Skip to main content

The Devil's Advocate, Well Actually, The Devil

While I don't support wasting time and energy on worthless activities, I can't vouch for ever having found the recommendation to research to be of any value. I am definitely 'promiscuous' with recruiters, and not a believer in networking, although I have a fairly high profile in LinkedIn.

Unlike most people that have a job that many people are qualified for, I am a niche contractor, not looking for permanent work. I work in a common language, or a set of tools, that few people specialize in, with a background at major corporations. When someone needs one of my specialties, I'll get calls and emails from 5 different recruiters. My specialization is also why I can never commit to one recruiter; when I need work, they don't have openings, but someone else does. And I have had repeat engagements from different clients, and with different recruiters. They find me jobs, take a percentage of the rate, and if the engagement is long-lasting, they barely have to milk the cow, just take the cream.

For extroverts, and those looking to sell, networking might be wonderful, but I'm nauseous of the promotion of networking. People find me engaging, well spoken, helpful, and I can certainly self-promote, but I'm not that interested in other people: I'm kind of half introvert/extrovert. I enjoy people, but I also enjoy my alone time, with my wife, my music, my books, and my fitness activities. Most people are extroverts, and likely, most people are not finding much help networking.

My primary focus, has been getting recruiters to see my resume on line. Right or wrong, I think recruiters look at people as a very narrow skillet and they have to fill/exceed the requirements, particularly in bad times. I keep my headline clear and simple. When searching I update my resume daily, or a few times a week. I focus on detailing my technical skills, not exaggerating my experience, or pumping it up with filler.

In truth, it's been a little bit of luck - I have a desired, niche skill set in technology, with a strong background at major financials - as well as being able to capitalize on my niche market.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Behave: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst by Robert M. Sapolsky My rating: 5 of 5 stars I finished reading this crying. It is a work of neurobiology, social science, anthropology, and history, but ultimately it is a work of great humanity, suggesting ways that humans, our groups, our systems, and our societies can be made better. View all my reviews

A Journey — if You Dare — Into the Minds of Silicon Valley Programmers

My responses in a NY Times comment section for the book, Coders: The Making of a New Tribe and the Remaking of the World by Clive Thompson : #1 - Link Although I've been a software developer for 15 years, and for longer alternating between a project manager, team lead, or analyst, mostly in finance, and now with a cancer center, I found it funny that you blame the people doing the coding for not seeing the harm it could cause. First, most scientific advancement has dark elements, and it is usually not the science but how it is used and sold by business people that is the problem. This leads to the second problem, in that it is not coding that is in itself problematic, but specifically how technology is harnessed to sell. It is normal and desirable to track users, to log actions, to collect telemetry, so as to monitor systems, respond to errors, and to develop new features, but that normal engineering practice has been used to surveil users for the purpose of selling. Blaming

Don't learn to code. Learn to think.

A response to  Don't learn to code. Learn to think. : Below is is my usual response when I see an article stating that everyone should learn to code:  Rather than programming, it is more important to impart the thinking of computer science (CS) than a specific implementation. Programming can be an end point for some students, but it is likely that programming itself will be increasingly automated, so that one needs more the general concepts common in CS. Even then, programming itself is to some degree a grunt task that one progresses beyond:  The following are typical components of a CS degree: algorithms & flowcharting systems thinking logical systems and set theory object-orientation & patterns probability, statistics, mathematics All of the above can be useful in an increasingly automated and data-driven world.