Comments on Getting Hired

Russ Unger — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 05:44:37 GMT

Thanks for referring me over to the article, Olga. Very useful in swaying me in the approach for my next resume(s).

While I am not looking forward the deep dive that is re-authoring my resume, the insights in your article (and from others on the IAI list) have really helped me fine tune my focus.

James M. Boekbinder — Sun, 02 Mar 2008 02:39:44 GMT

Very good overview, but I disagree on one point, the ‘Create a straightforward resume’ – Personality should not be part…’ This may be true in many cases, but I have had success by doing exactly the opposite. My resume starts with a sub-header : ‘Who is Jim Boekbinder?’ The fact is, facts often don’t add up to the main reason why someone is effective, or why you would want to work with them. And something else: the profile of an effective person often crosses all these categories of disciplines, and a ‘straightforward’, factual account cannot convey their strong points. It’s precisely the ‘people’ aspect of the work that I like, so I’m the guy to send out to work on location and facilitate all kinds of changes. But if I was only to sum up the ‘facts’, then most people would assume I’m some kind of typical creative who sits in his bubble (educated as filmmaker, won x number of prizes, copywriter, etc.) or only works with other creatives. The little personal bit is my way of battling with the stereotypes that go with existing categories.

Manoj Potdar — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 09:45:09 GMT

Olga!
One point I really agree is that an employer just want to fill the position with the ‘right’ candidate. And for that they just dive into your resume and your samples. Now, here ‘right’ is a very relative term which may change from employer to employer. Out of all this, we also must answer the question “Are we getting what we want? Or are we just filling up the position for the employer?”

In that aspect, I think, you missed the aspect of negotiating for your profile.

Cheers,

Manoj Potdar

Christina Wodtke — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 18:04:58 GMT

Olga—wonderful article! As a former hiring manager, I could comment on almost every point you made.. but I’ll restrict myself to one.

*Be truthful*: I cannot tell you how many resumes I’ve seen where consultants take credit for a project their company did and they did nothing or had a peripheral role. If you think that helps you, it doesn’t. What did you actually *do* on this project is always asked, and often the resume holder looks deceitful. It’s not worth it. Worse, sometimes a member of the service or client team is now working at the hiring company, and you are caught out before you even set foot in the place.

It’s not worth it. You will get busted.

Olga Sanchez-Howard — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 16:50:35 GMT

Thanks for your comments everyone!

Holger: Thank you for sharing the report for IAs for Germany. It’s important to note that my article was compiled from an event/workshop in Washington D.C. and that there will be differences in each region.

Megan: Your comment–”I’ve also experienced the issues semantics can cause when trying to staff and work together as a team.”–is important to point out. Given the challenge of following UX labels from one year to the next, it’s important for the UX team to define and be clear about the responsibilities for each role within their team. Also, to your question on whether the individuals representing the different types of employers share similar views on the topic. It’s interesting that in the context of the event/workshop none of the employers were interested in the words we use to describe ourselves. They were more interested in understanding your story–what you do, what you like, how you might fit into the UX team culture. The difference in views came from a direct connection with the type of clients, responsibilities, and leadership roles the employers were looking to hire for.

Terry: Qualifying as “older person” is contextual to the UX team you’re looking to work with. For example, if I’m fifty and looking to work with recent college graduates who tend to be in their early to mid twenties, they might think of me as an older person. You make a good point about my statement that “some older people are set in their ways”. I was pointing out an issue that came up in the event/workshop as a journalist might. And your right, it could be as simple as a myth.

Mary: Thanks for sharing! The recommended resume format in the article might be helpful in telling your story. In your high-level summary–where you see yourself as a UX professional, what you like to do–you might focus on your abilities as an individual contributor. Anything that helps potential employers see you for who you are rather than who they think you are will be helpful.

Mary Deaton — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 18:00:50 GMT

This article hit me where it hurts. My husband was told today he is getting laid off in two weeks from his product manager job. He is 57. I freelance part-time as an IA and usability specialist. I am 61. We both need to go out and look for work – more work in my case – and age is always at the backs of our minds. Although I have freelanced since 2000, the fact I owned my own consultancy and was a director-level manager in my corporate life leads potential clients and employers to believe I will not be happy as an individual contributor. For my husband, the issue is that he does not want to be a manager, a director, or a CEO. In many marketing departments, this is considered a major weakness. Whether we show up with great samples may not be enough.

Terry Bleizeffer — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 18:35:07 GMT

“One issue raised is that some older people are set in their ways.”

I enjoyed the article, but I admit that line made me chuckle. I’m not sure if I qualify as an older person yet, but I will say that I simply don’t think this is true at all. In fact, in my experience the opposite is true. Experienced employees, even if they don’t have UX backgrounds, tend to be MORE flexible, because they’ve been shaped by experiences that demanded flexibility. It’s new folks who tend to see the world as black and white, right and wrong (like I did when I was new) and get set in their ways. Then the hard reality of time-to-market and limited resources and consistency-vs-innovation rear their ugly heads and they realize that adaptability is a critical professional skill. I think the myth of the intractable old curmudgeon is just that… a myth.

Megan Fields — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 18:31:29 GMT

Agreed, timely article considering the title-talk going on in the UX community. And I’m with you, Olga, that what we do is more important than what we call ourselves. But I’ve also experienced the issues semantics can cause when trying to staff and work together as a team.

I was wondering if you can speak to the perspectives from individuals representing the different types of employers: the agency, the corporation, and the small business. Did they share similar views on the topic or were there any clear differences?

Holger Maassen — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 08:30:21 GMT

Thank you for this article. Right now, … your article was just right to get a clearer view of how the different aspects are put together. It never ceases to amaze me that it is so difficult to do the job we do for our own. ;-)

This is the report for IAs for Germany … http://www.gc-upa.de/images/pdfs/branchenreport%20usabili…
published by the German Chapter of the Usability Professionals’ Association http://www.gc-upa.de/

___ holger