The Codist - Programmerthink

A (Possible) Solution to Finding Good Programmers or a Good Job

Posted: 02/01/2007, Perm Link Readers: 2092


In my previous article on finding good employees, I wrote how painful it is for both programmers and those looking for them to get together. The current resume shuffle between the programmer, the recruiting firms, and the employers just doesn't work very well.

The recruiter game seems to be like Dr. Frankenstein asking his "recruiters" to go out and find him a brain. What he gets back is a pile of various body parts from the graveyard delivered to his feet in the hope of getting a reward. The hope is that somewhere in there is a brain. Not a very pretty image but that's how it works. An employer needs X and recruiters fall over themselves to toss enough resumes in the pile hoping that one is good enough to get them paid. For both the employer and the prospective employee it's more of a weird lottery than a real job match.

Of course if you go to any recruiter's website, they brag about how wonderful and qualified all of their people are. In reality most are nothing but body shops. You are lucky to find recruiters that can even spell the technologies being sought much less be able to separate the good from the chaff. Employers expect to be disappointed in the resumes they get, employees expect to be dumped into a big pile and never even called unless they show up randomly at the top. Of course there are really good recruiters out there who are passionate about their job and maintain great contacts. Sadly they are in the minority.

So how do we fix this sorry mess? Since I am at the employee end of this process I did have time to think since my last article. Naturally it's easy to come up with ideas but I am sure implementing them would take some effort.

One of the biggest irritations is that for both employer and prospective employee it's an endless cycle of doing the same things over and over again. Your reputation as an employee and your needs as an employer start over every connection. It's like having to log on again after ever web page you visit.

After wishing that there was an easier way to get employees and employers together directly, I decided that a decoupled and cached approach really did make more sense (hey I am a programmer after all!). The connection company (I refuse to use the word 'recruiter') contacts both sides of the equation as today. The difference would be that each prospective employee would be interviewed only by an experienced engineer in their own area, each entry in their resume checked (at least for truth), and at least N (lets say 5) technical references (people you worked with on a daily basis) would be called. All of this plus a background check and anything else that makes sense. The results of all this, plus a video of the interview, would be available for a prospective employer to view. The employers likewise would be checked (like D&B, etc) to make sure they are legitimate and dependable. Each employer would also be allowed to add information on the types of employees they would likely to be interested in, as well as being able to post specific jobs.

Each employee and employer accepted into the system would receive a personalized key. So if I would like to work at a company (in the system) all I have to do is give them my key. Using their key and mine they would be able to view my information, all the notes from the interview, as well as view the actual interview if necessary. This way I don't have to do anything special at all. If we do get together the interview can focus on specific things like personality, good fit, gut feel, etc instead of the usual introductory dance. The likelihood of being hired or hiring on the first meeting is much more likely.

I think the key to making this work (beside a great marketing campaign) is to charge the employee a little to go through the process (since it is labor intensive, and also make sure people are serious) and charge the employers a monthly fee to be in the system rather than only grab a percentage of the final salary or hourly charge. In this way it becomes more of a utility (like water) for connecting people together.

Another key is making sure you have fully qualified people doing the in-depth technical interview and not the usual "recruiter" types. If I interviewed a prospective java programmer you can be sure they will be qualified. So you have to find some way to keep your interviewers motivated to do this every day (most programmers hate this duty). But this is vital since you are essentially allowing any prospective employer to base much of their decision on this one interview session.

I imagine most recruiting companies would claim "we already do this" but in reality none of them go very far at all. If the system worked today as they claim I would be working already, employers wouldn't find recruiting companies a notch below used-car salesman, and employees would all have excellent jobs.

Can this work as a business, doing it right and not descending into the usual bodyshop mentality? I don't have any special knowledge into the financial aspects of a recruiting company, but there seem to be hundreds even in this area so someone is making money. At 30% to 100% markups (and hiring cheap labor themselves) it would seem profitable. My somewhat more involved system might make it more challenging although if the benefits are there for the customers (who are all motivated to have someone better) they has to be profit in it. Fixing something everyone hates seems like a business opportunity.

Anyone think this would work?

Tags: programmer, jobs
Sidu 02/01/2007 17:15

Apply to ThoughtWorks directly :-)

work [at] thoughtworks.com

http://diningtablecoder.blogspot.com/

Kirk 02/01/2007 23:29

My experience with many recruiters is; The play buzzword bingo with the resumes, sort the resuls by the largest difference between asking and rate quoted by client, submit resume with largest gap, bury the rest. You can't blame them for doing this, they are rewarded for it.

Doug 02/02/2007 10:43

I am a professional corporate recruiter and I have been seeing these types of posts more and more, and I have to say that I agree with your assessment to a point.

In the recruiting field the idea of using a video with an extensive on line application had been tried, but it turns out there are some real legal issues. For example, someone may not like how the person looks- despite the experience. I think at some point, it will happen but not without a fight.

As far the “body shop”, I agree there are some recruiters who just use the buzz words-After twelve years of recruiting, I don’t just use buzz words, but I speak with the candidate and find out the experience, what they are looking for. At our company one of the goals is to just fill a slot, but to hire someone to make a difference. During my career, I have had the opportunity to work on what recruiters call “both sides of the desk” and found I enjoy the corporate side more. Please don’t get me wrong there are some great agencies out there and not so good ones-those are the one who only go by buzz words.

There are ways to get around them for both the employer and employee-let me know and I will be happy to write about that.

Doug

jola_zm 02/02/2007 11:31

I don't understand how you intend to make the employee / jobseeker pay.

The jobseeker's w/ top notch skills and experience won't bother. Why pay money when you know that once your resume hits the streets, you'll get phonecalls and interviews galore? In other words...why pay money, when you know you can get the same type role using the current established methods for free? When I change, it doesn't bother me in the least that my company has to pay a fee to the recruiter.

The other problem is that companies are secretive too. The fact of life is that good people are HARD to find, and when I call inquiring about a job...I'm interviewing as much as they are. A lot of companies don't get that...if they did, then every freaking post on monster.com would have salary. Would save a lot of time I think!

George 02/02/2007 15:04

Finding the right job/employee is a lot like dating. Rapport is not possible without a face-to-face communication. And you cannot skip the "introductory dance".

Recruiters? Based on my experience, they are usually very helpful.

http://george.sudarkoff.com

codist 02/02/2007 16:58

@ jola_zm

Part of the problem may be regional. I've never gotten a job in the DFW area from a recruiter, it did work in the Bay area (1995). Here it seems I have to know someone or talk directly with the employer or it's almost hopeless. My resume and experience are great, my references are all very positive (and willing to talk) but there seems like a lack of connection occuring here.

@ Doug All of the employers I have worked for found dealing with recruiters highly distasteful, again it might be regional. I figured there might be legal issues, it just seemed too obvious to be original.

jola_zm 02/03/2007 16:14

No doubt regionality is a critical path in your plan. DFW area? I'm not U.S. based, so you'll have to forgive my geographic ignorance. However, I'll admit that I work in London UK, and I wouldn't be so popular w/ recruiters etc. if I worked in say Cornwall(south west coast of England).

But in terms of regionality, I think the issue is almost exclusively "How to find a good job"...there's just not enough to go around.

So -- if you get your system up and running and it works very well for areas w/ a low saturation of IT jobs, pls make sure you make the Caribbean one of your top targets...I'd love to line something up down in the Grand Caymans or something ;)

Btw -- I once thought about making a career change; even though I love coding etc I thought about changing careers and becoming a Network Engineer / help desk dude. Why? B/c software developer's can be located anywhere, and for companies it naturally makes sense to colocate teams etc My point is...even in the Grand Caymans, they need the help desk guy and it doesn't matter if their software is being developed in India.

codist 02/03/2007 22:34

DFW is the Dallas/Fort worth area in Texas.

CM 02/07/2007 09:02

I've found competency based interviews given by companies like SHL (Saville and Holdsworth) backed up with interviews by industrial psychologists give a very clear indication of who would be good in a technical role - They identify technical and numerical ability without getting mired in any technical language reguritation. They aren't used widely (possibly because of cost although that's a false economy) but I've never seen one be wrong or inaccurate