Joel Spolsky's resume tip for startup applicants

http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2009/01/02b.html

by tptacek • 18 years ago

85 35 18 years ago

schoudha• 18 years ago

"Those VP jobs just don’t exist at startups, and the few VPs they have are the founders and a key early hire or two. Not you."

That's probably not fair. Successful startups are looking for talent, not pedigree - it's a question of whether the candidate can add significant value as a VP.

I think this blog post get's distracted from it's original point - if you're a software developer looking for a software developer position then emphasize software development skills. This applies to small companies and even big companies (like Google). The skill set to be a good developer is consistent no matter what the size of your company.

This doesn't mean that startups don't need business, product, or technical leadership because all the best ones have shown they attracted all these very early.

tptacek7• 18 years ago

So, even though I think Spolsky's posts have gone further and further off the rails, this is one that resonated with me:

* first, management jobs in startups do go to the founders and "key hires" (definition: if you have to ask if you are one, you aren't) --- and

* the key predictor for whether someone does well in a startup has, in my experience, been how willing they are to write lots of code, as opposed to just talking about code.

Every bad hiring decision I have ever contributed to has involved allowing myself to be impressed with someone's design/architecture/methodology/"engineering". Conversely, everyone I've ever neg'd because they didn't seem grounded or professional enough has gone on to depants me in the commit logs.

ghshephard• 18 years ago

Even though I recognize you meant this, I'd edit your key predictor to read, 'the key predictor for whether someone does well in a startup has, in my experience, been how willing they are to write lots of _good_ code"

I've been at several startups where the developers who made the most difference where those who wrote concise, correct, and elegant code that did the job, and nothing more. They didn't get distracted into writing "architectures" when all that was needed was a "tool." Their code was a pleasure to build upon, and people instantly respected their ability to bang it out.

Sometimes less is more.

bootload• 18 years ago

I'd agree with pretty much all except the below quote.

"... So, even though I think Spolsky's posts have gone further and further off the rails ..."

From the article ...

"... But for startups, everything about your resume has to scream getting your own hands dirty... the only thing we REALLY need is code to be written, and customers to be called on the telephone ..."

reads to me, on-track. One thing I have noticed is JOS has always been skewed towards JOS type businesses (privately owned, bootstrapped software development companies) rather than Startups (fast revenue based technology companies that in the end are either sold or IPO'd). So the stories seem misaligned.

qhoxie2• 18 years ago

This applies to small companies and even big companies (like Google). The skill set to be a good developer is consistent no matter what the size of your company.

I agree only partially. It definitely applies to all sizes of companies, but larger companies seem to care less about it during interviews. This is a large part of why startups work more efficiently on average.

nostrademons2• 18 years ago

I dunno about other big companies, but Google seems to care about it a lot.

mpk• 18 years ago

Steve Yegge says something similar about applying for a position at Google.

http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2007/09/ten-tips-for-slightl...

'Resume screeners keep an eye out for non-weasel words, aka Productivity Words. These are words that you can't weasel out of when someone asks you about them. The best are synonyms of "got real stuff done", including "coded", "implemented", "developed", "delivered", and "launched".

It's perfectly OK to use "designed", as long as you follow it up with a Productivity Word. If you design something without implementing it, then it's just a synonym for "Proposed". If you prefer to design things that other people ultimately implement, then you're quite possibly outstanding material for a company full of kneebiters. But a real tech company like Amazon or eBay or Microsoft or whoever isn't going to hire you, because they can find plenty of people who can both design things and implement them.'

wheels4• 18 years ago

I think this depends on if you're hiring someone new primarily to take the coding pressure of the current team / founders or if you're hiring someone that will grow into leading a group later on and have to wear a lot of hats along the way.

But I don't think Joel is really talking about startups, he's talking about Fog Creek. Fog Creek isn't a startup, it's an established, profitable, small business, and for small businesses, he's right.

edw519• 18 years ago

Single-handedly developed robust 100,000 LOC threadsafe C++ service

I don't know if I love this or hate it.

Does "Single-handedly" mean "jack of all trades" or "doesn't work well with others"?

"Robust" according to whom? Save the commercials for your webpage. Just the facts, ma'am.

"threadsafe C++ service" that did what? for whom? Did anyone even want it? Does anyone even use it? The outcome is as important as the process.

"100,000 LOC" My favorite. I still don't know how I feel about this. Does this mean lots and lots of valuable experience or a newbie who can't write a function but is a whiz at cut and paste? Hell, my javascript generator just cranked out 100,000 LOC while I slept. Onto the resume it goes!

acangiano• 18 years ago

> "Robust" according to whom? Save the commercials for your webpage. Just the facts, ma'am.

I would argue that a resume is a personal, (hopefully) factual commercial. The interview is there to put any claims you've made into perspective.

tptacek7• 18 years ago

Well, since it's a resume, it sounds like you know exactly how to interview her. That's an hour's worth of questions right there.

Your comment reminds me of Steve McConnell's "beware a guy in a room" chapter in "Code Complete", though.

raffi2• 18 years ago

When I left the military--I interviewed, outside my network, looking for a tech lead position. During the interviews I emphasized my leadership skills and experiences. I had come from a research background: won funding on my own, executed my own projects (i.e. wrote code), led development teams, and contributed in many places. I got things done.

Every interview led to an offer+. Yet I was frustrated during the whole process. I asserted tech lead and they pushed back with straight coder.

+ [Note--there was one company where I declined before they could make an offer.]

After reading this post, I can see there was a difference of values causing a misunderstanding. In the military, my technical skills were completely ignored (except at the research lab--I found my way there despite my career field). Leadership ability is what matters (esp for officers). In the civilian world, it seems leadership skills are perceived as fluff.

I won't say one is better than the other. A lot of time what people pass off as leadership accomplishments are just fluff. Its harder to fake a solid technical background.

Eventually I declined every offer and am continuing to work on my startup idea. At the time, the process gave me a bad taste of private sector "jobs". This led to a second wind and more determination to make it.

My failure tolerance moved from "almost out of money--get a job" to "sell everything I own, move in with my parents, try startup again--get a job if accumulating debt".

I haven't hit these extremes yet but find myself willing to go there if necessary.

nostrademons2• 18 years ago

I'm curious - why the bad taste of private sector jobs? Because of the emphasis on technical skills, or something else?

I can sympathize with the "declined all offers and continued to work on startup idea". I did that once and was very tempted to do it a second time. Eventually I figured that since I had a good offer in hand and my ideas didn't seem all that hot, I was better off taking it before I got into dire straits.

raffi2• 18 years ago

This didn't really have anything to do with idea and opportunity cost vs. job. It was about cultural differences. I interviewed outside my network (to avoid burning bridges for saying no). At the time--I found the process distasteful as they ignored what I had been conditioned to value most about myself.

I'm thankful I did get offers and was welcomed into these organizations. But I did feel devalued and this is no way to walk into an organization. This further motivated me to keep rocking it on my own.

russell2• 18 years ago

Back in the last century, I was the CTO at small company and I had to hire marketing and sales vice presidents. I learned pretty quickly to avoid people from large companies like IBM. They never got their hands dirty and wanted a large support staff. I never really interview programmers from large companies, but I suspect the same may be true for them, e.g. they have never configured a server.

hs• 18 years ago

"Contributes to OpenBSD file system in spare time"

i'm curious about a windows shop using openbsd as an example for startup cto recruiting

nandemo• 18 years ago

I'm not sure if they're a 100% Windows shop.

In any case, if you think of it as a sort of modified version of the "Python paradox" for sysadmin, then it makes sense. You can probably get better Windows admins if you look for people who can do both Windows and OpenBSD (though I suspect not many OpenBSD gurus would be eager to work with Windows).

Joel Spolsky's resume tip for startup applicants

Related Stories