I had to giggle when I read your post. It brings to mind the job postings requiring "the ability to work in a team environment and with all types of personalities." That phrase alone makes me cringe. I have worked on many project and development teams and some worked out great and others, well, I'd be more than happy to leave a team where everyone thinks that 'we all have ownership' of the project but no one 'takes responsibility' for the project. It's great to bounce ideas off of each other but eventually someone has to make a decision and then also be responsible for incorporating that decision into the project. I have been on teams where everyone wants to have the power to make the decisions but no one wants to have the responsibility of enforcing them. Not only that, but in development teams (once the project is in development) there is nothing worse than making a suggestion to code in a way that is more standard in today's OOP and ntier design world or that processes faster when speed is a factor and to sit on a team where half of the members do not understand or have 'never done it that way' can be very frustrating. To hear "we've always done it this way and it's always worked before" as the only justification for not moving forward or considering other options is like a slap in the face. I have been on teams where I have coded different examples showing multiple ways of accomplishing the same task to demonstrate speed differences, code complexity, etc. If someone is not 'comfortable' with coding a certain way and they have worked for the company for x number of years or simply in a senior position, you can almost bet it won't be done that way. A few times of that is expected, but on a continuous basis it becomes frustrating. No one mentions in the HR ads that the 'difficult people' are not the customers but are instead the coworkers. Of course anyone can work with difficult personalities but do you always want to? :o)

My 2 cents... :o)


>Hello Bob,
>
>If I post something like this that does not result in at least some disagreement, I would consider the post a crashing failure.
>
>But with what do you really disagree?
>
>Job Ads are Largely Ineffective
>
>Are you suggesting that ads for programmer positions are adequate to do the job they are supposed to do? Seriously?
>
>What is a job add supposed to do? It's purpose is to attract an (1) application from a qualified candidate and (2) filter out applications from those who are not qualified. I suggest that most ads do not meet either objective because they don't tell us what we need to know to decide whether its worth the trouble to apply. Why, because they are not written by the people who really know what the job requires -- they are written by HR.
>
>I've been through the process a dozen times, so I know what happens.
>
>If I need a programmer who can take over and run with the interface design while I concentrate on the back end, what I need is a person who can "design a presentation layer to interface with the middle-tier using a data-driven paradigm in which presentation is control by metadata tables and responds fluidly to changes in the back-end design with minimum or no code rewriting." Fat chance!
>
>The first question from HR is "How many years experience with FoxPro must the candidate have?" Do I know? Someone right out of college who has been doing the front end development work for two years may be a good candidate, someone with 20 years of experience who has never designed a data-driven front end is probably not. Years of experience with FoxPro is largely irrelevant.
>
>It makes no difference. Right there on the prescribed, official, standard HR form for job specifications is a box that says "Years of experience required" and it will be filled in and it will get included in the add.
>
>So what happens, I finally, inevitably, give in and say "OK, five years". Now I've just eliminated the guy with two years doing nothing but front-end design who might be the ideal candidate.
>
>And, HR gets bombarded with resumes from programmers with 5+ years of experience, but not in data-driven interface design which, of course, is never included in the ad because HR does not know what data-driven interface design is nor has the slightest clue how to screen for it.
>
>HR people complain constantly that they are buried in resumes from people who are not really qualified for an advertised position -- and its their own fault. They write lousy ads that do not and cannot separate the wheat from the chaff -- so they get a lot of chaff.
>
>This is not a problem unique to programmers, by the way. Engineers for example, are often completely mystified about what an advertised engineering position actually requires.
>
>Job ads to not do what they are supposed to do, and that's a fact.
>
>Good programmers who are not in the "Community"
>
>I concede that there may be some good FoxPro programmers who never join the UT, who never post on the Wiki, who are not members of any local user group and who have never heard of VFUG. But how many of them can there be? A programmer who is so good that he never had a question, never has encountered a problem he or she could not solve without advice; a developer who has never had a unique experience to share? If you find out who this monk is, let me know what monestery he belongs to. Actually, I'm kidding. I work with just such an individual right now -- the best back-end guy I have ever met. He never posts. Never. But he is indeed a rara avis. He does attend conferences, however, which is how I met him.
>
>Face it, Bob, this is a small community. There probably are not more than 60,000 VFP programmers world-wide -- excluding the "dabblers", of course. And I'll bet 90% are members here. Do you want to work with or for a "developer" who is not a part of the development community -- I would at least hesitate.
>
>Skip opportunities cause you have to do a little research
>
>I don't think I do. I hope I don't.
>
>I spend a great deal of time researching a company. And as a former corporate lawyer, I probably know how to find out stuff about a company that most people can't find.
>
>However, as my original post points out. No amount of research is going to tell me what I need to know. It is not available in libraries, in government filings or on the web. To find out, I need to talk to the person who knows.
>
>The most efficient process is right up front before I or the company have invested a lot of time and resource in the multi-step recruitment process. If I have to wait to the final interview with the development manager to find out I don't fit the corporate culture or the job is not, in fact, exactly as described by HR, the everyone's time has been wasted. This cut needs to be made up front.
>
>All of which leads me back to my original premises:
>
>1) HR people are not very good at recruiting programmers so,
>2) Programmers need to get more involved in the recruitment and hiring process and to facilitate that process,
>3) Professional forum job posting sites such as the one on the UT should be limited to programmer-to-programmer recruitment.
>
>Regards,