Feedback on Resume
-
@dashrender said in Feedback on Resume:
Considering I clearly have never experienced the levels of management that Scott has, I have only ever seen directors report to executives, so a director could never fire one, they are lower than executives.
The term director implies an executive. Just normally a junior one. If someone used the term director and they were not an executive, they were not a director. They were just out of their internship most likely.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Feedback on Resume:
@eddiejennings said in Feedback on Resume:
This thread has encouraged me to change my title to IT Generalist on Linkedin rather than keep my company-provided title of Network Administrator.
It's not really a good title to use. It's a good description, and it is what all SMB IT people really do. But I would not use it on a resume directly.
How would one translate that into a title?
-
@dashrender said in Feedback on Resume:
But according to Scott's comments, when he was a director, he was over the top of executives.. so I'm wondering what is the fortune 500 management chain look like from the lowest employee to the CEO/board.
Where did I say that? As the SENIOR MOST director, I was over the other directors. I wasn't a rung higher, just the highest on my rung. But the seniority difference was enough to be able to fire the Director of Operations without any other approval.
-
@eddiejennings said in Feedback on Resume:
@scottalanmiller said in Feedback on Resume:
@eddiejennings said in Feedback on Resume:
This thread has encouraged me to change my title to IT Generalist on Linkedin rather than keep my company-provided title of Network Administrator.
It's not really a good title to use. It's a good description, and it is what all SMB IT people really do. But I would not use it on a resume directly.
How would one translate that into a title?
Pick a title which that description matches. His example is LAN Administrator
-
@irj said in Feedback on Resume:
Let me ask you this. How often do you see companies that follow the @scottalanmiller guideline for titling positions? 20%, 10%, 5%, 1%, .000001%?
Most of the enterprise I see this. None of the SMB. Which is partially why they are SMB - not enough business, too much politics. It's literally all about dishonesty there. Not every SMB, of course, but it is a market problem. The SMB has a strong tendency to lie about everything, partially because there is nothing like Sarbox to audit them. Positions, titles, capabilities, willingness to pay bills, etc.
-
@irj said in Feedback on Resume:
Let me ask you this. How often do you see companies that follow the @scottalanmiller guideline for titling positions? 20%, 10%, 5%, 1%, .000001%?
This is why we all know that titles are false and putting false titles on a resume is bad. It's so common that every hiring manager knows to look for people who are going to lead off the relationship with lies. That the old company made up a false title is assumed. That good people won't repeat it (at least without pointing out that it was only the title) is also assumed.
-
@dashrender said in Feedback on Resume:
@wirestyle22 said in Feedback on Resume:
@dashrender said in Feedback on Resume:
@wirestyle22 said in Feedback on Resume:
@irj said in Feedback on Resume:
How often do you see companies that follow the @scottalanmiller guideline for titling positions? 20%, 10%, 5%, 1%, .000001%?
0% in my case
Ditto - but other than the one larger company I worked for, the rest have been SMB.
My interest is to get out of the SMB but I'm not sure how clear I made that in this thread honestly. A lot of posts.
This makes me wonder, how many non SMB's are there. There's SMEs and then Enterprises.
I think Scott said SME's start around 2000 employees, enterprise is over 10K employees.
There are roughly 2,000 enterprises in the US.
-
@wirestyle22 said in Feedback on Resume:
@dashrender said in Feedback on Resume:
@wirestyle22 said in Feedback on Resume:
@dashrender said in Feedback on Resume:
@wirestyle22 said in Feedback on Resume:
@irj said in Feedback on Resume:
How often do you see companies that follow the @scottalanmiller guideline for titling positions? 20%, 10%, 5%, 1%, .000001%?
0% in my case
Ditto - but other than the one larger company I worked for, the rest have been SMB.
My interest is to get out of the SMB but I'm not sure how clear I made that in this thread honestly. A lot of posts.
This makes me wonder, how many non SMB's are there. There's SMEs and then Enterprises.
I think Scott said SME's start around 2000 employees, enterprise is over 10K employees.
I also think he said enterprise is more of a mindset than it is the size of the company
This is also true. There is no single hard and fast definition. The gov't DoL would look at it by a single factor like staff size or revenue. I've worked for companies that literally couldn't decide if they were SMBs or enterprises. By one measure, solidly SMB. By another, solidly enterprise. Staff of 1,400; revenue higher than Apple. Enough cash in the bank to buy anything under the Fortune 50, probably - with CASH. So by one standard SMB, by another enterprise, by others, medium.
In IT we generally care about the behaviour aspect, as that is what influences us. So a few smaller companies are enterprise to us and several big ones are not.
And of course non-profits, military, government can be enterprise size and budget but aren't enterprise.
-
@jimmy9008 said in Feedback on Resume:
@scottalanmiller said in Feedback on Resume:
Normal business does this....
Director -> Managing Director -> AVP -> VP -> SVP -> EVP -> P -> CEO
But finance does this...
AVP -> VP -> SVP -> EVP -> Director -> Managing Director -> P -> CEO
What do you think on entirely removing job titles from resume? Only putting organisation, and achievement's?
Job titles should never have been on resumes. There should be a "role name" that says what you actually did, not what title you were given. The only time you ever use a title on a resume is if it actually overlapped with your description / role.
Example: If you WERE a DBA and your title was DBA. Then you can use DBA.
-
@eddiejennings said in Feedback on Resume:
@scottalanmiller said in Feedback on Resume:
@eddiejennings said in Feedback on Resume:
This thread has encouraged me to change my title to IT Generalist on Linkedin rather than keep my company-provided title of Network Administrator.
It's not really a good title to use. It's a good description, and it is what all SMB IT people really do. But I would not use it on a resume directly.
How would one translate that into a title?
Someone suggested "IT Guy". "LAN Admin" is the traditional standard title for SMB IT Generalist. SMB IT Generalist is not horrific. Technical Support Specialist. IT Administration. Business Infrastructure Specialist. BI Admin.
(You can't use BI as BI, it always has to be written as Business Infrastructure as Business Intelligence has BI and is totally different.)
-
@scottalanmiller said in Feedback on Resume:
@wirestyle22 said in Feedback on Resume:
The Arc: I was the director of IT. I was responsible for every appliance, server, workstation, etc. All devices. I handled all of the purchasing in relation to IT. I was the sole IT person covering 33 sites all over ocean county (very large county).
snip SAM rant on titles...
It does not matter what you feel is a real title or not. If the company assigned him the title, that is his title. To use anything else is not correct.
If the duties do not match the title, he can explain that in an interview.
But the title as assigned by the company is the title he had.
-
@jaredbusch said in Feedback on Resume:
@scottalanmiller said in Feedback on Resume:
@wirestyle22 said in Feedback on Resume:
The Arc: I was the director of IT. I was responsible for every appliance, server, workstation, etc. All devices. I handled all of the purchasing in relation to IT. I was the sole IT person covering 33 sites all over ocean county (very large county).
snip SAM rant on titles...
It does not matter what you feel is a real title or not. If the company assigned him the title, that is his title. To use anything else is not correct.
We've covered this. Repeating a lie you know is a lie as if it was the truth, is lying. There is no expectation of using a title on a resume, but there is an expectation of the truth.
You always have a right and an obligation to the truth. No company's giving titles changes that. Do you have a right to repeat the title they give you? Yes. Do you have a right to do so without stating it is a title if it is not also what you do? No.
If your title is lawyer and you are not a lawyer, you can't repeat it as if it were true. Same with doctor. Same with engineer in some states. But you can always list what you did.
-
@jaredbusch said in Feedback on Resume:
But the title as assigned by the company is the title he had.
No one claimed otherwise. It's putting a known false title onto a resume as if it wasn't only a title.
Explaining in an interview is fine... but many times false titles will keep you from an interview. Titles like director are looked for by hiring managers in the enterprise. They know there are no SMB directors. They know that someone stating that is either totally confused or lying - both of which are bad. That your title was director doesn't matter, no one is looking for your title. If you are proud of a title, mention it somewhere as a title. Nothing wrong with that. But don't pretend it was your role.
-
One of the key points I keep making is titles don't go on resumes, roles do. So I never said to change the title, I said not to put it.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Feedback on Resume:
@jaredbusch said in Feedback on Resume:
@scottalanmiller said in Feedback on Resume:
@wirestyle22 said in Feedback on Resume:
The Arc: I was the director of IT. I was responsible for every appliance, server, workstation, etc. All devices. I handled all of the purchasing in relation to IT. I was the sole IT person covering 33 sites all over ocean county (very large county).
snip SAM rant on titles...
It does not matter what you feel is a real title or not. If the company assigned him the title, that is his title. To use anything else is not correct.
We've covered this. Repeating a lie you know is a lie as if it was the truth, is lying. There is no expectation of using a title on a resume, but there is an expectation of the truth.
You always have a right and an obligation to the truth. No company's giving titles changes that. Do you have a right to repeat the title they give you? Yes. Do you have a right to do so without stating it is a title if it is not also what you do? No.
If your title is lawyer and you are not a lawyer, you can't repeat it as if it were true. Same with doctor. Same with engineer in some states. But you can always list what you did.
You have repeated the same thing many times, but none of that makes it true.
If my company made my title lawyer, then my title is lawyer and it will be what is on all documentation referencing my job title. and it is not a lie.
It is the name the company assigned to my title.
Just because you think titles mean something else does not mean the rest of the world does.
I live in the real world not in SAM Land.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Feedback on Resume:
One of the key points I keep making is titles don't go on resumes, roles do. So I never said to change the title, I said not to put it.
And for the few people that apply to jobs where you review resumes, that is great. the rest of the world deals with random hiring manager A and will put their titles on their resume because that is what random hiring manager A is expecting to see.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Feedback on Resume:
@dashrender said in Feedback on Resume:
But according to Scott's comments, when he was a director, he was over the top of executives.. so I'm wondering what is the fortune 500 management chain look like from the lowest employee to the CEO/board.
Where did I say that? As the SENIOR MOST director, I was over the other directors. I wasn't a rung higher, just the highest on my rung. But the seniority difference was enough to be able to fire the Director of Operations without any other approval.
Unless you were his managing director, it doesn't compute that you were in his chain of command.
Your previous comments were that you fired "other executives", keeping in my earlier post where I didn't lump directors into executives (which I now stand corrected on) and not knowing finance put directors over all VPs, etc, it appeared that you, to me in a lower position, was firing a person in a higher one.
Now knowing about finance, it makes sense you fired someone, assuming you were in their chain of command. Which I must assume was the case. -
I'm not including my titles I decided just as an fyi
-
I'm curious to see none title Joe descriptions on resumes that get people jobs.
Anyone willing to share their last resume or two that got them their job?
-
@dashrender said in Feedback on Resume:
I'm curious to see none title Joe descriptions on resumes that get people jobs.
Anyone willing to share their last resume or two that got them their job?
I actually don't think the title is important. The explanation of job responsibilities is very important though.
