If not A+, then where should someone start?
-
@IRJ said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
Does the answer to this question change in 2020?
Where would you recommend an entry level person start in IT?
That's an entirely different question from the OP.
-
@Dashrender said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@IRJ said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
Does the answer to this question change in 2020?
Where would you recommend an entry level person start in IT?
That's an entirely different question from the OP.
I got the impression from the original thread that the person in question only wanted bench level support, not actual IT.
-
@Obsolesce said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
If you owned a computer repair business, would you look over each of the hundreds of applications closely enough to notice someone who is qualified enough that doesn't list an A+ cert?
I've done a bit of study and talks on this. Requirements are used for two primarily purposes...
- To give a general idea of what kind of level or skills are sought. A+ requirement tells us that it is absolutely entry level, the absolute bottom rung. Any experience, of any sort in IT would be leaps and bounds above this requirement. Every hiring manager I've ever spoken to refers to this as the "or better" principle. We want X, the equivalent of X, or better than X. Having the Network+, for example, is a full rung on the ladder above the A+. If the A+ (or better) is a requirement, then the Net+ is above that and only the most worthless and corrupt HR department would ever attempt to screw their employer and not take it.
- Everyone adds all kinds of requirements so that there is always a reason you can give to not hire someone so that you never have to pretend that someone evaluated better or that you weren't a good match. Turning people down for jobs is stressful and risks discrimination charges. So if you make a bunch of requirements that no one is going to have all of you have a way to turn anyone down, anytime and not have to worry about proving why. You have a completely false excuse that no one can prove isn't the real reason. It's a stock HR tool that everyone in HR knows as a way to CYA when turning people down for a job. Same reason impossible requirements are used (10 years on Ubuntu 18.04) because it's a guaranteed excuse.
-
@scottalanmiller said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
If the A+ (or better) is a requirement, then the Net+ is above that and only the most worthless and corrupt HR department would ever attempt to screw their employer and not take it.
This assumes the HR department knows that Network+ is higher than A+. Not an assumption I would make.
-
@Dashrender said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@scottalanmiller said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
If the A+ (or better) is a requirement, then the Net+ is above that and only the most worthless and corrupt HR department would ever attempt to screw their employer and not take it.
This assumes the HR department knows that Network+ is higher than A+. Not an assumption I would make.
No, it assumes HR is incompetent and not even remotely attempting to do its job. And that any job you'd want to waste time talking to would operate that way.
One is a huge assumption people should not make, HR is rarely so incompetent or outright evil to sabotage their own firms intentionally. The IT hatred for HR does a lot to undermine logic in IT career planning. It's absurd.
The second is a big planning mistake IT should not make. No one honestly trying to have a career should be focused on trying to get interviews and waste their time with the bottom of the barrel jobs. There will always be total career failures out there to fill those jobs, don't fight for them.
-
@scottalanmiller said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@Dashrender said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@scottalanmiller said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
If the A+ (or better) is a requirement, then the Net+ is above that and only the most worthless and corrupt HR department would ever attempt to screw their employer and not take it.
This assumes the HR department knows that Network+ is higher than A+. Not an assumption I would make.
No, it assumes HR is incompetent and not even remotely attempting to do its job. And that any job you'd want to waste time talking to would operate that way.
One is a huge assumption people should not make, HR is rarely so incompetent or outright evil to sabotage their own firms intentionally. The IT hatred for HR does a lot to undermine logic in IT career planning. It's absurd.
The second is a big planning mistake IT should not make. No one honestly trying to have a career should be focused on trying to get interviews and waste their time with the bottom of the barrel jobs. There will always be total career failures out there to fill those jobs, don't fight for them.
I don't think HR is bad at selecting good resumes to pass on to the hiring managers. I feel that's a general misconception and is as Scott says, only places you don't want to work anyways.
-
@Obsolesce said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@scottalanmiller said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@Dashrender said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@scottalanmiller said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
If the A+ (or better) is a requirement, then the Net+ is above that and only the most worthless and corrupt HR department would ever attempt to screw their employer and not take it.
This assumes the HR department knows that Network+ is higher than A+. Not an assumption I would make.
No, it assumes HR is incompetent and not even remotely attempting to do its job. And that any job you'd want to waste time talking to would operate that way.
One is a huge assumption people should not make, HR is rarely so incompetent or outright evil to sabotage their own firms intentionally. The IT hatred for HR does a lot to undermine logic in IT career planning. It's absurd.
The second is a big planning mistake IT should not make. No one honestly trying to have a career should be focused on trying to get interviews and waste their time with the bottom of the barrel jobs. There will always be total career failures out there to fill those jobs, don't fight for them.
I don't think HR is bad at selecting good resumes to pass on to the hiring managers. I feel that's a general misconception and is as Scott says, only places you don't want to work anyways.
Most places use recruiters for this now, they can be internal or external recruiters.
-
@scottalanmiller said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@Dashrender said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@scottalanmiller said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
If the A+ (or better) is a requirement, then the Net+ is above that and only the most worthless and corrupt HR department would ever attempt to screw their employer and not take it.
This assumes the HR department knows that Network+ is higher than A+. Not an assumption I would make.
No, it assumes HR is incompetent and not even remotely attempting to do its job. And that any job you'd want to waste time talking to would operate that way.
Is that really an HR responsibility? I guess maybe internal recruiters are considered HR, but they usually dont fall under that department from what I have seen.
-
@IRJ said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@scottalanmiller said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@Dashrender said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@scottalanmiller said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
If the A+ (or better) is a requirement, then the Net+ is above that and only the most worthless and corrupt HR department would ever attempt to screw their employer and not take it.
This assumes the HR department knows that Network+ is higher than A+. Not an assumption I would make.
No, it assumes HR is incompetent and not even remotely attempting to do its job. And that any job you'd want to waste time talking to would operate that way.
Is that really an HR responsibility? I guess maybe internal recruiters are considered HR, but they usually dont fall under that department from what I have seen.
Not sure I've seen enough to say, but I feel that recruiting is either an HR (company wide) function or a departmental function.
-
@IRJ said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@Obsolesce said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@scottalanmiller said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@Dashrender said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@scottalanmiller said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
If the A+ (or better) is a requirement, then the Net+ is above that and only the most worthless and corrupt HR department would ever attempt to screw their employer and not take it.
This assumes the HR department knows that Network+ is higher than A+. Not an assumption I would make.
No, it assumes HR is incompetent and not even remotely attempting to do its job. And that any job you'd want to waste time talking to would operate that way.
One is a huge assumption people should not make, HR is rarely so incompetent or outright evil to sabotage their own firms intentionally. The IT hatred for HR does a lot to undermine logic in IT career planning. It's absurd.
The second is a big planning mistake IT should not make. No one honestly trying to have a career should be focused on trying to get interviews and waste their time with the bottom of the barrel jobs. There will always be total career failures out there to fill those jobs, don't fight for them.
I don't think HR is bad at selecting good resumes to pass on to the hiring managers. I feel that's a general misconception and is as Scott says, only places you don't want to work anyways.
Most places use recruiters for this now, they can be internal or external recruiters.
It might be better to say - the places that Scott and elk WANT to work use recruiters...
-
-
@Dashrender said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
It might be better to say - the places that Scott and elk WANT to work use recruiters...
No, lots of good places don't. But lots of good places do. I think the point was only that HR doesn't play the huge role that people often imagine.
-
@scottalanmiller said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@Dashrender said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
It might be better to say - the places that Scott and elk WANT to work use recruiters...
No, lots of good places don't. But lots of good places do. I think the point was only that HR doesn't play the huge role that people often imagine.
I haven't been in the job market going through HR in - hmm... ever I guess. First tech job was a bench job, but was pulled off a telemarketing call floor to work it part time as one of the few on the floor who "knew anything about computers" - so no HR for that move, that job became full time jack of all trades on anything PC/phone related (including pulling cables). Inter-company department change - no HR, moved to another company where a friend worked - no HR, company merged with second company - no HR - Opened business - of course no HR, closed business went to work for a client - no HR...
Nope, never really dealt with HR myself.
-
@Dashrender said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@scottalanmiller said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@Dashrender said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
It might be better to say - the places that Scott and elk WANT to work use recruiters...
No, lots of good places don't. But lots of good places do. I think the point was only that HR doesn't play the huge role that people often imagine.
I haven't been in the job market going through HR in - hmm... ever I guess. First tech job was a bench job, but was pulled off a telemarketing call floor to work it part time as one of the few on the floor who "knew anything about computers" - so no HR for that move, that job became full time jack of all trades on anything PC/phone related (including pulling cables). Inter-company department change - no HR, moved to another company where a friend worked - no HR, company merged with second company - no HR - Opened business - of course no HR, closed business went to work for a client - no HR...
Nope, never really dealt with HR myself.
Me either, not for getting a job. Dealing with things after being hired, sure. But HR never seems to be in the critical path to getting the offer. Or when it is, it's like just in doing background checks and stuff, but not in the interview process.
-
@scottalanmiller said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@Dashrender said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@scottalanmiller said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@Dashrender said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
It might be better to say - the places that Scott and elk WANT to work use recruiters...
No, lots of good places don't. But lots of good places do. I think the point was only that HR doesn't play the huge role that people often imagine.
I haven't been in the job market going through HR in - hmm... ever I guess. First tech job was a bench job, but was pulled off a telemarketing call floor to work it part time as one of the few on the floor who "knew anything about computers" - so no HR for that move, that job became full time jack of all trades on anything PC/phone related (including pulling cables). Inter-company department change - no HR, moved to another company where a friend worked - no HR, company merged with second company - no HR - Opened business - of course no HR, closed business went to work for a client - no HR...
Nope, never really dealt with HR myself.
Me either, not for getting a job. Dealing with things after being hired, sure. But HR never seems to be in the critical path to getting the offer. Or when it is, it's like just in doing background checks and stuff, but not in the interview process.
Sure, but that said - I definitely don't consider this the norm. I mean it might be the norm for someone in your position - where people are seeking you out - but if you have zero contacts at the company - how else are you getting in the door? Do the F500 basically allow the hiring teams to get the resumes directly, and only after they pick a candidate have HR do the checks?
-
@Dashrender said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@scottalanmiller said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@Dashrender said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@scottalanmiller said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@Dashrender said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
It might be better to say - the places that Scott and elk WANT to work use recruiters...
No, lots of good places don't. But lots of good places do. I think the point was only that HR doesn't play the huge role that people often imagine.
I haven't been in the job market going through HR in - hmm... ever I guess. First tech job was a bench job, but was pulled off a telemarketing call floor to work it part time as one of the few on the floor who "knew anything about computers" - so no HR for that move, that job became full time jack of all trades on anything PC/phone related (including pulling cables). Inter-company department change - no HR, moved to another company where a friend worked - no HR, company merged with second company - no HR - Opened business - of course no HR, closed business went to work for a client - no HR...
Nope, never really dealt with HR myself.
Me either, not for getting a job. Dealing with things after being hired, sure. But HR never seems to be in the critical path to getting the offer. Or when it is, it's like just in doing background checks and stuff, but not in the interview process.
Sure, but that said - I definitely don't consider this the norm. I mean it might be the norm for someone in your position - where people are seeking you out - but if you have zero contacts at the company - how else are you getting in the door? Do the F500 basically allow the hiring teams to get the resumes directly, and only after they pick a candidate have HR do the checks?
It's always filtered with large companies. They almost always pay internal or external recruiters for this. There is no way they are reading through every resume.
-
@IRJ said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@Dashrender said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@scottalanmiller said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@Dashrender said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@scottalanmiller said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@Dashrender said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
It might be better to say - the places that Scott and elk WANT to work use recruiters...
No, lots of good places don't. But lots of good places do. I think the point was only that HR doesn't play the huge role that people often imagine.
I haven't been in the job market going through HR in - hmm... ever I guess. First tech job was a bench job, but was pulled off a telemarketing call floor to work it part time as one of the few on the floor who "knew anything about computers" - so no HR for that move, that job became full time jack of all trades on anything PC/phone related (including pulling cables). Inter-company department change - no HR, moved to another company where a friend worked - no HR, company merged with second company - no HR - Opened business - of course no HR, closed business went to work for a client - no HR...
Nope, never really dealt with HR myself.
Me either, not for getting a job. Dealing with things after being hired, sure. But HR never seems to be in the critical path to getting the offer. Or when it is, it's like just in doing background checks and stuff, but not in the interview process.
Sure, but that said - I definitely don't consider this the norm. I mean it might be the norm for someone in your position - where people are seeking you out - but if you have zero contacts at the company - how else are you getting in the door? Do the F500 basically allow the hiring teams to get the resumes directly, and only after they pick a candidate have HR do the checks?
It's always filtered with large companies. They almost always pay internal or external recruiters for this. There is no way they are reading through every resume.
It's only the small companies with no resources who have one HR person filter resumes and forward the ones they like to the hiring manager.
For normal companies and medium/large companies, it's as IRJ said.
In/external recruiter > hiring manager > all interviews > hr/recruiter.
-
@Dashrender said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@scottalanmiller said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@Dashrender said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@scottalanmiller said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@Dashrender said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
It might be better to say - the places that Scott and elk WANT to work use recruiters...
No, lots of good places don't. But lots of good places do. I think the point was only that HR doesn't play the huge role that people often imagine.
I haven't been in the job market going through HR in - hmm... ever I guess. First tech job was a bench job, but was pulled off a telemarketing call floor to work it part time as one of the few on the floor who "knew anything about computers" - so no HR for that move, that job became full time jack of all trades on anything PC/phone related (including pulling cables). Inter-company department change - no HR, moved to another company where a friend worked - no HR, company merged with second company - no HR - Opened business - of course no HR, closed business went to work for a client - no HR...
Nope, never really dealt with HR myself.
Me either, not for getting a job. Dealing with things after being hired, sure. But HR never seems to be in the critical path to getting the offer. Or when it is, it's like just in doing background checks and stuff, but not in the interview process.
Sure, but that said - I definitely don't consider this the norm. I mean it might be the norm for someone in your position - where people are seeking you out - but if you have zero contacts at the company - how else are you getting in the door? Do the F500 basically allow the hiring teams to get the resumes directly, and only after they pick a candidate have HR do the checks?
Obviously they do neither. They do the sensible thing of using recruiters, who are not HR and don't intentionally keep good candidates away. They do the simple, obvious thing. Why anyone things HR is normally in the chain is beyond me, no one seems to have seem this first hand.
I have a feeling that everyone hopes that HR being crazy is the reason why they don't get every job begging for them every time and it makes us feel good to blame HR. But working from the hiring side, only a total imbecile and failing company would ever have it cross their minds to work that way. Someone somewhere has done this, and it's like become that lore that has been accepted as truth because from the IT perspective, much like every end user being a complete idiot, it servers our egos to think HR are all idiots and that explains why we aren't the top pick for every job. But logic, observation, etc. don't support that theory. It's just something that people say and it gets repeated because everyone wants it to be true and it's obviously impossible to actually prove either way.
-
@Obsolesce said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@IRJ said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@Dashrender said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@scottalanmiller said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@Dashrender said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@scottalanmiller said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
@Dashrender said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
It might be better to say - the places that Scott and elk WANT to work use recruiters...
No, lots of good places don't. But lots of good places do. I think the point was only that HR doesn't play the huge role that people often imagine.
I haven't been in the job market going through HR in - hmm... ever I guess. First tech job was a bench job, but was pulled off a telemarketing call floor to work it part time as one of the few on the floor who "knew anything about computers" - so no HR for that move, that job became full time jack of all trades on anything PC/phone related (including pulling cables). Inter-company department change - no HR, moved to another company where a friend worked - no HR, company merged with second company - no HR - Opened business - of course no HR, closed business went to work for a client - no HR...
Nope, never really dealt with HR myself.
Me either, not for getting a job. Dealing with things after being hired, sure. But HR never seems to be in the critical path to getting the offer. Or when it is, it's like just in doing background checks and stuff, but not in the interview process.
Sure, but that said - I definitely don't consider this the norm. I mean it might be the norm for someone in your position - where people are seeking you out - but if you have zero contacts at the company - how else are you getting in the door? Do the F500 basically allow the hiring teams to get the resumes directly, and only after they pick a candidate have HR do the checks?
It's always filtered with large companies. They almost always pay internal or external recruiters for this. There is no way they are reading through every resume.
It's only the small companies with no resources who have one HR person filter resumes and forward the ones they like to the hiring manager.
Yep and thats the issue many here describe. Recruiters are not cheap, so small businesses dont use them. Even though, we all know the importance of finding a good candidate and how much money it can save in the long run.
The one man IT department is too busy to look over resumes, so HR filters for them. I think this is fairly common.
-
@IRJ said in If not A+, then where should someone start?:
Even though, we all know the importance of finding a good candidate and how much money it can save in the long run.
yeah, nothing more important than hiring well! If you "can't afford to treat hiring as a priority", your business can't afford to operate.
