Zak, you need to watch less bad TV and actually get out and meet some Americans. Sheesh!
Great post, Reemul.
Um, no.
Our company is a private one, and we don’t pay what many of our huge, global competitors do. I get offers often to go back to the global companies with much more money, stock options, etc. But we have no problem getting and keeping great employees, because they value what we offer. Which is a company owned by people who value family and walk the talk. It really threw me when I first got here, and I saw that it was very rare that anyone came in to the office/lab on Saturdays. When we have suppliers, etc. who come in during the week and there are the usual dinners with them, no one has to come up with an excuse to say no thanks, I need to be home for family reasons. We tell our employees, when they have their 7 year old daughter in a school play at 2:00 PM, go, see your kid, we know you’ll make up the time. People in the industry know we are like that and we have a great reputation for that. We also offer a rare amount of job security; the owners have made it clear we are not for sale (and we get offers from “the big guys” all the time) and even during the economic meltdown of the recession, we had no forced layoffs (i.e. no targets of xx percentage cuts to save money) - our owners just took the losses out of their pockets (of course we did take measures, salary freezes, we shut down some of our stores that had been underperforming for years, etc.) The CEO said firing good employees when times got tough was like your car going too slow so you throw out the engine to save weight.
My previous company was not privately owned, but also not a huge global behemoth (though it was owned by a huge one, Total.) Again, we didn’t pay the maximum bigger guys did, but our work environment was very good. We worked hard (as we do in my current company) but people valued the integrity of management, the work itself was interesting and challenging, and people really cared for each other. E.g. we had a guy whose house burned to the ground, in December, and they lost everything including the kids Christmas presents. We had our normal annual Christmas party and we told them, hey, bring your 3 little kids for the cake and ice cream. They did, and the employees surprised them by having a Santa Clause show up and hand out presents to the kids, and then the parents were discretely given an envelope of cash that had been taken up. Later, when their new house got built, the employees helped them move in, fix it up, etc.
Is money important? Sure. It is in the UK too. Does it trump work environment? Not most places. Absolutely there are companies that will grind you down and try to get every last drop of blood from you. But that’s not a U.S. thing. That’s just the nature of a there being a LOT of companies out there and they are all run by people, and different people run things different ways.
As to the question of working outside your normal work day on what you do for a living, I think, as an old hiring manager, I get what the poster was saying. If he’s got two candidates, they are equal in every way, and one loves programming so much that he does it in his or her spare time, he gives them the nod. All other things being the same. But there’s a difference between two candidates where everything is pretty much equal and that is a differentiator and EXPECTING that in all employees and one who does not being considered a lesser employee. I have found that employees with a healthy family life tend to be happier when at work. But I also won’t expect all employees to have a family life, e.g. vs. a single person. Volunteer work is good, but again, for me, life balance is the most important. In fact, I have one chemist right now, she is SOOOO intense, she lives and breathes her work, she wants to come in after hours, she is married with a son, but she just never stops thinking work. And while she really gets things done and is incredibly productive, there’s another side to that - she is SOOOO driven that she has a very difficult time dealing with other people who aren’t as driven, she takes setbacks personally, and she takes a lot of coaching to keep her from blowing up.
There’s just no simple formula, people are complicated. I understand why a hiring manager who sees someone who really, really is into whatever they do at work would be a potentially better hire than someone who just does it because it earns them a check. But it’s complicated. I’ve said hiring someone after a couple of interviews is like getting married after two dates! (and the same for taking a new job.)
So I’ve been pretty much laid off every 5 years for the past 15 years. I’ve been a software developer for 20+ years now but for what most people would consider big boring corporate enterprise stuff.
One I guess didn’t count because I was a contractor that just kept getting renewed for 5 years straight until they had some budget cuts. Another one was my job was off shored to India. I was so glad when it happened because that job was awful. I was just waiting for my package. Last one I was told that I was exceeding expectations consistently but was getting paid too much (even though I was under industry average. That’s a non profit for you). So when the company ran into money problems it was me vs cutting 2-3 other jobs. That was about 6 months ago. I found my current job within about three weeks.
I’ve been on both sides of the interview process many times everything from phone technical interviews, to white boarding, to sitting in front of a computer with visual studio open and asked to code on the spot (not fun). But I’ve never been asked if I code on the side. But maybe that’s because I always presented that information voluntarily. I’ve been bringing home projects and such on usb flash drives to interviews for a while though most didn’t even care to look at it. But I would at least talk through my projects during the interview.
When I went to the in person interview for my current job I actually brought my laptop with several of my open source and some closed source projects. Sure, we did the usual tech interview stuff, white board a project (this was a senior dev/framework architecture type position), talk design patterns, etc, etc. But then we sat down and I demoed a few of my applications. I walked them through my podcatcher program, showed them the source, walked them through some of my design and thought processes. We played my shmup I wrote in XNA in the middle of the interview. It was actually kind of fun.
That night I got a call with an offer (they cancelled the follow up interview).
Software development is a craft. We create things. If you were an artist, animator, writer, photographer, etc would you walk into an interview without samples of your work? Wouldn’t you have some sort of portfolio? It’s harder though with enterprise stuff because most of the things you create are private to that company. So if you don’t do programming on the side it’s hard to have anything to show. I know I’m definitely in the minority in this line of thinking. I actually don’t know any other programmers who does this. My current employers never had anybody in an interview show their work. I’ve never seen it when interviewing. I guess I am passionate about writing software. Not so much the enterprise stuff anymore. I’m pretty burnt out on that but it pays the bills. So yeah I’m learning unity on the side (really fun stuff to mess with) and swift (not as fun until the damn thing stabilizes and stops changing so much but still interesting). I have 2 kids and a wife that works full time. Then again, I work a pretty regular 40 hr week with an occasional tiny crunch. It’s all a balance but it can be done: wife, kids, work, triathlon training, witcher 3, and programming on the side (more or less in that order).
I agree mostly with what Tman said. Doing stuff on the side is definitely a plus and a factor. There are a LOT of mediocre to bad programmers out there. There are some good ones. Technical skills, experience, and personality/fit with the team/no ego are all very high on the list though. Showing side projects is a good way of demonstrating all the above and help show you are one of the good ones.
OK, switching gears here to just some things I’ve noticed about when looking for a software development job from a enterprise C# .net developer perspective:
- Prep for the technical interview. Google and drill on a ton of interview questions. You might be shocked how many questions that will be asked that you’ve already heard before. You can really shine here with just a bit of studying.
- Make sure you can explain clearly about your last 2 jobs.
- If you don’t have much job experience then I bet showing some personal projects would really help here.
- Pay, technology used, etc is all important but for me the people I’m working with and especially who I’m working for on a day to day basis is critical. I work well with technical managers usually ones that use to be programmers or still program 50% of the time. Our current team lead is super sharp and as good if not a better programmer than I am, incredibly polite, 0 ego, very reasonable expectations, flexible with work hours, and always willing to pitch in and help a team member. Such a rare find and is why I’m putting up with this life sucking commute (but the company is moving at the end of the year which cuts my commute in half).
- Knowing people is a big deal. I now have a pretty wide network of programming friends, all senior, all very good at what they do. Expand that to include anybody in the development process: BA’s, QA, etc. Pretty much the last 3 jobs I’ve had I know one or more people from previous jobs. Besides being good references this can get your foot in the door at several places or at least put you in contact with recruiters they have used and recommend and are preferred providers at different companies.
- Just come out and ask if they expect overtime. If there is a lot of overtime going on or it’s expected then that points to probably some bigger issues up the chain with planing and expectations. Are they Agile? How agile are they, etc? I’m ok with an occasional short crunch here and there but I won’t put up with consistent overtime. I’m no programming buffet. That’s the other advantage of the enterprise side of things. I don’t see that expectation of work all you can for one low price mentality as on the entertainment “dream” job side like game development.
I think I’m rambling now. I’ve been following this thread for a while now. Even though my wife has a good stable job so we won’t starve or anything if I’m out of work, I always get a ton of anxiety when I’m unemployed. It doesn’t matter how many years of experience I have, or contacts, leads, or severance, it always sucks. Looking for a job is the worst job. Good luck Armando and the rest of you looking!
Yeah but you answered the point discussed all on your own with this point Then again, I work a pretty regular 40 hr week with an occasional tiny crunch. It’s all a balance but it can be done: wife, kids, work, triathlon training, witcher 3, and programming on the side (more or less in that order).
Try saying that on a 90 hour regular week including weekends when you aint seen the kids or done the runs or played any games for the last 8 months.
It’s great you have the balance the issue is always when you don’t have it or are having to sell yourself as willing to not have it as if it’s a good thing.
I guess I’m very lucky to have never been in that position. Because I would never take or stay at a 90 hr regular work week kind of job no matter the pay.
I think this is key, it definitely has been in my life and career. It’s kind of funny but if you stick in more or less one industry you’ll find that the world is a lot smaller than it seemed to you initially, you’ll tend to run into the same people now and then and if you make a good impression, have a decent reputation, this opens more doors than just about anything else you can do. I’ve known lots of guys who didn’t finish school, didn’t have certifications, but proved themselves with their work and went quite far. I know they would agree that that’s not easy and probably not preferable, but if you show you are good at what you do that usually trumps everything else.
Again it’s easy to say that until you need the money, look at some of the stories on here and how desperate people become that they are left feeling like they have no choice when those sort of conditions shouldn’t be there anyways.
This is a great point, my last role is key in getting this new role, both companies have known each other for 25 years and people know people so getting in and speaking to the right people once in is useful and more relevant that somneone unknown commenting.
What exactly are you arguing for here, Reemul? Employers shouldn’t be interviewing for best fit for their needs? I thought Tman gave a very good explanation for why he asks the questions he asked. You’ve apparently gone off on some sort of political rant in response that was borderline an attack on Tman and how he’s an evil taskmaster.
I think one thing we might all be able to agree upon is that technical interviewing is hard on both sides. Simple whiteboard questions can be gamed and so interviewers have to come up with “trick” questions that are so tricky that even stellar interviewees will stumble on them. It’s definitely a hard job on both sides of the table. Side projects are definitely something that can provide something concrete (and it is probably more accurate than a 1hr whiteboard session will ever be). People that are good at interviewing could still be terrible at their jobs and vice versa.
What I don’t like about the side project question is that it seems to rely on one metric too heavily IMO. And people are more complicated than that. In a lot of ways I can see how it makes hiring decisions easier, but it also means that lots of people will get overlooked for not doing it (and its not easy to tell the difference between between not able or not willing to do side projects easily).
Reemul - thanks for the explanation. I can understand how working those type of hours would scar a person for a long time. I’m glad you got out. However, we’re going to have to agree to disagree on the volunteering for charities. I’ve met some of my best friends coaching soccer, being on the library board, belonging to the Knights of Pythias (a fraternal organization where we work to earn money so we can give it away). My work group also devotes a 2 quarterlies a year to volunteering - a whole day of packing vegetables, pulling nails, etc. Giving back to the community is a really healthy thing to do with many side benefits. Things like soccer are great because it gives me quality time with my sons as well.
ARogan - thanks so much for sharing so much great information & knowledge. I found myself nodding a lot at what you have to say. I particularly liked the fact that with large MNC’s, you can’t show work as easily as other companies. It sounds like you’ve got the interview process down!
nKoan - I couldn’t agree more that people are widely different and finding that right one is a very difficult process. Because I spent so many years coding myself, I’ve got a soft spot for the quiet introspective people who can churn out code. It’s hard to sniff those people out, although I’ve found finding people who’ve been laid off from a long stint at a company is a sometimes a good sign to look out for (as opposed to job hoppers).
Pogue - when you say:
I’ve known lots of guys who didn’t finish school, didn’t have certifications, but proved themselves with their work and went quite far. I know they would agree that that’s not easy and probably not preferable, but if you show you are good at what you do that usually trumps everything else.
It reminds me of one of my best coders. He worked on a fish processing ship in the Bering Sea for many years, and basically taught himself coding to help automate the ship.
JeffL - When you say
There’s just no simple formula, people are complicated. I understand why a hiring manager who sees someone who really, really is into whatever they do at work would be a potentially better hire than someone who just does it because it earns them a check. But it’s complicated. I’ve said hiring someone after a couple of interviews is like getting married after two dates! (and the same for taking a new job.)
I hope you don’t mind if I steal that for future reference. Great analogy!
I am arguing that picking someone for a job because they are stupid enough to agree to make work their only focus and in some cases not having any other choice but do that because they need the job as a poor choice.
Of course you want the best person for any given job but basing that on stuff like oh he does charity work or is willing to work much longer hours for free or dedicates his life to his work is in fact not the correct choice and having someone with the same skills who says they would like a work life balance and a home life but you seem to be saying that that doesn’t matter and you just choose the other option. This is why the software industry is in such a state isn’t it?
It is also easy for anyone working 40 hours a week with a good life balance to say people shopuld be doing this and that without having directly had that issue themselves. The pressure is unbelieveable and it was not mean to say he was a taskmaster but anyone asking for that sort of commitment and not actually doing themselves is hard to understand.
So you think long demanding hours and additional work outside is a better requisite than someone wanting a family life and work life balance and that would sway your employment choice then against people wanting a work life balance?
Sorry Tman I don’t mean doing stuff like that is not important what I meant was it is not more important than spending quality time with your family or friends or stuff for yourself and becoming over burdened with work and other stuff at the expense of those around you. It seems you have it well thought out.
I think I need to make my position a bit clearer.
I have no issue with people working overtime, going in on days off etc when the business has a need for these things, i’m sure we have all done it just not mostly as the norm.
What I am against are businesses that require this as standard and more, long hours, unpaid mostly that in the long run work against the employee. I am also against employers that would pick someone who would be willing to do this against someone who wants a work life balance. There should never be a choice all good employers should want and expect staff to have this balance not expect them to just work their lives away and I suppose I don’t understand people who seem to support this option.
As all staff need a proper balance so should employers and they should be recognising this or it just equates to high staff turn over and burnout, poor work practices and unhappy staff even if it does equal more profit for the faceless organisation.
The one issue is when unemployed and needing a job desperately it is easy to be pressured in to this sort of choice because you feel you have no choice, you need the job and the money so the need to have any sort of balance is lost because you are desperate so it continues. This seems especially so in the gaming industry where once a game has shipped people are let go so need more work so take the deal regardless.
Of course this is understandable but it certainly isnt good for the employees or their families.
I also realise this is probably a pipe smokers dream in some industries.
Well, there was the recent change to overtime pay that the Obama administration made. You still have to ask for it, but now more people should get it.
It has been very interesting to read all the posts in this thread in the past few days about work-life balance, types of employers and employees, and how it all relates back to your general state of happiness as a working stiff. Coincidentally, the Today show had a piece on this morning about Treehouse, one of several companies (mostly in tech) experimenting with a 32-hour (4-day) work week. The piece was interesting, but it made me feel like a stodgy old suit because in addition to extolling the virtues of the 32 hour work week all the millenials they were interviewing at the company were shown playing Ping-Pong and dominoes, building LEGO models and other fun-time stuff while at the office and all I could think was “they’re only in the office 4 days a week and they have time to play games and build LEGO sets. WHEN DO THEY ACTUALLY WORK?!” LOL, I am officially my dad!
That said, maybe we should continue this discussion (if everyone wants to) in an actual “Work-Life Balance - How does it work?” thread and leave this thread to the people coping with the job hunting ordeal? I know everyone’s intentions are good and the discussion derived from a couple of posts on hiring practices that were relevant to the thread, but now it seems like we’re off on a tangent of sorts…
I just want to chime in that as a passion programmer who enjoys programming on the side in my free time, this conversation confused me. I feel as though I keep a great work-life balance (40 hr weeks) but apparently I’m the devil for programming on the side. And a bad father.
Edit: And yes, Slainte, you’re right and I apologize.
Yes arrendek, the discussion has mainly been focused on how anyone who does any coding whatsoever outside the confines of a 40-hour work week is a terrible human and parent. Nice work.
Regarding thread derails: I have a different philosophy, as well I might given how often I am guilty of doing that. I think side topics can keep a thread going, keep it alive. Of course it helps if the topic is at least tangentially related to the main purpose of the thread - if I started pictures of my kids that would pretty much be wasting everyone’s time. But personally, and of course it’s just my opinion, there’s no harm in circling around the main topic and we always seem to get back to folks looking for work when the time comes. But if someone disagreed, or wanted to create a more focused topic based on work-life balance, I’d be good with that too. Whatever works for everyone.
Which brings me to another derail: one of the things I really like about Qt3 is the way threads find life, or sometimes fail to. If the topic is of interest, it keeps itself going. If not, well perhaps another time. I’ve certainly started threads that have died a quick death and dropped off without interest and, well, so be it. That’s just me being out of step with where everyone else’s interests lie. Threads like this one are pretty universal and can manage to keep themselves going one way or another.
And how the interviewer who asks about it is Satan incarnate. The interviewer asks the question and it’s clearly not only a thinly veiled request to see if you’ll slave away for free, willingly. Tman has provided some very reasonable (and frankly more probable) bases for the question. Given that, it’s up to the candidate how they want to take it.