Continuing on a previous topic, some people may experience a protracted period of unemployment. In some cases it may take months, or even years before they find a suitable job. If this happens to you, try not to be discouraged. Yes, it’s easy for me to say that, but it’s still important to look at things from a clear perspective.
First of all, you should ask yourself whether the extended job search is normal. Fact is, it takes time to find a new job, and the higher you are on the salary ladder the longer it generally takes. The old rule of thumb was 1 month for each 10K of salary, and I think it still applies – more or less. Also, if your skills are more specialized, or if you live in an area that’s not a technology hotspot, you should expect an even longer job search. And finally, if the economic climate is poor, the search will naturally take longer (duh).
If your search extends even beyond what might be considered normal by these standards, you’ll need to start considering what extenuating factors might be in play. Are you getting interviews but not offers? Or are you not even getting interviews at all?
If you are not getting many interviews, it might be that there is a general tech downturn in your particular geographic area or in your particular field. In these cases, you need to ask yourself whether you should consider relocating to another part of the country (or the world). Or perhaps you should consider retooling your skill set, or even try another line of work altogether.
Personally I think relocating is a viable option for a lot of people, even those that would not normally consider it. However, it’s not a good idea to move to a new location before you have a job there, as there are no guarantees that you will land a job. Also, retraining for a new skill set sounds good in theory, but most employers will want actual hands-on experience in a technology, not just a training certificate. And changing careers to an entirely different field is definitely a last resort.
Hence my advice is to stick it out and keep looking for a job in your chosen field. Perhaps you might have to take a slightly different position, such as a Project Manager or Analyst or even QA instead of a Developer. Or you might have to take a cut in pay or title. But as long as the new position is related to the work you were doing, and the step back is not a huge one, you should consider it. Spending a year working as a junior developer is far preferable to spending it unemployed and on the sidelines.
If you are getting interviews but no offers, perhaps you need to review your interviewing skills and style. Too many people think that their skills should speak for themselves, and that the interview is an objective format for discussing those skills. Not so. There are many complex factors that play into an interview, many (if not most) of them subjective. Your interview skills can definitely be improved; try going to ‘practice’ interviews with jobs you aren’t really interested in, or else engage in mock interviews with friends and colleagues if you have to.
Finally, remember that you are not your interviews. To put it another way, you should not see successful interview outcomes (i.e., offers) as a validation of your personal worth, and vice versa. They are just auditions, and auditions do not always reward the best candidates.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Monday, June 1, 2009
Is Outsourcing to Blame?
From the comments to my last post it looks like people are concerned about the trend towards outsourcing taking away their jobs. Rightly so, but things aren’t necessarily as bleak as some might imagine.
Outsourcing, or more correctly offshoring, has become the bogeyman for the software engineering industry, and has spread to other industries as well. However, from my perspective I have seen how outsourcing has worked (or not) at several companies. So here is my observation of how the process typically goes.
First, during boom times a company finds that it needs more people to handle its growing IT needs. It discovers that it either can’t find people to hire fast enough, or else the boom market has driven up salaries beyond what it wants to pay. Either way it looks to offshoring as a source of cheap, plentiful tech labor.
So the company starts outsourcing positions, typically working with a large Indian consulting firm like InfoSys, Tata, or Wipro. The company goes out of its way to reassure its employees that no, their jobs are not at risk; the company is merely supplementing its engineering capacity with offshore talent. The employees are naturally uneasy about this, but management is happy because they are getting additional bodies at a fraction of what it would cost to hire American engineers.
After about a year though the company starts to notice that productivity with offshore engineers is not what they had hoped. Challenges in communication, issues with remote management, and a wildly variable resource pool results in poor code, lots of bugs, and misunderstood requirements. Counting rework and time lost in cleaning up mistakes, overall net productivity amounts to perhaps a half or a quarter that of domestic engineers.
At this point one of two scenarios occurs. In the first, management is so giddy about the cost savings from offshoring that they start pushing American engineers out the door and replacing them with offshore labor. They either don’t understand the implications of reduced quality and productivity, or they just don’t care. They believe that if offshore engineers’ productivity is lower, their lower cost more than makes up for it
Hence these companies throw more bodies at the problem, adding more offshore engineers to while reducing domestic headcount. Productivity, turnaround time, and time to market suffer, but the bottom line looks better… at least for a while. These companies however often get addicted to the supposed cost savings, and enter into a spiral of costcutting and poor quality and never recover.
However, in the alternate, more positive scenario, the company decides that the lower productivity and poor quality from offshoring are not worth the cost savings. Hence they start to bring the jobs back to the U.S., and reduce their reliance on undependable offshore labor.
I have seen both of these scenarios firsthand, and am hopeful that the second scenario will become more common. I believe that eventually more and more companies will begin to see the benefits of having technical resources close at hand, where they can be closely supervised and where communication is more straightforward. This will take time, but I think the tide may be (slowly) turning.
Outsourcing, or more correctly offshoring, has become the bogeyman for the software engineering industry, and has spread to other industries as well. However, from my perspective I have seen how outsourcing has worked (or not) at several companies. So here is my observation of how the process typically goes.
First, during boom times a company finds that it needs more people to handle its growing IT needs. It discovers that it either can’t find people to hire fast enough, or else the boom market has driven up salaries beyond what it wants to pay. Either way it looks to offshoring as a source of cheap, plentiful tech labor.
So the company starts outsourcing positions, typically working with a large Indian consulting firm like InfoSys, Tata, or Wipro. The company goes out of its way to reassure its employees that no, their jobs are not at risk; the company is merely supplementing its engineering capacity with offshore talent. The employees are naturally uneasy about this, but management is happy because they are getting additional bodies at a fraction of what it would cost to hire American engineers.
After about a year though the company starts to notice that productivity with offshore engineers is not what they had hoped. Challenges in communication, issues with remote management, and a wildly variable resource pool results in poor code, lots of bugs, and misunderstood requirements. Counting rework and time lost in cleaning up mistakes, overall net productivity amounts to perhaps a half or a quarter that of domestic engineers.
At this point one of two scenarios occurs. In the first, management is so giddy about the cost savings from offshoring that they start pushing American engineers out the door and replacing them with offshore labor. They either don’t understand the implications of reduced quality and productivity, or they just don’t care. They believe that if offshore engineers’ productivity is lower, their lower cost more than makes up for it
Hence these companies throw more bodies at the problem, adding more offshore engineers to while reducing domestic headcount. Productivity, turnaround time, and time to market suffer, but the bottom line looks better… at least for a while. These companies however often get addicted to the supposed cost savings, and enter into a spiral of costcutting and poor quality and never recover.
However, in the alternate, more positive scenario, the company decides that the lower productivity and poor quality from offshoring are not worth the cost savings. Hence they start to bring the jobs back to the U.S., and reduce their reliance on undependable offshore labor.
I have seen both of these scenarios firsthand, and am hopeful that the second scenario will become more common. I believe that eventually more and more companies will begin to see the benefits of having technical resources close at hand, where they can be closely supervised and where communication is more straightforward. This will take time, but I think the tide may be (slowly) turning.
Friday, May 29, 2009
Why Can’t I Land a Job?
We have all heard stories about candidates who go on interview after interview but can never land a position. Or even worse, they don’t get interviews at all. Perhaps you know of someone like this, or maybe you are in this situation yourself. And you might be asking, “What’s going on? Has the market gone completely to hell? Or maybe is there something wrong with me?”
There could be several possible answers. Perhaps there are not many jobs in your desired field. Is your specialty in Artificial Intelligence with Lisp? Certainly there will be fewer career choices for you than if you are an ASP.NET, Java, or PHP developer. Ask yourself if you would rather continue in your area of expertise or learn more general and more marketable skills.
Also, there might not be the right types of jobs in your geographic area. Are you flexible about relocation? There may not be many ASP.NET/WCF or Java/Spring positions in Great Falls, Montana. Not that there’s anything wrong with Great Falls, but it might not be the place for someone with your skill set. Consider moving to a major metropolitan area if possible.
So let’s say that you’ve learned C#/ASP.NET and relocated to the San Francisco Bay area (don’t call it ‘Frisco’, by the way). Unfortunately PHP and Ruby on Rails are far more popular than ASP.NET in the Bay area, but let’s put that aside for the moment. There should still be a fair number of ASP.NET positions in the Bay area, so why hasn’t that great position come along? You may have gone on several interviews with great companies and thought you did well, but you have yet to hear back from any of the companies you visited.
It’s possible that in this situation your skills are not strong enough for the positions you are applying to. You should consider taking a position with a less prestigious company as a stepping stone. Once there you can improve your skill set and build up a track record of achievement that you can leverage into a new position.
Keep in mind also that finding a new job is never an easy process. In the past the rule of thumb was to allow 1 month of searching for each $10K of salary. That may seem extreme, but it does make sense that as you progress further in your career, there are fewer senior and advanced level positions available. So naturally it will take longer to find that matching position.
Finally, it is always pays to be introspective. Is it possible that all the companies you’ve talked to are staffed by bumbling, incompetent idiots who fail to see your true genius? Are they all just going through the motions of interviewing before they hire their cousin or an H1B? Are you just wasting your time with these clowns?
All of these things are possible, but unlikely. Remember that companies look for more than just technical skills. Your social skills, communication skills, and yes, even your appearance can play a factor. Do you enjoy interacting with other people? Or do you just endure them? Do you enjoy chatting people up? Or do you wish people would shut up and go away so you can do your work? Are you well groomed, or do you think dress and appearance are unimportant as long as you do solid work? Your answers to these questions will likely matter more than you might think.
There could be several possible answers. Perhaps there are not many jobs in your desired field. Is your specialty in Artificial Intelligence with Lisp? Certainly there will be fewer career choices for you than if you are an ASP.NET, Java, or PHP developer. Ask yourself if you would rather continue in your area of expertise or learn more general and more marketable skills.
Also, there might not be the right types of jobs in your geographic area. Are you flexible about relocation? There may not be many ASP.NET/WCF or Java/Spring positions in Great Falls, Montana. Not that there’s anything wrong with Great Falls, but it might not be the place for someone with your skill set. Consider moving to a major metropolitan area if possible.
So let’s say that you’ve learned C#/ASP.NET and relocated to the San Francisco Bay area (don’t call it ‘Frisco’, by the way). Unfortunately PHP and Ruby on Rails are far more popular than ASP.NET in the Bay area, but let’s put that aside for the moment. There should still be a fair number of ASP.NET positions in the Bay area, so why hasn’t that great position come along? You may have gone on several interviews with great companies and thought you did well, but you have yet to hear back from any of the companies you visited.
It’s possible that in this situation your skills are not strong enough for the positions you are applying to. You should consider taking a position with a less prestigious company as a stepping stone. Once there you can improve your skill set and build up a track record of achievement that you can leverage into a new position.
Keep in mind also that finding a new job is never an easy process. In the past the rule of thumb was to allow 1 month of searching for each $10K of salary. That may seem extreme, but it does make sense that as you progress further in your career, there are fewer senior and advanced level positions available. So naturally it will take longer to find that matching position.
Finally, it is always pays to be introspective. Is it possible that all the companies you’ve talked to are staffed by bumbling, incompetent idiots who fail to see your true genius? Are they all just going through the motions of interviewing before they hire their cousin or an H1B? Are you just wasting your time with these clowns?
All of these things are possible, but unlikely. Remember that companies look for more than just technical skills. Your social skills, communication skills, and yes, even your appearance can play a factor. Do you enjoy interacting with other people? Or do you just endure them? Do you enjoy chatting people up? Or do you wish people would shut up and go away so you can do your work? Are you well groomed, or do you think dress and appearance are unimportant as long as you do solid work? Your answers to these questions will likely matter more than you might think.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Hiring Freeze
What does it mean when a company is in a hiring freeze? Does it simply mean they are not hiring anyone, period? No, that’s not necessarily the case.
What a hiring freeze does mean is that managers cannot open new reqs to increase headcount. However, they can often open reqs to replace people who leave.
Also, even with a hiring freeze in place many companies make provisions for hiring essential personnel to fill key positions. In such cases the hiring freeze is a “soft” one in that each req has to be approved by senior management,
The moral? Even if you hear that a company has a hiring freeze, that shouldn’t discourage you from applying there, as there are always exceptions.
What a hiring freeze does mean is that managers cannot open new reqs to increase headcount. However, they can often open reqs to replace people who leave.
Also, even with a hiring freeze in place many companies make provisions for hiring essential personnel to fill key positions. In such cases the hiring freeze is a “soft” one in that each req has to be approved by senior management,
The moral? Even if you hear that a company has a hiring freeze, that shouldn’t discourage you from applying there, as there are always exceptions.
Friday, May 15, 2009
Handling a Layoff (or Other Involuntary Separation)
Layoffs can happen to the best of us – and yes, it has happened to me in the past. Not through any fault of my own (of course!), but as they say, sh*t happens.
There are several stages in dealing with a traumatic event like a layoff. Different sources may have slightly different lists, but for me it goes like this:
1. Shock
2. Denial
3. Anger
4. Bargaining
5. Depression
6. Acceptance
Shock means it takes a moment for the news to sink in. “What just happened here?” is what you ask yourself, and you wander around in a daze.
Denial is where you tell yourself that this can’t be happening, that it’s all just a dream (or a nightmare). Or they surely must have made a mistake, and your name should have been on the promotion list instead of the RIF list?
Anger is where you curse your employer for having the gall to lay you off, after all you’ve done for them. All that hard work, the best years of your career down the drain.
Bargaining is where you try to negotiate with the company for a second chance, or more time, or at least a better severance package.
Depression is where you feel sorry for yourself, thinking that with this stain on your record you’ll never find another good job. How long will you be unemployed? How painful will the loss of income be?
Acceptance is the part where you basically decide to deal with it and move on. This is where you start polishing your resume and posting it online. The sooner you can move to this stage, the better off you will be.
I have gone through this myself, more than once in fact. And I think it's an experience that everyone should go through if only as a learning experience. Once you are the subject of a RIF you look at the job market differently; you learn that you, and no one elsehave to actively look out for your own career and well being.
There are several stages in dealing with a traumatic event like a layoff. Different sources may have slightly different lists, but for me it goes like this:
1. Shock
2. Denial
3. Anger
4. Bargaining
5. Depression
6. Acceptance
Shock means it takes a moment for the news to sink in. “What just happened here?” is what you ask yourself, and you wander around in a daze.
Denial is where you tell yourself that this can’t be happening, that it’s all just a dream (or a nightmare). Or they surely must have made a mistake, and your name should have been on the promotion list instead of the RIF list?
Anger is where you curse your employer for having the gall to lay you off, after all you’ve done for them. All that hard work, the best years of your career down the drain.
Bargaining is where you try to negotiate with the company for a second chance, or more time, or at least a better severance package.
Depression is where you feel sorry for yourself, thinking that with this stain on your record you’ll never find another good job. How long will you be unemployed? How painful will the loss of income be?
Acceptance is the part where you basically decide to deal with it and move on. This is where you start polishing your resume and posting it online. The sooner you can move to this stage, the better off you will be.
I have gone through this myself, more than once in fact. And I think it's an experience that everyone should go through if only as a learning experience. Once you are the subject of a RIF you look at the job market differently; you learn that you, and no one elsehave to actively look out for your own career and well being.
Friday, May 8, 2009
Am I Being Pushed Out?
I noted in my last post that California is an employment “At Will” state, so it’s virtually impossible to fire someone on the spot. Whenever I’ve tried to do so, HR has always slapped my hand. Except in cases of gross misconduct companies will almost never fire anyone on short notice.
It’s basically a liability issue. The employee may find an excuse to sue the company claiming they were unfairly let go. “At Will” employment rules do have exceptions, and disgruntled terminated employees (is there any other kind?) and their lawyers have habit of exploiting these laws to the fullest.
Sometimes I wonder if I shouldn’t have become an employment lawyer. They seem to be always busy either suing companies or sitting back and counting their money. Hopefully they won’t sue me for this post.
As a result of worry over legal action, companies are quite methodical and deliberate when they want to terminate someone. The manager has to build up a strong case and document performance problems with the employee. The employee will also typically be given at least one verbal warning and then a written warning.
So what does it mean if you are presented with a written warning? Well, to begin with it shouldn’t come as a total surprise. You will most likely have received verbal warnings already, though it might not have been explicitly stated as such. You might not even have taken them seriously, dismissing them as a cantankerous boss just venting steam.
However, when it gets to the point of a written warning, it’s definitely serious. Basically this is one of those few times where you’re justified in being paranoid. Your bosses really do have it in for you, and they are building up a case file to cover their backs.
At this point you’re on borrowed time – a written warning typically gives you 30 days to shape up or ship out. And it’s a rare situation indeed where 30 days is enough for a person to show dramatic improvement, which is what it usually takes to get your neck out of the noose.
Furthermore, in many cases your bosses won’t even care if you do show improvement, as they will have already made the decision to show you the door after the 30 days. So your best bet is really to polish up your resume and start actively looking for a new job.
It’s basically a liability issue. The employee may find an excuse to sue the company claiming they were unfairly let go. “At Will” employment rules do have exceptions, and disgruntled terminated employees (is there any other kind?) and their lawyers have habit of exploiting these laws to the fullest.
Sometimes I wonder if I shouldn’t have become an employment lawyer. They seem to be always busy either suing companies or sitting back and counting their money. Hopefully they won’t sue me for this post.
As a result of worry over legal action, companies are quite methodical and deliberate when they want to terminate someone. The manager has to build up a strong case and document performance problems with the employee. The employee will also typically be given at least one verbal warning and then a written warning.
So what does it mean if you are presented with a written warning? Well, to begin with it shouldn’t come as a total surprise. You will most likely have received verbal warnings already, though it might not have been explicitly stated as such. You might not even have taken them seriously, dismissing them as a cantankerous boss just venting steam.
However, when it gets to the point of a written warning, it’s definitely serious. Basically this is one of those few times where you’re justified in being paranoid. Your bosses really do have it in for you, and they are building up a case file to cover their backs.
At this point you’re on borrowed time – a written warning typically gives you 30 days to shape up or ship out. And it’s a rare situation indeed where 30 days is enough for a person to show dramatic improvement, which is what it usually takes to get your neck out of the noose.
Furthermore, in many cases your bosses won’t even care if you do show improvement, as they will have already made the decision to show you the door after the 30 days. So your best bet is really to polish up your resume and start actively looking for a new job.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
“At-Will” Employment
What exactly does it mean when a state such as California, has an “At Will” employment law?
Before you read any further you should realize that INAL – i.e., I’m Not A Lawyer. What I’m writing here is based on my fuzzy understanding of employment law based on the management training classes I slept through.
Basically the idea is that an employee can be let go at any time for any reason, except for a few reasons that are forbidden by law. Those exceptions include things like race, age, gender, etc. Of course, the idea works both ways; you as an employee are also free to walk away from the job at any time.
In practice though, firing someone is a painfully tedious process for most companies. That’s because companies will generally document pretty thoroughly the reasons why they are letting someone go. While such documentation is not strictly required, it is a defensive measure in case the fired employee sues for wrongful termination. In most cases the employee has an uphill battle proving they have been wronged, but companies don’t like to take chances.
That means that for most companies in most situations, on the spot firings are not really an option -- unless it’s for cause. “For Cause” is usually defined as gross misconduct, but again INAL, and the definition of misconduct will vary by company.
Hence it’s much easier for companies to push someone out as part of a larger layoff. In such cases the company generally does not need significant documentation as to why they let people go. In fact, they can even adopt the line “Hey, we really would have liked to have kept you onboard, but difficult times call for difficult choices…”
Before you read any further you should realize that INAL – i.e., I’m Not A Lawyer. What I’m writing here is based on my fuzzy understanding of employment law based on the management training classes I slept through.
Basically the idea is that an employee can be let go at any time for any reason, except for a few reasons that are forbidden by law. Those exceptions include things like race, age, gender, etc. Of course, the idea works both ways; you as an employee are also free to walk away from the job at any time.
In practice though, firing someone is a painfully tedious process for most companies. That’s because companies will generally document pretty thoroughly the reasons why they are letting someone go. While such documentation is not strictly required, it is a defensive measure in case the fired employee sues for wrongful termination. In most cases the employee has an uphill battle proving they have been wronged, but companies don’t like to take chances.
That means that for most companies in most situations, on the spot firings are not really an option -- unless it’s for cause. “For Cause” is usually defined as gross misconduct, but again INAL, and the definition of misconduct will vary by company.
Hence it’s much easier for companies to push someone out as part of a larger layoff. In such cases the company generally does not need significant documentation as to why they let people go. In fact, they can even adopt the line “Hey, we really would have liked to have kept you onboard, but difficult times call for difficult choices…”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
