June 2, 2008 at 8:41 am
I haven't seen this as much of a problem. Yes I'm a specialist in portfolio analysis and financial data warehousing and reporting.
What does this really mean?
I'm a database developer, a business intelligence developer
with additional domain knowledge in financial instruments, accounting and bond math
As a developer just classifying yourself by what MCITP category you fall into for SQL Server should be enough. If you don't know the curricula for your role, you are probably not suited to it. Specialization is good, generalists is where the bad code comes from.
June 2, 2008 at 9:07 am
The problem isn't a lack of skilled or qualified candidates, the problem is how narrowly companies define 'skilled' and 'qualified'. In most situations, finding a good candidate without having to cave into the demands of the 'one' who meets all the listed qualifications, and maybe sacrificing on personality traits, is only a problem for the employer if they're unwilling to be flexible.
Instead of rating all the necessary skills equally , they need to understand their own job posting well enough to rank skills in order of importance. They should understand that if their candidate meets or surpasses their requirements on the top 3-5 skills the person is probably capable of quickly getting up to speed on other technologies. Isn't that what a good geek is all about, quickly picking up an utilizing new tools?
Being flexible may provide them with more hiring choices accommodating other working aspects like fitting in with the existing team or having a better fit with the corporate culture.
June 2, 2008 at 9:18 am
james (6/2/2008)
As a developer just classifying yourself by what MCITP category you fall into for SQL Server should be enough. If you don't know the curricula for your role, you are probably not suited to it. Specialization is good, generalists is where the bad code comes from.
Unless your definition of "generalist" is vastly different from mine, then I'd have to disagree. Generalist doesn't mean incompetent, and doesn't equate to bad code in my mind. Knowing something well enough to put out decent code doesn't require someone who has memorized every word of every version of Books Online.
Yes - it might take a few more minutes for the "generalist" than for the specialist, but that doesn't mean that the code will automatically be inferior...
I've seen enough bad code from all sorts of folks to not lay the blame on any one group....All it takes is a bad day, "happy keys" or having to modify code without proper testing... Not to mention the ever popular "Director in your office breathing down your neck"....:cool:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your lack of planning does not constitute an emergency on my part...unless you're my manager...or a director and above...or a really loud-spoken end-user..All right - what was my emergency again?
June 2, 2008 at 9:35 am
Also the company cannot outsource the utility guys !!!!!! Definitely they are more important to IT people !
June 2, 2008 at 12:40 pm
Anirban Paul (6/2/2008)
Job specialization is required to increase your salary but utility guys are more popular in companies......:)
Actually, I've seen promotions and salary increases because I am a "utility" guy that can (and often does) work on just about everything under the sun. I need to get more involved on the network side, though, as that's one area I could learn a lot more about.
K. Brian Kelley
@kbriankelley
June 2, 2008 at 12:48 pm
blandry (6/2/2008)
Ted, your use of the term "qualified candidate" makes your editorial rather "soggy". What is a "qualified" candidate?
I suppose "qualified candidate" would be whatever the employer thinks it means. In my experience, qualified usually means an adequate level of technical mastery and X years experience in some constellation of technologies.
And despite pitching myself as a jack-of-any-needed-trade, recruiters\employers tend to care most about mastery of whatever is listed in the job description.
I agree with you that the prevalent focus on what can be read from a CV does not complete the picture of what a good candidate should be.
---------------------------
|Ted Pin >>
June 2, 2008 at 4:46 pm
One time my boss and I interviewed a candidate. I did not think he qualified but my boss did so he got hired. It ended up I was right. Whenever he wrote a procedure or sql script, he always asked my boss or other co-workers to review it. He supposed to be a senior developer and he got a higher salary than mine (don't ask me how I found out). Later on I found out accidentally from one of the recruiter. He said he was in charge of building a data warehouse in the resume. That was right, he co-ordinated the DBA, the users and the developers to do the project, he never wrote a single line of code. Maybe we misread his resume or not asking the right questions, my boss thought he actually built the data warehouse.
A 'qualified candidate' also is in perspective depending on the person interviewing the candidate.
June 3, 2008 at 2:43 am
Loner I also have same experience as you. It is not only I and you it is everywhere. Best worker do get best salary always. In one of the forum we were discussing about it. Boss preference sometimes tilt the salary. 🙂
June 3, 2008 at 2:59 am
K. Brian Kelley (6/2/2008)
Anirban Paul (6/2/2008)
Job specialization is required to increase your salary but utility guys are more popular in companies......:)Actually, I've seen promotions and salary increases because I am a "utility" guy that can (and often does) work on just about everything under the sun. I need to get more involved on the network side, though, as that's one area I could learn a lot more about.
Some people are champions (read exceptional) like you, who can be expert on both (read Network & DBA). We have a utility guy who is very popular but not one of the highest salary holder.:)
June 3, 2008 at 4:34 am
Your accusation of a sweeping generalization is accurate, however in my experience there are more unskilled [read sloppy, inexperienced] generalists than specialists.
June 3, 2008 at 6:25 am
Yes Ted - I think you are right...
'I suppose "qualified candidate" would be whatever the employer thinks it means.'
I think the problem arises because in the old days, when a company ran a classified ad in a news paper, they had to be sparse with the job description and list only what was absolutely necessary.
Now with the web, companies can list everything from "must have" through "would'nt it be nice to have" qualifications and this leaves many of us "utility men" looking at postings and wondering "Do these guys REALLY think they are going to find someone with all that?"
I know in my case, there have been a few times that I talk to people about projects and then ask about all the stuff listed in a posting and they respond; "Dont worry about that, we really care about..." and then list one, two or three primary skills.
I guess "qualified candidate" is really in the eye of the beholder, right at the time of the interview. That is, I think it still boils down to how a client 'feels' about you in the face to face.
Its a brave new world!
June 3, 2008 at 6:57 am
Anirban Paul (6/3/2008)
Some people are champions (read exceptional) like you, who can be expert on both (read Network & DBA). We have a utility guy who is very popular but not one of the highest salary holder.:)
Actually, I spend a lot of time outside of work on the various technologies because I'm always curious to learn more. Thank goodness for online library sites like Safari, my wife has said, because my house, while still cluttered with books everywhere, sees far less books than in previous years.
K. Brian Kelley
@kbriankelley
June 3, 2008 at 7:02 am
blandry (6/3/2008)
Now with the web, companies can list everything from "must have" through "would'nt it be nice to have" qualifications and this leaves many of us "utility men" looking at postings and wondering "Do these guys REALLY think they are going to find someone with all that?"
I think you're right. With the ability to put everything but the kitchen sink in, the recruiters do so. After all, many of them have heard of the technologies but they aren't intimately familiar with the job requirements and how those technologies relate. They ask a few questions of the manager like, "So do you think the candidate will need ASP.NET experience?"
"Yes, of course."
"Would the candidate need to understand Windows security?"
"It would be helpful."
"So if an MCSE candidate applied, that would be ideal?"
"As long as he or she had the other skills, yes."
And then you get the ad that says ASP.NET, IIS, MCSE, etc., etc., etc.
K. Brian Kelley
@kbriankelley
June 3, 2008 at 8:50 am
"...in my experience there are more unskilled [read sloppy, inexperienced] generalists than specialists." so says James, and I dont disagree, but I think the measure of a great generalist versus a sloppy generalist is how much they care about the quality of their own work.
In my experience, caring about the quality of your work is what sets you up for more work later, and a good if not great reference. Yeah, I am a generalist, but I have been called back into various client projects (new and old) because I deliver quality work.
I must also point out that the terms "sloppy" and "specialist" are NOT mutually exclusive. That is, I have run into many sloppy specialists in my day, but in every case I can think of they were sloppy because they didnt care about the quality of their own work. They wanted the paycheck and to do as little as possible to get it.
June 3, 2008 at 2:10 pm
I must also point out that the terms "sloppy" and "specialist" are NOT mutually exclusive.
How true, how true.
The measure of a person is how well they do the work and meet their goals. I'm a generalist as well, knowing lots about lots of different systems. In many troubleshooting situations, it makes me more valuable than lots of specialists.
The being said, I have specialist friends I call when I know the problem is in their area. They do a much better and quicker job than I at finding a resolution.
Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 64 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply