Visual Resumes?
-
@scottalanmiller said in Visual Resumes?:
@dbeato said in Visual Resumes?:
@scottalanmiller said in Visual Resumes?:
@networknerd said in Visual Resumes?:
Regardless of the platform's intended purpose, isn't it about how someone leverages the platform to his / her advantage?
No, it is not. It you put your profile on Craiglist, that reflects badly on you, does it not? It doesn't matter what content you put on there, the platform itself is part of the message.
So where would be a good place to point to our projects ? Our own github or personal site?
I don't think anywhere. Why would you list projects? I've always found this to be a "Spiceworks-ism", kind of like their RFQ system. No one wanted it before they created these things, then they promoted them and people promote them because SW says so - not because it's something that hiring managers or hirees want. "Projects" aren't things to highlight, it's just "weird" to do so. Your projects are to provide experience and skill, those you list. If someone wants to know more about where you've gotten a skill, you can talk about projects you've done.
Take a look at SW project stuff, it's all super silly. I "deployed email" or "I upgraded AD"... IT "projects" are just "tasks" and shouldn't be highlighted. Especially since to be impressive you'd need hundreds or thousands of them. Without that, it looks like you've hardly done anything.
I see, I mean on a resume you usually highlight the most important parts of your work on each company you have worked but yeah you should be able to articulate your skills.
-
@dbeato said in Visual Resumes?:
I see, I mean on a resume you usually highlight the most important parts of your work on each company you have worked but yeah you should be able to articulate your skills.
I don't, not in that way. Certainly not listing out little projects, I see that on a lot of resumes and just assume that those people have done very little.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Visual Resumes?:
@dbeato said in Visual Resumes?:
I see, I mean on a resume you usually highlight the most important parts of your work on each company you have worked but yeah you should be able to articulate your skills.
I don't, not in that way. Certainly not listing out little projects, I see that on a lot of resumes and just assume that those people have done very little.
I don't list projects, I list what was improved or how we helped the company but certainly not projects....
-
@dbeato said in Visual Resumes?:
@scottalanmiller said in Visual Resumes?:
@dbeato said in Visual Resumes?:
I see, I mean on a resume you usually highlight the most important parts of your work on each company you have worked but yeah you should be able to articulate your skills.
I don't, not in that way. Certainly not listing out little projects, I see that on a lot of resumes and just assume that those people have done very little.
I don't list projects, I list what was improved or how we helped the company but certainly not projects....
I don't list those things either, because they don't tell the hiring manager anything. How it helped the company is always subjective - and often wrong. I've seen many a person list things like that on a resume and then when questioned, say it helped the company, but then when questioned about it, they weren't sure why and it ended up looking like a mistake (some big SW threads about that.) Those almost never look good because if they aren't the best, most amazing thing ever, then people wonder how that was helpful (as opposed to doing something better) and people wonder why someone would be showing off that they were assigned to a useful project as if that reflects on them personally.
Like.... I saved the company a million dollars by moving us to Exchange!
Oh really... how much would you have saved had you moved to something cheaper? Fail.
Or.... so you were working for a company so screwed up that they were losing a million dollars by using a bad email system and you are taking credit for the savings by having pushed the buttons to install the new system? Fail.
There is rarely, I think, a good way to look at those things as a hiring manager. I think that they almost always look really bad on a resume because they don't convey anything useful, but look like empty claims to fill space.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Visual Resumes?:
@dbeato said in Visual Resumes?:
@scottalanmiller said in Visual Resumes?:
@dbeato said in Visual Resumes?:
I see, I mean on a resume you usually highlight the most important parts of your work on each company you have worked but yeah you should be able to articulate your skills.
I don't, not in that way. Certainly not listing out little projects, I see that on a lot of resumes and just assume that those people have done very little.
I don't list projects, I list what was improved or how we helped the company but certainly not projects....
I don't list those things either, because they don't tell the hiring manager anything. How it helped the company is always subjective - and often wrong. I've seen many a person list things like that on a resume and then when questioned, say it helped the company, but then when questioned about it, they weren't sure why and it ended up looking like a mistake (some big SW threads about that.) Those almost never look good because if they aren't the best, most amazing thing ever, then people wonder how that was helpful (as opposed to doing something better) and people wonder why someone would be showing off that they were assigned to a useful project as if that reflects on them personally.
Like.... I saved the company a million dollars by moving us to Exchange!
Oh really... how much would you have saved had you moved to something cheaper? Fail.
Or.... so you were working for a company so screwed up that they were losing a million dollars by using a bad email system and you are taking credit for the savings by having pushed the buttons to install the new system? Fail.
There is rarely, I think, a good way to look at those things as a hiring manager. I think that they almost always look really bad on a resume because they don't convey anything useful, but look like empty claims to fill space.
So then, we are left to place skills, stints on companies/business or owning a company and that's it correct? Then let the interview play out.
-
I list extremely little about jobs, there is almost nothing that a new employer will want to know that can be listed. They might want to know your level, your responsibilities, and maybe some tech that you worked on. But that's about where the utility limit is.
-
@dbeato said in Visual Resumes?:
@scottalanmiller said in Visual Resumes?:
@dbeato said in Visual Resumes?:
@scottalanmiller said in Visual Resumes?:
@dbeato said in Visual Resumes?:
I see, I mean on a resume you usually highlight the most important parts of your work on each company you have worked but yeah you should be able to articulate your skills.
I don't, not in that way. Certainly not listing out little projects, I see that on a lot of resumes and just assume that those people have done very little.
I don't list projects, I list what was improved or how we helped the company but certainly not projects....
I don't list those things either, because they don't tell the hiring manager anything. How it helped the company is always subjective - and often wrong. I've seen many a person list things like that on a resume and then when questioned, say it helped the company, but then when questioned about it, they weren't sure why and it ended up looking like a mistake (some big SW threads about that.) Those almost never look good because if they aren't the best, most amazing thing ever, then people wonder how that was helpful (as opposed to doing something better) and people wonder why someone would be showing off that they were assigned to a useful project as if that reflects on them personally.
Like.... I saved the company a million dollars by moving us to Exchange!
Oh really... how much would you have saved had you moved to something cheaper? Fail.
Or.... so you were working for a company so screwed up that they were losing a million dollars by using a bad email system and you are taking credit for the savings by having pushed the buttons to install the new system? Fail.
There is rarely, I think, a good way to look at those things as a hiring manager. I think that they almost always look really bad on a resume because they don't convey anything useful, but look like empty claims to fill space.
So then, we are left to place skills, stints on companies/business or owning a company and that's it correct? Then let the interview play out.
Yes, that's how I prefer it. The resume should be lean and focus only on what is clear, objective, and useful to the hiring manager. It should never provide opinion, discussion, or filler.
-
Think of it like a SW discussion. If people make wild claims, people will dispute them or make them prove how they now it. Like the email conversation... we see that play out all the time. This is a real one I've dealt with several times...
"I saved my company a fortune by going with an IPOD and spending $100K instead of the $200K the sales guy wanted them to spend!"
And we answer.... "How could you save them money at all, when the baseline starting point for a faster, safer, easier system is about $15K? Your starting point is that you lost them $85K. The $200K from the salesman is an obvious red herring and not part of the evaluation. If it was, you'd just find another salesman willing to sell you something for $2M and you'd claim $1.8M in savings even if you went for the $200K solution that was silly a second ago. Obviously, that's a false comparison. So going from a standard baseline, it sounds like you failed miserably not just at the decision, but also your post mortem of it. How can you justify losing 400% compared to the obviously starting point that should have taken zero effort to start from; and then how can you justify the post mortem not catching something so obvious?"
It doesn't take much for opinion valuations to wind up really bad. Especially if the person can't provide solid numbers from which the savings was based - it just comes off as lying.
In reality, the idea that IT saves money is kind of wrong. Doing IT well means that IT adds a lot of value. Anything less and IT adds less value. The only things we can do in IT is approach the best value, we never actually "save" the company money, unless we compare to a false valuation of doing something less good - but why would we ever compare against something arbitrarily bad? It makes no sense in that situation.
-
I followed the format LinkedIn uses. Skills & some Certs at the top, current/previous jobs below, with each having my main responsibilities for each job, then any education/cert clarification.
-
@tim_g said in Visual Resumes?:
I followed the format LinkedIn uses. Skills & some Certs at the top, current/previous jobs below, with each having my main responsibilities for each job, then any education/cert clarification.
Yeah, I've never seen the project listing outside of SW. I'm sure it's out there, but it's not something I commonly encountered until finding it on SW.
