Interview advice for someone new to the field 4

[wuneyej]

For 8+ years I've worked as a chemist for a very large corporation. In 2000 I went back to school to get a second BS degree in Information Technology. Shortly after finishing school I had a couple interviews for desirable jobs, but the IT market had already started to fall, then 9-11 happened and everyone went on hiring freezes.

So I stayed where I was and eventually persuaded the local IT manager to let me help him out. So for the past year and a half I've been doing things like...minor PC repairs, software intallations/upgrades, adding/maintaining network printers, troubleshooting connectivity problems, handling server backups, keeping equipment inventories, etc. Admitedly, not really in-depth, complex stuff, but I believe I have the potential if I were exposed to more, especially on a full-time basis.

Finally, I have an interview for a new job with an IT services branch of my current employer. The job description makes it sound like I'd be doing similar things as I've been doing, but more advanced. I'd have to move a few hours away, but I'd be willing to do so.

The initial interview will be over the phone. I was hoping some of you could offer some advice as far as what questions I should expect and what questions I should be asking. Any advice would be great. It's been a while since I've interviewed so I'm a bit nervous about it.

Thanks!!

wannabe IT guy

 

[BiggerDon]

When I applied for my current job, I was quite upfront about not having much or even any experince with some of the specific technologies my current employer uses. That being said, I chose to emphasis that I've been in this field for (yikes) 18 years (just did the math!) and that I didn't know a thing about the things I now know alot about when I started....or words to that effect! I've worked with programmers and operators who have degrees in English and Fine Arts! I think today employers are starting to realize that they need to find someone with some aptitude but more importantly someone who can change with the times because in this business things will change. I think being honest and saying I can apply similar knowledge with a different product to solve their problems is a good move. It worked for me!

 

[Terpsfan]

At present I have a job in the IT field but I don't know how long it will last. I have forayed into the job search market and found how ugly it is compared to a few years ago. There just aren't that many software development jobs out there! I have to admit I have a great background, but I am horrible at interviews. Apparently you have to play some sort of "game" to get hired. It's not good enough to be qualified. It seems they are more interested in finding someone they like than someone who can best do the job. I'll give you an example. I went to this one inteview, the initial interviewer loved me, and said I would be a good fit for the position. Then a bigger shot comes in for the second interview... he kept posturing me for questions and seemed pissed off I didn't ask the "right" questions. Everything had been covered before in the previous interview. The guy was rude and whisked me out of there. I did nothing offensive, I just didn't have any questions. Will someone please tell me the right questions to ask in an inteview? thanks... apparently I need to learn this interview game better. Any feedback would be appreciated.

 

[MDXer]

Omega,

You're right, just being qualified is no longer good enough to secure the job. Many companies want people who will be a good fit for the company while possesing the needed skills. I am guilty of not approving candidates based upon non skillset issues. In one instance I had to candidates both qualified but one had more time and experience in the technology but had ahorrible attitude. My boss Liked him but I didn't I made an arguement for not hiring the more experienced guy and hiring the other guy. The less experienced guy was hired and preformed beyond expectation. I think it was one of the best decisions the company made.

This attitude is best seen in smaller companies where the interaction between people is more important. If you have a development shop of 100 people and 2 do not get a long then is may have little impact, but if you have 10 people and 2 don't get a long then the preformace of the group can be affected.

In most instances qualified people are still getting the job they may be more or less qualified but they probably show a greater intrest in the comapny. One of the reasons interviewees are given the oppertunity to ask questions is so the interviewers can gauge a persons intrest in the company and those he may end up working with.

There are no right questions to ask there may be a few wrong questions to ask. The best types of questions would be those that inform you about the compnay, and it's culture. Who cares if you know the answers by asking you are demonstrating an intrest.

"Shoot Me! Shoot Me NOW!!!"
- Daffy Duck

 

[Terpsfan]

I think what you are saying is that it's 90% personality and 10% qualifications. I'm not sure why companies don't just say "looking for someone who smiles a lot and looks good in a suit. will train.". It seems ridiculous that they would ask for someone with 10 years of experience in 5 disciplines when they are more than likely going to go for the person who they like better.

And your case worked out well. However I often see cases where someone gets hired and can't do the work. They have a great attitude but can't even do the simple stuff, so I have to do the work for them.

 

[jtb]

I know the pain; I have felt the pain; but, there really is a lot more out there. At 45, I've gotten a lot more philosophical.

Never give up. You must believe that the "right job" is out there. If it takes 1000 resumes to get an interview and 25 interviews to get that job, then each one should just be an opportunity to hone your skills. And when you're ready, so will be your ideal job.

But there is a legitimate "shortcut" to the resume game...

Just read a book that hit the point.

[ol][li]Figure out where you want to live[/li][li]Draw a 40 mile (diameter) circle around that spot[/li][li]Make a list of all companies with more than 10 employees within that circle (I know it's huge if you picked NYC, London, Tokyo, etc.)[/li][li]Pick the top five based on who you like the best (at that moment)[/li][li]Research them completely: magazine articles, who's who, financial reports, buy their products, read the sales literature, chat up their customers, investigate their competition, know them inside and out[/li][li]Develop five detailed ways to improve each of those companies[/li][li]Send an impactful letter (not email) to the CEO, CIO, or some other CxO (unless you were able to find out the manager over the department you want to work for) telling her or him you did some research and here are your five high-level conclusions that you'd like to discuss in more detail (save the details for when they call you back)[/li][li]If if doesn't work with the first five companies, try it again with the next five...[/li][/ol]

¡eh, voila! You're hired (and "in good with the top brass" to boot)

Only one catch... you have to work hard to get noticed, so don't try bluffing--ever. If you do, they'll just sail on by...



JTB
Have Certs, Will Travel
"A knight without armour in a [cyber] land."

 

[Terpsfan]

JTB I think you are giving some sound advice. The biggest impediment to me getting a job in my area seems to be the security clearance. In the DC metro area, if you have a top security clearance, you have a ticket to ride so to speak. I agree with you that most jobs are not listed. It requires a proactive approach. I think I have been too reactive. Fortunately for me, I have a job now, so I am not at the point of desperation. But I know that I will probably have to find something in 6 months. Fortunately I live within the dc metro area, which is one of the better areas to look for IT jobs. If I lived in Butte Montana I would probably have to relocate.

 

[SQLSister]

Omega, at the point of the second interview you have to remember several things. Everyone being interviewed is considered well qualified technically for the job or you wouldn't be at the second interview. The purpose is to see how well you fit the company's corporate culture and evaluate your personality. Frankly if the guy treated me like that I'd thank my lucky stars I wasn't hired. You don't want to work for someone who expects you to be a mind reader and who is rude. Trust me on this, I know from bitter experience.

Questions to ask are ones that show you know something about what the company does and ones to find out the organization of the area you are working in and the expectations of the company as far as the corporate culture. But the real thing you need to do is sell yourself. Assume the interviewer knows nothing about what you said in the first interview (He or she may not, just that the interviewer liked you enough to pass you up the line). Ask about upcoming projects, major benefits, relative casualness of the office, working hours, chance for promotion etc. If you feel most issues have already been covered, mention that you and whoever the first interviewer discussed it and this is what you understood from that discussion. Points to make sure you hit are why you believe this opportunity is a good fit for your skills and experience and personality. You might mention why you think the position would be interesting to you and how excited you would be to work for that company.

 

[robbieguy2003]

I can understand why companies want people with the right attitude.

When someone joins an IT department the department cant change the way they work so that person fits in, the new person has to mold into the current department and thats what interviewers are looking for.

When employing someone the majority of the time you want someone with good experience (doesnt have to be excellent in most cases) who can be taught to work the way the company works.



Rob

 

[Terpsfan]

Like I said, I have a job right now, but I was just testing the waters so to speak. It was a bit humbling to see that none of these other places were willing to hire me. I know my abilities however and have created applications beyond what most people can do. I have created stuff from the ground up, including designing the database, to writing the code, to writing the stored procedures, to training, to writing documentation, help desk, etc. But that seems to matter little to these employers.

I'm great on the technical end, but I stink at the interview.

My favorite interview was when a manager basically asked me in the interview, this is what you would be doing, can you do the job? I said, yes. I was hired. There were no phoney baloney questions, etc. I wish all interviews were like that.

 

[rosieb]

Omega36

In a previous incarnation, my hit rate on recruiting was c 80%, measured on promotion (internal within the dept as it grew, or moved upward within the company), plus a couple who left after a couple of years to follow partners abroad. Most were not highly qualified, came in at a junior level and progressed upward.

The "failures" were generally higher qualified/experienced and did not want to adapt to our working ethos - they expected us to adapt totally to them. Having said that, some of my best "successes" were highly qualified and brought new ideas/working practices - but were willing to adapt.

Over a period I became convinced that the ideal recruit is the one with the "capability & willingness" to learn the job and the ability to fit in. It's not smiles a lot and looks good in a suit but someone who is interested in the job/product, wants to learn as well as contribute and is willing to fit in.

That said, my recent expreience is that many organisations have a "square hole" and want a candidate precisely the right shape to fit.

To an extent, interviews are a game and you have to play it well, and vary your tactics according to the interviewer. Practice, go for lots of interviews - then when the job you really want comes along - you'll be prepared.

Rosie

 

[Terpsfan]

That's the thing...people who have a lot of experience and skills tend to get looked at as a threat to an organization and not an asset. This is why we often have people in technical jobs who don't know what they are doing.

 

[JillofAllTrades]

I don't know you, Omega, so I am not saying that this is you, but we interviewed a guy today that kept talking about how good he is. Now, this is good to do, but he made himself look bad by saying things like, "I could even fix other people's stilted code" and "I stayed and worked all night because other people couldn't get the job done". Of course, we want someone qualified, but we don't want someone who thinks so little of their current colleagues.

We like when people ask questions about the company because we want to think you care enough about the company to be loyal.

We take the person around to meet people during the interview and get people's gut feel for the person. Not if they have the right smile or suit, but if they seem like they would fit in with our small company. We have made mistakes before and had some poor matches that did not make the person or us happy.

Best of luck with your job hunt!

Christine

 

[rosieb]

Omega36

people who have a lot of experience and skills tend to get looked at as a threat to an organization and not an asset.

Not necessarily, sometimes they're just seen as arrogant. I'm not going to rethink my entire departmental structure just to suit a new recruit. Often it is better to recruit at at a lower level and get someone who is willing and capabable of learning.

(Nor am I likely to recruit someone who tells me that he expects to have my job within 6 months. - True, strangely, he didn't get the job.)

That said, if you're really good, AND can adapt. I'd recruit in a second.

Rosie

 

[Terpsfan]

Ok, maybe I need to be more explicit in my example. I worked with a guy who management loved because he played the game well and never made waves. He never disagreed with anything that management would want to do. Management raved at how great he was...yet I had to show him how to do simple things like write a message box. Three years down the road this person is still not that much more advanced technically than before, but because this person is deemed more "likeable" they are given advancement.

Management cleared out all the people who had dynamic, independent ideas. People who went against the flow were deemed "arrogant". They settled for the yes people. Why? It keeps the game intact and no feathers are ruffled. Yes, everyone that remained fit into their little box, however the department no longer worked on complicated projects. Unfortunately when you get cookie cutted people who don't want to go against the flow, you don't get a flux of fresh ideas that may improve the way things are done.

I have managed before and I would take the more skilled less likeable person over the less skilled likeable person. I had people working for me that I didn't particularly like and they didn't particularly like me at times, but they always produced. In turn, they were compensated well. Also I gave these people excellent personnel reviews based on what they did, not based on personality. I am willing to bet more than a few managers would have given these people a less satisfactory review because they were less liked.

However I am aware of the fact that corporate america tends to be more interested in whether someone is likeable than skilled. Of course, not all companies are this way...but too many are.


My problem with recruiters is that they often do not have the sufficient technical background to really gauge whether someone has the necessary skills.

 

[Onyxpurr]

A lot of companies are starting to hire based on an emphasis on personality rather than skill because they feel it's easier to train someone on skills than try to change their personality. Which to a point, is true.

 

[SQLSister]

Omega36, given the choice, I prefer someone who is likeable and skilled. However, when faced with a decision, likeable will win for me if the person is close in skills or has shown an ability to learn and is skilled at some other similar programming language. Last summer we did some hiring and the choice came down to someone who was arrogant and unlikeable and the likeable candidates who had maybe 25% of the same skill level. In this case, we went for unlikeable and arrogant because his skills were so far superior, but if anybody had been close, we would have chosen differently. And yes, his arrogance has created problems in the workplace, although we seemed to have fixed most of them now since we were aware coming in that there would be a problem. So I guess the moral of the story is that if you are arrogant and and unlikeable, you had better be much more skilled than anybody else out there.

 

[ChrisHunt]

The ability to get on with other people is a skill, and an important one at that. Sure a department full of yes-men is unlikely to be terribly creative, but neither is a department full of prima-donnas. Good team work is vital in almost all IT projects.

-- Chris Hunt

http://www.mcgonagall-online.org.uk

http://www.napitalia.org.uk

http://www.leicesteryha.org.uk

 

[Onyxpurr]

Just because you're likeable, doesn't mean you're necessarily a 'yes' man (or woman).

Preferrable personality traits include the ability to be honest and creative. Someone who is not afraid to speak their mind, but knows how to do so without offending everyone.

I would hope that I can still retain my creativity and still be amicable. The best solution overall is to try to be as highly skilled and highly professional in you're demeanor.

One thing that helps me is that I always try to be nice and respectful at work with my co-workers no matter how stupid a request or how arrogant they get with me. However, I make sure I have a couple of "venting" buddies too. These people I choose because i know they are trustworthy enough not to take my venting too seriously and won't spread it around what I vented about.

 

[Terpsfan]

Actually my ultimate goal is to start my own business. I have built up a diverse portfolio by working on various projects for a major financial corporation. Some may say I'm crazy, others say impossible, but for me it provides the best chance to do the kind of projects I like, and have more control over how the projects get done.