Re: Resume inflation (was Re: [SAGE] Tests for Systems Administratorinterviews.)

[Trey Harris <trey@eecs.harvard.edu>]

In a message dated Thu, 16 Sep 2004, Matt Disney writes:
> I have to wonder, though, whether this would really result in any kind
> of meaningful correction. It would be great for position ads to state
> "Submissions must be compliant with SAGE proficiency descriptions," or
> some such. But might we simply see a transferral of inflation from their
> qualified skills to these SAGE proficiency keywords? I wonder if the
> root issue here might be beyond standardization efforts. If the problem
> is that candidates lack the verbal tools for accurately communicating
> their experiences, then Trey's idea should really help. However, if the
> problem mostly boils down to dishonesty or misrepresentation, having
> capability keywords could potentially still be valuable but maybe it
> wouldn't really solve the problem of resume inflation as stated IMHO.

I really don't think dishonesty is the problem.  One always has to contend
with the possibility of dealing with a BS'er or con artist.  That I'm okay
with.  My problem with all the dance about lying resumes is that it may
not actually be lying.  Maybe the candidate sincerely believes that they
are "expert" because they don't have to look at the manpage anymore, or
because they once submitted a simple bugfix.

If I catch someone in an out-and-out lie, I terminate the interview.
That's easy.  But if they've merely gilded the lily, I don't think that's
a disqualifying factor.  If the competency descriptors in the resume had
actual definitions, then profligate competency inflation would be a lie,
and I wouldn't have any qualms about stopping the interview when I
discovered it.

This is what I mean by resume inflation--what used to be gilding the lily
is now required to show you're a serious candidate.  Candidates who refuse
to play the game and write an honest resume get weeded out of the process
by non-technical people before anyone does a phone screen.

And that, in turn, leads to job requirement inflation.  I recently spoke
to a hiring manager who told me she wouldn't consider a candidate who
didn't have at least ten years of Java experience.  I just stared at her.
(Maybe she actually had an open developer position to be filled by James
Gosling, but I somehow doubt it.)

There's no doubt that using recruiters and personal networks can help
greatly with this problem.  But if you're on the tail end of a funnel that
starts with a non-technical recruiter doing Monster and Dice searches, as
many of us are, the complete disconnect of resume from reality really gets
annoying after awhile.

I'm just not convinced that there's absolutely nothing to be done.  I'm an
optimist.  :-)

Trey