NINJA'S NEEDED!! (cue eye roll)

Attention Employers! It's a buyers market. Over the course of the last 18-24 months software engineer Supply / Demand reports are showing approximately three open positions for every one qualified job seeker.

If I told you we were hiring JavaScript Ninjas would you think any less of me? Don't answer that. See, I'm not looking for "Rock Stars," "Warlocks" or a "Code Monkey" either.

Attracting top talent takes more than posting an extensive laundry list of required skills or using clever words and phrases to appear "hip."

What if I told you I simply need a solid client-side developer who can come up with elegant front-end solutions? You'll be given autonomy to make decisions, work with some reasonably talented and friendly human beings, and be treated & compensated fairly. Sound reasonable?

The methods recruiters (both corporate and agency) are using to engage with technical professionals need to change. Job descriptions should be descriptive of the job not a generic list of skills that you won't find combined in one person.

Here's what top talent wants to see in a job description:

• A decent picture of the day-to-day roles and responsibilities. They understand they'll be slinging code and running unit tests. They also understand there likely will be some production babysitting. They're looking for the FUN stuff like researching and deploying new technology along with being an integrated member of the solution development & delivery team. Coding existing technical requirements is part of every software engineer's job, but if that's all they're going to do reference "code monkey" and make sure your day-to-day picture looks like that. (Note: this will likely negatively impact the number of applicants.)
• What kind of people will they be working with on a regular basis? What's the team make-up? Who inside and outside the organization will be influencing and impacting their work on a daily basis? Is there a mentor? Is there someone there TO mentor?
• What the company offers in terms of culture, benefits, and opportunities for growth. Ultimately they want to know why it's a great place to work and what might set you apart from the other two employers who are competing for their services.
• How much money the employer expects to pay for the right person. They'd also like to know the non-monetary reasons to consider the job if the money is on the low side of the scale.
• Some core technical expectations without running down the litany of every piece of technology and third party vendor currently residing in your data center.

What top talent doesn't want to see is qualifications listing "a minimum of five years experience in XYZ" or a demand for "excellent organization, communication, and/or people skills."

They also don't want to see jobs that don't pay a fair market wage. A recent senior .NET developer posting in Kansas City touted "TOP PAY $" yet listed pay range is $25,000less than average compensation level and $35,000 less than what empirical data from a number of reliable sources indicates.

The data tells me the senior .NET developer you are so desperately trying to attract to your team is currently making anywhere from $90k - $120k annually. An advertised $65 - $85k range represents a significant cut in pay which will only attract unqualified applicants or no applicants at all.

PS: I didn't run the numbers on a ninja, but I'm certain that will be higher.

Software professionals are smart buyers so talent acquisition professionals need to be savvy marketers.

PPS: I seriously am hiring a couple solid client-side developers to build elegant front-end solutions who will be given autonomy to make decisions, work with some reasonably talented and friendly human beings, and be treated & compensated fairly.

How to Spot a Phony on LinkedIn

Hackers are a busy bunch. I'm sure you've received a Facebook invitation from someone you're already friends with, or from a complete stranger. Usually these are hackers with ill intent. It should come as no surprise hackers have targeted LinkedIn as well.

Here's how to spot a fake.

Start by doing a Google search on the profile picture by right clicking and selecting "Search Google for Image." Hackers often use the same stock photos on multiple phony profiles. Generally you should only get a handful of hits on the image - any more than three or four is a flag to do some further investigation. (This works for Facebook & other social outlets as well.)

Other things to consider:

• How many connections does this person have? Once someone determines a profile is a fake they're not going to want to connect.
• How complete is the profile? There are a LOT of "shell" profiles on LinkedIn and while many are legitimate people who signed up and simply aren't active users others are fakes. Either way, why connect to someone that isn't involved in the community? The whole idea is to build a relationship and collaborate. 
• Quality of content. Many hackers are not native English speakers so when they do take time to build out a more robust profile you're likely to find bad grammar, misspellings, and poorly written copy.
• What does the invitation to connect say? Many legitimate people don't change the default "I'd like you to join my network on LinkedIn" message, and I'm sure there's some hackers who have figured out how to customize their message.

LinkedIn is a wonderful networking tool. I know I've helped people I've never met in person, and they have helped me. Just because you don't know someone now doesn't mean you shouldn't try to get to know them. Don't be afraid to accept invitations, just be a little more aware when a new invitation hits your inbox.

If you'd like more pointers on spotting a fake, check out this article which proved exceptionally helpful in composing this post.

Online Consumer Review Sites

Everyone has an opinion. With so many voices wanting to be heard in today's hyper-connected and information saturated world, it's no mystery why online review sites have become so popular. 

Google's review platform allows you to share your opinion on any product or service in a Google search result. Interested in researching a company? Glassdoor, Yahoo, and others offer options. Traveling or looking for a new place to have a nice meal? Check out Yelp or TripAdvisor. You can even check out reviews for a gallon of milk on Amazon. 

If you clicked on the link to the milk reviews you saw the humor of some online reviewers. However, reviews don't have to be absurd to be viewed with skepticism. There certainly are pro's and con's to using online reviews as a source of information.

The Pro's:

Accessibility to Information. Before Al Gore invented the internet there were a handful of print publication that provided this type of information Today that has all changed. Before we step foot in a business we have an opportunity to form an opinion based on "word-of-mouth" ("word of internet?") information.

Positive Reviews drive business. Yes, I check out Yelp before I try someplace new. The places that"delight their customers" have been rewarded with new customers. However, there's another edge to this sword - if the reviews are consistently 4+ stars I also go in with high expectations. 

The Business can improve and/or make amends. A negative review gives a company a chance to learn from mistakes and provides an opportunity to reach out to an unsatisfied customer to rectify a situation. 

Global Impact. If you're unfamiliar with a city you plan to visit or live in this information can impact many decisions you need to make. Online review sites expose businesses to an audience beyond their immediate neighborhood.

The Cons's:

Michael Scott (Dunder Mifflen Regional Manager) once said "Wikipedia is the best thing ever. Anyone in the world can write anything they want about any subject, so you know you are getting the best possible information." Review sites are no different than the rest of the intrawebs - everything must be read with a critical eye. Just because it's written doesn't make it real.

Focusing on the Negative. You know the old adage "if you like something you'll tell one person, if you don't like it you'll tell ten." As authors review sites give us a forum to vent our frustrations. As readers we like "the dirt." Expect negative reviews - you can't please everyone.

Dated Reviews. Our world moves at a fast pace so reviews have a fairly short shelf life. The positive or negative experience from two or three years ago very well may be a completely different story today.

Anonymity. If you so choose, you can remain anonymous on every review site. In some cases (such as Glassdoor) nearly every review is anonymous. If you have an ax to grind there are no consequences for providing  misleading or false information.

If you post nothing but negative reviews your credibility as a reviewer is in question. Make sure you're singing the praises of the organizations that get it right as much (if not more) than the ones that get it wrong. 

Conclusion

As a consumer be discerning about available information. Reviews often are born from a strong opinion or experience so the number of reviews should be considered. Look for trends in the reviews. Is the majority singing their praises or complaining? 

Above all, formulate your own opinions and check things out with an open mind. Make decisions based on your experience, not on opinions and experiences of people you'll never meet.

Scrummerfall....

...is now one of my favorite made up words. This interesting mash-up of Scrum and Waterfall was used in a conversation yesterday and it made me smile. It also got me thinking about how many conversations I've had with people about Agile, Scrum and the stories I hear about how these SDLC strategies are being used (and mis-used.)

If an organization is going to 'buy in' to SCRUM there are two fairly critical Agile principles they need to follow:

• "Build projects around motivated individuals. Give them the environment and support they need, and trust them to get the job done"
• "Business people and developers must work together daily throughout the project."

Sounds good, right? Give business a daily voice in development and give the technical team the resources they need to do the job.

So why can we relate to Scrummerfall?

Let's start with Agile. Like it's predecessor Waterfall, Agile is a general label. It's a foundation that has generated different ideas and styles along with new tools and technologies for delivering software.

Scrum, TDD / BDD / FDD, paired programming and other development strategies fall under the Agile "brand."  Tools such as JIRA & TFS, Selenium & Cucumber, Docker, & CruiseControl are just a handful of the hundreds of platforms available to deliver in an iterative and continuous fashion.

By definition, if they serve the underlying purpose of delivering software efficiently, you can mix and match these strategies. When you boil it all down Agile is simply finding a way for business and technology to work together to find a better way to put usable software to production. 

Scrum & Kanban have been mashed up into Scrumban so why not mash up Scrum and Waterfall? Some would argue DSDM could be branded Scrummerfall.

After all, Agile is not without it's foibles. Fifteen years after the manifesto was written organizations still struggle to implement an Agile strategy that works for everyone. This is especially true in large, established organizations where there are many impediments to large scale Agile adaptation.

Who knows, maybe in the next few years we'll see Scrummerfall (or a variant) pop up on the drop down in TFS. And that's the beauty of Agile.

What is a Recruiter?

Not all recruiters are just recruiters. Human Resources generalists are recruiters. Hiring managers are recruiters. CEO's are recruiters. If you've ever suggested someone apply for a job you are a recruiter.

Usually when the word "recruiter" is used the perception falls into one of two camps - the corporate recruiter (HR) and the agency recruiter (headhunter.) These roles can be very similar, but the job seeker "customer experience" can be very different. 

Corporate recruiters are almost universally attached to the Human Resources department. Along with the legal department part of  HR's responsibility is to protect the interests of the company so they follow set procedures. The corporate recruiter role is more all-encompassing, so training and experience is more diverse. 

Unfortunately, talent acquisition tasks are often overshadowed by tasks related to existing employees such as benefits, training, compensation, retention, employment law, and employee issues. If you'd like to read about challenges faced by someone who is not 100% dedicated to recruiting impacting experience with the process I posted "Should Human Resources be Recruiting?"

Even though they may not be dedicated to the recruiting process, they are on the "inside" which can be an advantage. If you're hitting a wall with a corporate recruiter understand their situation and continue to persist, just don't become a pest.

Agency recruiters are usually "compartmentalized" to a specific discipline - technology, medical, light industrial, finance & accounting, or clerical / administration are the major agency categories. Agencies are sales organizations so recruiter training and experience is much different and focused purely on talent acquisition.

Because they usually have a more sales-oriented mindset they can be a great resource tailoring your resume & cover and preparing you for an interview. They are not recruiting for one company which will give you more market coverage. If a job doesn't work out they can help you find another. Just because they're not on the "inside" doesn't mean an agency recruiter isn't your best angle to a corporate job. Sometimes internal hiring processes are "broken" at a company so the agency recruiter will be in a better position to get the decision maker's ear.

Remember that an agency recruiter is looking to fill jobs, and they may feel you are not their best candidate to accomplish that task. A good recruiter will be honest with you about their client relationship and the competition you face within the agency. If they have a candidate they feel is better suited for the job don't be offended - chances are pretty good at some point that will be you.

About Us

RiverPoint is the only IT Staffing Agency in Kansas City that offers a full time consulting employment model that includes a competitive compensation and benefits plan including paid bench time between client engagements.

Our client list includes industry leaders in the digital marketing space, insurance, retail, financial, and many other business verticals.  Several of our clients have been recognized as "Best Place to Work" by a number of different organizations because they view employee engagement and satisfaction as much more than bullet points on a mission statement. 

The technology market is hot right now, so if you'd like to consider options for 2016 give us a call.

Recruiters.....

2016 marks my sixteenth year in recruiting which means I’ve spent approximately 40,000 hours of my life helping thousands of people explore new career opportunities, and have placed hundreds of them in new careers. Malcolm Gladwell writes about the “10,000 Hour Rule” in his book Outliers. The rule states that if you spend 10,000 hours doing something correctly you’re going to build what Gladwell calls “world class expertise” in that field.

While I don’t claim to have “world class expertise,” I think my years in recruiting have taught me a thing or two about the business.

One of the things that I’ve learned is not all recruiters are equal. Some are exceptional professionals who know how to cultivate relationships and leverage connections to the benefit of all. Others care more about hitting metrics than they do about the candidate. Believe it or not, some of them will lie to your face to get what they’re after.

Good recruiters are a valuable asset in a job search & can be worth their weight in gold. Bad recruiters can put you into a bad situation. Be discerning.

Another thing I’ve learned is not all candidates are equal. Many are exceptional professionals who make my job fun and make me look great to my clients. A few don’t appreciate the value a good recruiter brings to the table and can be demanding, unreasonable, and downright nasty. Believe it or not, some of them will lie to my face to get what they’re after.

I’ve interviewed thousands of job seekers – you can bet I’m discerning.

You want relationships with a recruiters in your field. You don’t need to be BFF’s with everyone, but you do need a few who you can consider “trusted advisers.” Someone you can turn to when your company merges with another and your position is eliminated. Someone that can help you get out of a jam when they make the jerk two cubes down your boss.

I would not be shocked if you’ve had a bad experience with a recruiter. If you’ve had enough exposure to recruiters I’d be shocked if you haven’t had a bad experience. Don’t let that bad apple spoil the bunch. There’s lots of great recruiters out there – make sure you have a few to lean on in bad times.