On Mar 26, 2013, at 5:22 PM, Sasha Pachev <[email protected]> wrote:
> Regarding trying to pick a potential world-class marathoner from a 100
> meter sprint test. The idea is actually not as ridiculous as it
> sounds. Most world-class marathoners will perform quite a bit better
> than the average Joe in this test. Thus we expect at least 12.7 for
> the guy to have a shot at making it. But we deal with some limitations
> of the method. 12.7 is possible with bad biomechanics compensated by
> raw fast-twitch power. A guy with a bad heart or some glycogen storage
> problem might be able to make the cut, but when you start training him
> for distance you realize that he has problems. He may not mentally
> have what it takes to put in the training day after day even if his
> physiology is there.
>
> When we look at a resume of a backend coder we need to realize that we
> are trying to figure out how good of a marathon runner he might be by
> having him run 100 meters. Resume writing is a different event.
> Granted, somebody who can write good code would normally be able to
> express himself somewhat coherently, but this is not where you want to
> expect perfection. And too much perfection in resume writing may
> indicate that his talent is somewhere else.
That's just the thing, though. Your analogy falls apart when in one situation
you are judging one class of runners by a skill test that applies exactly to
another class of runners; then you compare that to judging back-end coders by
resumes, as if there were some class of employee who did resume-writing as a
primary job function. Skill in resume writing won't really tell you anything
about the primary job skills of any profession, except perhaps if a graphic
designer does a particularly good job with her typography and layout or
something. Yet resumes are used for nearly all hiring!
They aren't supposed to tell you how good a person is. They are supposed to
give a general sense of education and previous employment experience, as a
preliminary filter. They also give an opportunity to show that you care about
how you present and express yourself. I fail to see how a well-presented resume
could imply less skill in any job; someone of any resume-writing skill level
could put together a well-presented resume by recognizing their weaknesses and
enlisting the help of a proofreader or something.
Of course a résumé is just a first step, and conversations/skill checks are far
better at discovering how well someone would fit in a job. Looking past résumé
weaknesses might even be appropriate sometimes when seeking out employees. But
saying that a well-presented résumé reflects poorly on the author makes no
sense!
--Levi
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
Don't fear the penguin.
*/
