Reaction to cold letters

    I was a little upset by the article "We evaluate recruiters by cold letters . " As for me, the whole problem is sucked from the finger, and everything is very similar to what the author has already described: Go on! @ # With your “toxicity”

    I will write the most opposite opinion to the majority, rather than pushing myself into minuses, but before you just minus the % username% , think about it, write a comment, trying to convey your point of view. I also want to note that my opinion is subjective and is not the ultimate truth.

    All this I will describe as a developer who knows the ins and outs of recruiting from a friend.

    So, all the fuss is due to the non-personalized and “little detailed” recruiters addressing programmers.

    To begin with, we define our potential development candidate:
    Most of the outraged developers are not “rokstar”, “evangelicals”, MVP, etc. in the industry. They do not have their own projects on github or any other public platform. (Hello Worlds are not considered).

    It is also worth eliminating developers with projects that only they themselves use (including using them in customer projects), such developers are certainly great, but they are also not “famous” for other people from the industry.

    So who do we ultimately have? Our potential “outraged” hero works for the customer and nags him with enterprise projects without any rocket tool.

    Some input

    I asked familiar recruiters to count the number of answers / refusals, I received a small statistic (in fact, it all depends very much on the company's fame, but in general in the hospital this way):

    • 60% of candidates ignore (or respond very late after the letter);
    • 25% of candidates answer with a negative answer, a la not looking for a job;
    • The remaining 15% are interested and ready to have an interview. This is not an offer yet. Up to the offer reaches 5%.

    And people in the company need, the processes are idle, customers are indignant, and the personnel reserve of the developers who are waiting for your job does not exist. Each recruiter personalizes his appeal due to the possibility and availability of time. And if the developer is interested in the tasks, he will respond even to “Hello, look at the vacancy% link_na_resource% ....” And demagogy is most often bred by those who are not initially interested in any proposals, but need to throw it out. And yes, a very small number of people in public profiles indicated that they were not interested in changing jobs.

    Someone is very insulting that you are not to him, someone has incorrectly indicated technologies (guys, not everyone has perfect and relevant profiles and resumes), someone does not respond when there is no plug (even worse when there is, but you are a star and you want 100,500 thousand), someone wants recruiters to study their projects on GitHub day and night. In short, you can not please everyone. And time is moving inexorably ...

    And if we, the developers, were like this:

    A month later, the deadline remained the last task. Of course, you implement it and send it to the review, and here comes our convention. Every time different people review you (there are many candidates) without seeing the comments of previous reviewers.

    The first reviewer asks you to use tabs instead of spaces, you format your code. The next reviewer asks you to use spaces instead of tabs. You format your code again and send it to the review. Further, each subsequent reviewer asks you with a high probability to change something, including the comments of one of the previous reviewers. The deadline is missed, the task is not injected - it turns out that it is not done (although in fact everything is ready and working).

    And what exactly infuriates something?

    “The problem of links to third-party resources with the description of the vacancy and etc.” - As for me, this is a normal approach:

    • Firstly, most people more adequately perceive small amounts of information;
    • Secondly, there is a remarkable principle of DRY - Don't repeat yourself (which, unfortunately, not all projects are practiced). Why do graphomania and rewrite the job description for each, especially when the vacancy is drawn up in as much detail as possible and it is clear from it what you need to do and where. And what will it be.

    “They are asked to drop a resume” - Let's be honest, a lot of people update info into linkedin and other platforms as needed. Often the current place of work is entered when looking for another / new. Not everyone describes their tasks, and this is also important. As an example, the profile indicates that you are a .Net developer, and the direction is not indicated: web, desktop, etc. And is it important.

    Mutually exclusive points: “there are at least some details about the employing company in the letter ..” and “if there are stock pictures or videos in the letter ...” - You should probably decide whether you need additional information about the company or not.

    “The letter was written personally by the CTO or the head of the engineering department of the employing company”or how to amuse your ChSV. - There is a very strange situation here, and it’s good if there are only 2 people working in the company (one HUNDRED and not one HUNDRED) and a new vacancy miraculously opened. And recruiters are hired by large companies so that the service station says how many people are needed, and the recruiter has already searched for them.

    Pseudo outputs

    Undoubtedly, there are incompetent recruiters who make mass mailings, despite the profile of a potential candidate. As well as there are incompetent programmers who reserve the code “with a scent” . But we all learn and grow when we get adequate feedback. That is why the reviewed code looks much better than without.

    Well, globally, there is not a very good impression of our industry. Where are some developers zazhralis proposals and are trying to force everyone around to lick their ass, thereby amuse their ChSV. But in reality they do not represent anything. And even if they represent, then what? How quickly would the behavior change if there were less vacancies than developers?

    How difficult would it be to live if everyone behaved like modern developers?
    Taxi drivers: I'm sorry, but we will not go anywhere until you stop staring at the phone and start watching how I skillfully shift gears to cars with a manual transmission.

    Doctors resuscitation : I'm sorry, I will not start to save the patient's life until I drink my coffee with buns.

    Plumber: I will not fix your pipes, they are too old and smell.


    Most recruiters, by the way, are also outraged by the answers and requests of developers.

    Especially when the mother said that you are a good programmer, and here in the summary there is already a level sn of 250000 r.

    You just need to respect each other and understand that we are all equal ordinary people.


    I understand that in this article there are many loopholes and inaccuracies, but a little boiling over. Recently, the IT-community behaves like a small child, with insults, rooting, etc. and not as professionals.

    Also popular now: