The problems and irritations with finding a new job...

Frank

Certified not a majority
Veteran
Until 6 years ago, if I got a job interview, I was hired (with one exception). But now I'm in the market for a new job for months, and I get turned down every single time. So, what has changed and how do I fix it?

Well, for starters, Human Resource Managers. They're a pretty new concept (at least to me), they have a mostly fixed list with questions, no matter the job or company, and your answers are valued the same way. Or, in other words: it's like an exam. And I get most of the answers "wrong" if I'm simply being honest.

So, my best bet is probably coming up with the right answers up front, memorizing them and sticking to them.

Further, I have done just about everything in electrics and ICT, most things in electronics and a lot of general engineering. Don't bother making a list, I probably did something alike at some point (although I never designed/build IC's or wafer steppers). I like figuring things out, designing new stuff and I run the show if needed. But I lack any formal education beyond high school.

So, I respond to vacancies that ask for a very broad experience, with a lot of overlap between different fields. But those generally turn out to want people that simply have the required education and a few years experience in the primary field. My definition of a "broad experience" is leaps and bounds above the requirements, and hard to fit in for your average manager.

And, it doesn't help, that I am used to do all the work for which companies tend to hire many different people. So, questions like: "What do you like best?" and "What career path do you want in the future?" are problematic. Because I like all of it, at the same time if possible.

Then again, I'm supposed to be in "middle management" by now, but I would rather be a senior engineer and run projects. And I readily agree, that a specialist will definitely beat me on his chosen field. But I'll beat him on any other one.

I tried having my own company, but that wasn't a big success. I'm pretty bad at sales and marketing, and the administration is a pain.

Any help or suggestions?
 
It sounds like you're mainly chasing larger companies which leads to the "tests" you mentioned above. I'm biased but I think smaller companies are a far better way to go. Less bureaucracy, less red tape, less need for people to be put in boxes (one must wear many hats) and far easier to know who does what and how well.

With many larger companies they want you to show up practically shaking at the thrill of a chance to work for THEM. You basically have to kiss ass before you even have a job. After that it's playing politics and stroking the right egos to get ahead.

I recommend networking with associates and friends and trying to find a small company where your experience will be hugely valuable and valued that doesn't have some need for labels and boxes. Sure, smaller companies are riskier, but they are a heck of a lot more fun.
 
Thanks. And I agree, and do so.

But I was thrown out of my last job for a small company that I worked for more than 5 years, because one of my former co-workers worked himself up to CEO, decided that everything had to be streamlined the way he wanted it and that he didn't like me disagreeing with him. Anything Microsoft is sacred, anyone not kissing his ass is OUT! And I do have hands-on experience with a whole lot of stuff, so I'm not easily bullied into submission. I'm stupid, right?


Do you know CMM? It stands for Capability Maturity Model, and it's probably the most meaningful benchmark for measuring the maturity of your business model that I know of. Especially designed for ICT companies, but very generally applicable.

If you don't, I would urge you to check it out. It's really insightful. And don't bother with all the newer versions.

Anyway, it goes mostly like this:
CMM1: Heroes and hard work. This is how you create a company.
CMM2: Repeatability. If a customer asks for the same product a year later, or you send two different people, you should still be able to deliver the same product. This is where most companies go bankrupt.
CMM3: Pro-actively improve your business and products continuously. Very few companies get this far, most simply react and follow.
CMM4: Actively try and improve your business model by trying to innovate things before your clients feel the need. IBM was one of the first, and still one of the few to actually try and do this (disregarding huge fuck ups like with the PC). The designer of CMM was an engineer/manager from IBM. And Xerox (Palo Alto lab) was famous for this.
CMM5: ? Many (mostly Indian) companies claim this, but I don't think anyone knows how this should work, let alone that there are actual companies who do this.

Anyway, I automatically do CMM4, if you let me, simply because that's what I like doing. I think status quo is boring.

That's also the difference between being a leader and a manager: the first creates new things, the second one freezes it and keeps it running. I'm a great leader, but a very bad manager. Mostly because I need to improve things all the time.

And that's also the reason most of my network thinks it's risky to tell their management I'm the best man for the job.
 
Ah, shame. Unfortunately the person at the top can make or utterly destroy a small company.

As for lead vs. manage, why would you want to manage? :) I find the hardest slots to fill are R&D project leaders. Once the product is launched and "manage" that type is infinitely easier to find. A leader has to be willing to hurt some feelings cracking a whip to get things done right and on time and on budget. On top of that they need to understand each discipline in the project enough to act as a translator/mediator and enough to come up with good and innovative ways around obstacles.

Companies that stop inventing and creating simply die. Just a matter of time.
 
If you're looking for an engineering function in the Netherlands, you could consider applying to Schuberg Philis. They've got a very strong customer portfolio and I know they're actively looking for ICT engineers of all disciplines at the moment. If I read your story correctly, they might suit you well because this is a company where the engineers are very much in charge, they have low (read: almost no) management overhead, and they strongly value job experience over formal qualifications. Just came to mind because I know a couple of people who work there or used to work there.
 
Ah, shame. Unfortunately the person at the top can make or utterly destroy a small company.
Sweet talked lies :D

That's politics, to me.

As for lead vs. manage, why would you want to manage? :) I find the hardest slots to fill are R&D project leaders. Once the product is launched and "manage" that type is infinitely easier to find. A leader has to be willing to hurt some feelings cracking a whip to get things done right and on time and on budget. On top of that they need to understand each discipline in the project enough to act as a translator/mediator and enough to come up with good and innovative ways around obstacles.
I couldn't agree more, especially as that is what I (try to) do. I dislike the politics involved, but I make it a very well known point that I am always blunt, objective and to the point. I can't be, unfortunately, but I try. And it helps that I can take control whenever I want, simply by doing so and telling them what will work, what won't, and what the impact is of all those things easily muttered. Because I do know, and I'm the only one.

Companies that stop inventing and creating simply die. Just a matter of time.
Yes, totally agree, but the question would be: how fast, considering the competition.

Most companies really don't innovate, at whichever level. They react, and follow the lead. In ICT, that mostly means: whatever Microsoft decides. There are no questions asked, Microsoft is God. If you voice your irritation about things like the Vista/W7 explorer being extremely slow because it's reading all the files all the time to see if there are pictures and/or videos in there, to create thumbnails and show their resolution and duration, while not caching anything, and deleting your selections all the time, you're considered a dangerously, subversive element.
 
If you're looking for an engineering function in the Netherlands, you could consider applying to Schuberg Philis. They've got a very strong customer portfolio and I know they're actively looking for ICT engineers of all disciplines at the moment. If I read your story correctly, they might suit you well because this is a company where the engineers are very much in charge, they have low (read: almost no) management overhead, and they strongly value job experience over formal qualifications. Just came to mind because I know a couple of people who work there or used to work there.
Thanks! I very much appreciate that tip! I'll check them out tomorrow, and post a feedback here whenever I have one.
 
I did a capacity test a few days ago, in which I turned out to perform far beyond the average of highly educated people. I did only average on Dutch word knowledge, because most of my communication is in English. But that was the single exception.

But that's a two-edged sword, as I tend to expect that everyone (especially managers and engineers) are as well-informed and have the same understanding.

Or, in other words: the really hard things are easy to me, while the really simple things are hard. I make many mistakes if I have to do dumb work, but excel with the very hard and complex stuff.
 
Until 6 years ago, if I got a job interview, I was hired (with one exception). But now I'm in the market for a new job for months, and I get turned down every single time. So, what has changed and how do I fix it?

Well, for starters, Human Resource Managers. They're a pretty new concept (at least to me), they have a mostly fixed list with questions, no matter the job or company, and your answers are valued the same way. Or, in other words: it's like an exam. And I get most of the answers "wrong" if I'm simply being honest.

http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.com/2010/11/how-female-romantic-wish-list-for-men.html

http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.com/2011/02/correct-answers-to-hr-interview.html

http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.com/2011/01/bypassing-hr.html
 
have we ever had a thread-polluter as proficient as gamervivke before?
even with him on my ignore list I can see him interject his mommy issues into basically every thread.
 
have we ever had a thread-polluter as proficient as gamervivke before?
even with him on my ignore list I can see him interject his mommy issues into basically every thread.


You clearly must have not been around or lurking during the era of eastman/jvd (they are the same as we both know) as a moderator of the console forum. He interjected his hate of Sony in many threads derailing them. Even worse was this guy named deadmeat or some such who also derailed all threads predicting doom and gloom for one of the consoles. 2008_IQ_is_unacceptable was a bad poster but that's fairly recent. The worst offender this board has seen when it comes to derailing threads and ruining an entire forum (the console forum) was chap or chaperone. He went through more than 15 names when I was a mod and was truly a headache waking up and having to delete all his posts. That guy was the absolute worst I've ever seen, and it didn't help that jvd didn't do a thing to moderate the guy.
 
There was also this Guden Olden character who frequented the boards. I wonder what happened to him. He wasn't a troll, just kinda nostalgic now.
 
Back
Top