such questions include: Why are you looking for a job? What is the ideal job, role, organization? What is the most important thing I should know about you as a candidate? Tell me about an interesting technical or team challenge and how you resolved it. What was the best project your were on? Worst? Why?
Interview the employer organization
You should look as closely at the employer company as they are looking at you. Good candidates take their professional development very seriously and are engaged in knowing about the company, its culture, its business model, future, history, etc.

If you are looking to work for me...

This entire blog entry is biased about making a candidate attractive to me, as an employer, but there are a few other items of note:

Communication Skills are Key
Being able to communicate clearly, effectively and succinctly is critical. It is vital to working in an agile environment and poor communication is one of the core reasons I don't pursue candidates.
Must be a Team Player
Agile Processes emphasize collaboration. You must thrive in a team environment.
Be Honest
I generally know when a candidate is weak in a particularly area, unsure or blatantly lying. I prefer and respect an honest and direct "I don't know" rather than trying to dance around ignorance.
Be Committed to Projects
I am looking for people who will take ownership of the result and do what they can to achieve it. I want candidates who take the outcome as a personal reflection of their abilities and work ethic. I don't ask for late nights or weekends but respect people who sacrifice when they need to make sure something is done.

Conclusion

Employers hire people, not cogs. A candidate should never forget that an employer is investing in a person and should do everything they can to position their value as an individual to an organization. If you are seen as just a Java developer who knows SOAP, you are easily replaced. Great employees, however, are assets to companies and rare.

Posted by csepulv at September 23, 2005 05:53 PM

Comments

Very nice and practical essence! Especially I love the extreme item "1 page only. No exceptions." I'll cut now my 2-page resume in half:-)

Posted by: Roman Rytov at October 19, 2005 09:06 PM

Very nice post and a practicaly minimized list of advice of what to do and do not. Especially I love the point about one page resume. I'll cut my two page resume in half now:-)

Posted by: Roman Rytov at October 19, 2005 09:11 PM

Very useful post! I'm a developer and my resume could use some tips like these. Until now my resume was actually a list of all the projects I had done, with the technologies used. I always thought that is what recruiters wanted, but now I see my mistake. I'll be updating my resume even though I don't need to find a new job :)

Posted by: Nico Mommaerts at October 19, 2005 11:07 PM

I made a lot of interviews as job candidate and also had a chance to interview people who are candidates for a job in my company - so I have experience in both sides. Here are my thoughts:
1. As job candidate (JC shortly) I never know what are my unique stregnts and wekanesess - they are even relative to the job position - in one company detailed craft and documentation of every class/detail can be a strngth and in other not! In my current job I could be the guru of SOAP and in the new place to be the weakest in this area. Moreover I never know who else is a candidate so my knowledge/abilities to be unique or outlined among others.
2. I never know what can i do or how can I help to an employer untill I know a lot of details of working environmet, practises, projects, tools, colleagues etc. And usual adverts for a job position are so "lean" that I never can get such info before the interview itself, nor any employer will give it to me before it. So the resumes are a "mirror" of the job position adverts. Even if I browse the employer's web site to get more info it is full of marketing "buzzwords" so in the end I know less. The only think that can probably impress me is the list of clients, but this doesn't help to me.
3. If I have to sell myself to the employer, why the delicate question about the sallary is the last in the interviews and never methioned in the job adverts. Always there is an option the salary to be specified in some ranges. The same is with my apply - I can always write explicitely in my apply email what are my expectations about the salary (again in a range). How many cases like this have you seen?
4. I wrote my resume following the advices of some gurus how it should be writen. Then, when I read it, it sounds to me so "hollow"-"empty", that if I'm an employer I'll never mark it for interview. This is probably because all gurus recomend to use some standart words and phrases - the result is "commodity" resume.
Moreover even the interviews are short, focused only ot technical details/tests/questions and not revealing these details that are necessary for both sides to make a good desicion about the deal (sign contract) - just because the real "feeling" about the job (respectively about the employee) can mature in 1-2 months work. (example - almost every company claims that uses some SCC system, have automated builds and have mature development process, etc - but only after 1-2 months of work you realise that this is not "exactly" true - the same is with an employee - he claims to know a lot of things untill the moment you find out that he is ignorant or have very shallow knowledge about the subject.)
May be the only think that I agree with is that both sides must play the game very, very honestly, but unfortunately this happens very rarely.

Posted by: Borislav at October 20, 2005 05:57 AM

Thank you so much for the article. I've been on both sides of this topic and I like what you have to say about it. The lack of focus in the resumes is something I find all the time. I may also have been someone who has done that myself at times. I think it comes down to a matter of pride for some people. Since they have spent so much time learning these different things they feel the need to jam them all in the resume somehow, or maybe that is just me. Anyway, what you say makes perfect sense. Thanks

Posted by: Jason Darrow at October 20, 2005 10:32 AM

Interesting summary, but at least in many engineering fields I would have to disagree with the one page thing. Most recruiters/jobs I have talked with used something along
1. Bachelors candidates ~1 page
2. Masters candidates ~2 pages
3. Every 5 years of work experience ~1 page
For academics the resumes are expected to be even longer.

Posted by: Justin Shriver at October 20, 2005 01:33 PM