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

[Matt Disney <disney@ece.utk.edu>]

Trey Harris wrote:
> ...
> 
> I've been wondering about whether this wouldn't be a useful project--some
> sort of guidelines for sysadmin resumes, perhaps keyed to job description
> levels and with definitions of these vague words.  For instance:
> 
> 1.  Simply listing a technology means nothing except that you'd like to
>      be considered for jobs using that technology.
> 
> 2.  "Some experience" with a technology means you've touched it
>      significantly enough to be familiar with it and know the roadmap of
>      its general workings.
> 
> 3.  "Conversant"  means you can work with it without constantly
>      experimenting or referring back to documentation and do some
>      rudimentary troubleshooting.
> 
> 4.  "Competent" means you can work with it to do just about any normal
>      task and have some understanding of its internals, and are prepared
>      to do many kinds of troubleshooting (I think this is what many folks
>      mean when they say "expert").
> 
> 5.  "Expert" means you can push it to do things nobody's done before, can
>      teach it to others with aplomb, would be ready to tackle any
>      troubleshooting problem, and have a solid understanding of its
>      internals.
> 
> Is anyone else feeling the pain of these awful resumes?  Does anyone else
> want to help take a stab at trying to do something about it?
> 
> Trey

That's an interesting suggestion. I imagine there are few organizations 
in such a good position as SAGE to tackle something like this and 
actually have it respected across the field(s).

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.

MD