January 12, 2009 at 12:01 pm
GSquared (1/12/2009)
gcopeland (1/9/2009)
I agree that your synopsis puts the subject in clear view for everyone. And if everyone agrees with you that technical design is the most important, then you win.However, there is another big camel with his head under the tent, and that camel is business design. Business design requires business acumen. This is a big requirement that few here seem able to understand.
...
Dressing well also does not equal business accumen. One of the owners of one of the companies I used to work for was a great dresser. Always looked very sharp. And she had all the business accumen of a vacuum cleaner. The only thing she was really good at (besides looking good) was chasing away competent employees. Her husband, also an owner of the business (was a family thing), was also a sharp dresser. Suits and ties. And he ran a multi-million dollar per year company into bankruptcy.
Yes, technical and business expertise are both necessary. Very, very necessary. So, for that matter, is political expertise. NONE of these require the slightest bit of fashion sense. Dressing appropriately might make them easier, since people do judge by appearance, but it is far from mission critical.
Again, you're connecting data that have no actual logical connection. Dressing well does not have a causal relationship with success in anything at all except being a fashion model.
I agree. In a previous job I reported directly to the Executive Director of a Foundation. She also dressed to the nine's, drove a BMW -- and was a complete harridan.
She was originally hired because the University responsible for the Foundation needed someone who had no compunction in firing people, which the University people found hard to do. She had no problem letting people go. She also had no problem alienating the remaining employees. The University finally kicked her out after she had managed to drive away many of the top managers and professionals, resulting in inexperienced new hires making a lot of mistakes with big endowments and contracts.
-----
Beware of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
January 12, 2009 at 12:34 pm
jpowers (1/12/2009)
GSquared (1/12/2009)
gcopeland (1/9/2009)
I agree that your synopsis puts the subject in clear view for everyone. And if everyone agrees with you that technical design is the most important, then you win.However, there is another big camel with his head under the tent, and that camel is business design. Business design requires business acumen. This is a big requirement that few here seem able to understand.
...
Dressing well also does not equal business accumen. One of the owners of one of the companies I used to work for was a great dresser. Always looked very sharp. And she had all the business accumen of a vacuum cleaner. The only thing she was really good at (besides looking good) was chasing away competent employees. Her husband, also an owner of the business (was a family thing), was also a sharp dresser. Suits and ties. And he ran a multi-million dollar per year company into bankruptcy.
Yes, technical and business expertise are both necessary. Very, very necessary. So, for that matter, is political expertise. NONE of these require the slightest bit of fashion sense. Dressing appropriately might make them easier, since people do judge by appearance, but it is far from mission critical.
Again, you're connecting data that have no actual logical connection. Dressing well does not have a causal relationship with success in anything at all except being a fashion model.
I agree. In a previous job I reported directly to the Executive Director of a Foundation. She also dressed to the nine's, drove a BMW -- and was a complete harridan.
She was originally hired because the University responsible for the Foundation needed someone who had no compunction in firing people, which the University people found hard to do. She had no problem letting people go. She also had no problem alienating the remaining employees. The University finally kicked her out after she had managed to drive away many of the top managers and professionals, resulting in inexperienced new hires making a lot of mistakes with big endowments and contracts.
-----
Beware of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
I'll agree, but slightly differently. At my previous employer there was an individual who also dressed to the nine's. She could make or break your career at this employer. How did you stay on her good side, prove yourself technically, and deliver what you said you could when you could. She didn't mind being told no, if you could support your argument in a sound manner. She recognized technical expertise.
January 12, 2009 at 12:37 pm
After all the HR-bashing I have just read, I would love to see the HR viewpoint on this question. It has been my experience that they are often clueless about the skills IT management requires for candidates to fill various positions - ComputerWorld has a whole "shark bait" category dedicated to these stories. I believe that we need to open a real dialog with HR types to understand them and to allow them to understand us. Opinions??
January 12, 2009 at 12:44 pm
Holy hot threads, Batman. 26 pages of replies? Seems like people seem to care about how others dress... Zowie.
I had a rule in startup-land that I never hired anybody who showed up for an interview in a tie, especially if they asked about interview attire and I warned them in advance; I told all the headhunters the rules, too. I broke the rule once or three times for great candidates who passed The Quiz, though. Rules are made to be broken, and all that.
Wearing a tie to a Finals Day on campus may not prevent you from getting a job @ Microsoft, but it depends mightily on which team you want to join. For consulting and marketing teams, go with more formal; for product teams, you might get bonus points for showing up in a t-shirt. Ask somebody who knows the hiring manager first.
FWIW, when I wear a polo shirt around Building 35, people start asking where I'm interviewing... shorts are common around here, even in January. YMMV.
January 12, 2009 at 12:51 pm
David Reed (1/12/2009)
Holy hot threads, Batman. 26 pages of replies? Seems like people seem to care about how others dress... Zowie.I had a rule in startup-land that I never hired anybody who showed up for an interview in a tie, especially if they asked about interview attire and I warned them in advance; I told all the headhunters the rules, too. I broke the rule once or three times for great candidates who passed The Quiz, though. Rules are made to be broken, and all that.
Wearing a tie to a Finals Day on campus may not prevent you from getting a job @ Microsoft, but it depends mightily on which team you want to join. For consulting and marketing teams, go with more formal; for product teams, you might get bonus points for showing up in a t-shirt. Ask somebody who knows the hiring manager first.
FWIW, when I wear a polo shirt around Building 35, people start asking where I'm interviewing... shorts are common around here, even in January. YMMV.
Curious, what about those who showed up in a tie but weren't aware of the no tie rule?
January 12, 2009 at 12:54 pm
Robert Domitz (1/12/2009)
After all the HR-bashing I have just read, I would love to see the HR viewpoint on this question. It has been my experience that they are often clueless about the skills IT management requires for candidates to fill various positions - ComputerWorld has a whole "shark bait" category dedicated to these stories. I believe that we need to open a real dialog with HR types to understand them and to allow them to understand us. Opinions??
I don't know about others, but I am NOT bashing HR. I'm bashing the dangerous idea that how you dress says anything about you other than how you dress.
I've known plenty of competent HR people. They understood that their job was to make sure a person could do things like legally work there (citizenship or proper visa, etc.), that the employees understood the rules of the business, and so on.
In technical cases, or other cases beyond their personal judgement, they would review resumes to make sure they met minimum requirements, and then pass them on to someone who had the expertise to actually judge the rest of it.
If the hiring manager wants someone who's really good at .NET, and the HR dept doesn't know anything at all about skill in .NET, they can ask for some minimum requirements, like "Twenty years experience in .NET and SQL 2008", and if they don't see that on the resume, they can kick it back or throw it away or whatever. If they can't tell from the resume, they can forward it with a sticker on it that says, "I can't tell", and the person who can tell can handle appropriately. This leaves them to eliminate the ones that have, "20 years experience as a dentist, and I think I want to change to .NET, which I heard of when someone mentioned it in a sitcom". Which is a valuable service in that regard.
HR provides a valuable and necessary service to a business. My complaint is only when they break that service by judging people by how they dress.
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
January 12, 2009 at 1:07 pm
GSquared (1/12/2009)
Robert Domitz (1/12/2009)
After all the HR-bashing I have just read, I would love to see the HR viewpoint on this question. It has been my experience that they are often clueless about the skills IT management requires for candidates to fill various positions - ComputerWorld has a whole "shark bait" category dedicated to these stories. I believe that we need to open a real dialog with HR types to understand them and to allow them to understand us. Opinions??I don't know about others, but I am NOT bashing HR. I'm bashing the dangerous idea that how you dress says anything about you other than how you dress.
I've known plenty of competent HR people. They understood that their job was to make sure a person could do things like legally work there (citizenship or proper visa, etc.), that the employees understood the rules of the business, and so on.
In technical cases, or other cases beyond their personal judgement, they would review resumes to make sure they met minimum requirements, and then pass them on to someone who had the expertise to actually judge the rest of it.
If the hiring manager wants someone who's really good at .NET, and the HR dept doesn't know anything at all about skill in .NET, they can ask for some minimum requirements, like "Twenty years experience in .NET and SQL 2008", and if they don't see that on the resume, they can kick it back or throw it away or whatever. If they can't tell from the resume, they can forward it with a sticker on it that says, "I can't tell", and the person who can tell can handle appropriately. This leaves them to eliminate the ones that have, "20 years experience as a dentist, and I think I want to change to .NET, which I heard of when someone mentioned it in a sitcom". Which is a valuable service in that regard.
HR provides a valuable and necessary service to a business. My complaint is only when they break that service by judging people by how they dress.
Well met! I agree!
January 12, 2009 at 1:19 pm
GSquared (1/12/2009)
Robert Domitz (1/12/2009)
After all the HR-bashing I have just read, I would love to see the HR viewpoint on this question. It has been my experience that they are often clueless about the skills IT management requires for candidates to fill various positions - ComputerWorld has a whole "shark bait" category dedicated to these stories. I believe that we need to open a real dialog with HR types to understand them and to allow them to understand us. Opinions??I don't know about others, but I am NOT bashing HR. I'm bashing the dangerous idea that how you dress says anything about you other than how you dress.
(snip)
HR provides a valuable and necessary service to a business. My complaint is only when they break that service by judging people by how they dress.
Ditto, and well stated, GSquared! In my experience, HR is an excellent place to ask the question about company dress code and they give very clear answers.
Steph Brown
January 12, 2009 at 1:22 pm
Not that I ever got asked to come, but I wouldn't wear a tie to interview with you, David 😀
course, not sure I could pass The Quiz.
January 12, 2009 at 1:28 pm
Robert Domitz (1/12/2009)
After all the HR-bashing I have just read, I would love to see the HR viewpoint on this question. It has been my experience that they are often clueless about the skills IT management requires for candidates to fill various positions - ComputerWorld has a whole "shark bait" category dedicated to these stories. I believe that we need to open a real dialog with HR types to understand them and to allow them to understand us. Opinions??
Don't forget, though, Robert, that we've not done much (if any) HR-bashing. There's been plenty of ordnance directed at an IT professional with an HR qualification believing a well-entrenched opinion of his is utterly correct, an alternative view that his opinion is built on sand and a polarising of attitudes on both sides.
If I stated that:
1. I have an IT-related degree (which I don't, by the way) and
2. I believe, based on my reading during that degree, that cursors should NEVER be used in stored procedures (which is far too absolute a stance for my taste, by the way)
then I'd expect a torrent of alternative views to either moderate my assertion or disabuse me of that standpoint, and none of that torrent would, in my opinion, be IT-bashing.
Part of my degree was a specialising in HRM, and I've known quite a few HR people. Few, I'm sad to say, are what I'd deem professional, but some are, and do indeed take the time and effort to "analyse" the need, understand the people and research the correct solution. I agree with you that it'd be excellent if we could get their opinions.
Coming back to the original topic, someone (perhaps Mr Copeland, perhaps not) suggested that Steve appearing in public wearing a t-shirt portrayed an unprofessional image. Put simply, professional means entering into business for monetary gain, and additionally extends to cover an impression of honour and dependability. A professional company, then, by definition is one that attracts customers and favourable reputation. Forget for a moment what the academic text books say (in volatile subjects like business, they're rarely current by the time they get to print anyway) and judge by results. SQL Server Central is certainly one of the most successful independent SQL Server sites on the Web, and it's Steve (with t-shirt) who got it there. Microsoft is (without much argument) the most successful software company ever, and achieved its dominance whilst its CEO (Bill Gates) looked like someone everyone else would want to hide in a back room somewhere. There have been plenty of professional violinists every bit as good as Nigel Kennedy, but few as widely discussed and profitable in their heyday. They aren't successful because they looked good, they're successful because they provide(d) something people want and put together an overall image that accurately backed that up.
Oh, and every one of the Enron board who were convicted were dressed impeccably "professionally".
Semper in excretia, suus solum profundum variat
January 12, 2009 at 1:30 pm
Steve Jones - Editor (1/10/2009)
jpowers (1/9/2009)
Anyone who thinks writing in assembler is essentially more difficult than writing in any other language is not a very experienced application developer.
Not sure I agree with that. Assembler requires, I think, a more detailed thought process. And you have to really think about what goes where. Even C handles things for you, like basic memory management, and lets you think a bit more about the logic.
The basics are similar, but I surely wouldn't necessarily think a top-notch C# programmer would do well in assembler. Perhaps the other way around.
My point was just that writing in assembler is not necessarily difficult for someone experienced in such. I have more than 20 years experience writing embedded logic for tiny chips, hence requiring assembly language, and I have lost count of how many variants of assembly language I have used. To me, using assembler is no scarier than using C or another higher order level language.
However, until last year I had managed in my career to avoid using most databases, so I am very inexperienced in thinking through the relations for proper use of SQL. I have learned a lot through these forums, the QOTD, etc., and I am very grateful that there is a site such as this.
January 12, 2009 at 1:30 pm
Steve Jones - Editor (1/12/2009)
Not that I ever got asked to come, but I wouldn't wear a tie to interview with you, David 😀course, not sure I could pass The Quiz.
I had a funny one on that point. "The Quiz" here had a question on it about the minimum number of tables for a many-to-many join. The answer being looked for was "three", which I knew was the answer being looked for, so it's what I gave. But the actual answer is "one". You just have to violate normal forms in order to do that, but it can be done. And you can do it with two without violating normal forms. But the person giving "The Quiz" (technical interview) was looking for "three" (they always are), so that's what I answered.
(Just to keep it on-topic, I was wearing pajamas when I answered that question. It was a phone interview.)
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
January 12, 2009 at 1:45 pm
Lynn Pettis (1/12/2009)
David Reed (1/12/2009)
I had a rule in startup-land that I never hired anybody who showed up for an interview in a tie, especially if they asked about interview attire and I warned them in advance; I told all the headhunters the rules, too. I broke the rule once or three times for great candidates who passed The Quiz, though. Rules are made to be broken, and all that.Curious, what about those who showed up in a tie but weren't aware of the no tie rule?
The fact that they didn't ask was strike one or two (depending on how the phone conversations and email exchanges went)... Desperate people who don't care to ask about the environment they're heading into are usually a problem waiting to happen, IME. I'm quick to "eliminate" problem children, but it doesn't mean that I like firing people. I don't.
Candidates who did well on The Quiz often overcame several strikes, though. I even hired a smoker once who could accomplish reasonable C# tasks in an hour. http://blogs.msdn.com/reedme/archive/2007/05/30/the-quiz-lives.aspx
January 12, 2009 at 1:49 pm
Steve Jones - Editor (1/12/2009)
Not that I ever got asked to come, but I wouldn't wear a tie to interview with you, David 😀course, not sure I could pass The Quiz.
Steve, if you ever decided to learn C#, I'm sure that you could ace The Quiz. I know you master everything you set your mind to... but living on a horse farm seems to have had an effect on your ambition. 😛
FotR, you have to actually apply[/url] in order to get invited to a Finals Day. I've told you many times that I think you'd be a great advocate for customers here!!
January 12, 2009 at 2:59 pm
You may be correct that the "best" person was eliminated for those reasons, but I highly doubt it. And further, due to a lack of attention to detail on the part of the candidate, it is a shame that we will never know.
You highly doubt it? On what basis? That statement displays a disturbing tendency to pre judgement. You know for a fact that highly competent people are not always the best dressers and yet you still cant put appearances to one side.
Viewing 15 posts - 256 through 270 (of 335 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply