Comment by ian_dot_so | Hacker News Reader

Comment by ian_dot_so | Hacker News Reader

I think this is over-generalizing

I've been both on the hiring side and candidate side this year and demand is still very strong (granted moreso for more senior applicants than junior).

Couple of tips that have worked for me:

* Make sure your Linkedin is up-to-date, you have "open to work" turned on and that your experience is filled with direct results and accomplishments. Example of a bad bullet point (Used javascript to build a user-facing dashboard). Example of a good bullet point (Built a new dashboard product that manages x for y number of users. Ultimately drove z result.

* Tweak your resume details over time. Don't blindly apply to 100+ roles with the same resume. Not only could there be something wrong with it that's throwing off employers, it doesn't serve you as well as it could. If it's a full stack role, highlight more of those skills in your resume. If it's a iOS role, make sure more mobile experience is called out. Note: this doesn't mean filling it with things that aren't accurate about your background.

* Don't underestimate a solid cover letter (especially for smaller companies) and also reaching out to recruiters at those companies. Both of these things should take < 15 mins.

* Have a skills section somewhere on your resume that lists the technologies you are familiar with. This is critical to get passed resume screeners and it also helps free up your experience section to list more accomplishment details than technology ones.

* Leetcode, leetcode, leetcode. I know it sucks and it feels like a waste of time but your point of "several places where I was rejected after either the initial or tech screen" makes me feel like you could use some work here. Try to do as many mediums as you can. When I've been deep in interview mode, I try to solve 1 medium problem/day every single day. I set a 45 minute time and make sure I can get something working in that time. If I fail, I study the answer and get ready for the next day. After 1-2 months you should be in good shape.

Hope this helps!

I don’t agree on a few of these.

I wouldn’t personalize your resume for any company, nor do I recommend writing a personalized cover letter for any of them — you have no idea the skill set that will be valued by the person reading the resume, as they are an unknown random variable. I feel it’s just a time waste and there is no proof that this sort of thing is fruitful.

Also fuck leetcode. I’ve refused to do the leetcode and still gotten the offer to do an interview without it. Imo, we should all show some backbone and stop accepting all this superstitious mumbo jumbo as the accepted form of recruitment.

OP here. I agree with not customizing the resume, that's not sustainable for a necessarily high-volume job search. I'm lucky enough that my background is in a relatively popular field, so it's a much better strategy to just apply to places that are already a good fit for my existing resume. Definitely not going to do micro-tweaks to a resume based on whatever happens to be in the listing. Keep in mind recruiters spend literally seconds per resume. However a simple cover letter is generally a good idea and also a good place to add or highlight skills that may be especially relevant but not in the resume.

Strangely enough, despite what you might think from HN, I haven't run into a ton of LeetCode algorithm-type puzzles at the places I've been looking.

I wrote above that I don't understand _not_ customizing the resume, but I understand why it would seem not sustainable for a high volume job search.... can't say I wouldn't force myself to do it though as I think not doing it increases the chance of having to apply to more jobs.

It depends on what we mean by customizing. If you're strong in two different areas, for example both web development and devops, and you're open to both types of positions, you should have two resumes. However once you have these resumes, you should look for positions that fit the resumes and not vice versa.

Beyond that I don't think it's worth tweaking a resume for each ad, for example modifying word order. Nothing wrong with it exactly, but the gain is minimal because no one reads your resume that closely, and I think it encourages the wrong mindset for what is unavoidably a numbers game.

> I wouldn’t personalize your resume for any company

No one wants to read a multi-page resume, so you have to leave things out. Some of the things you normally leave out might be super-relevant for a particular role, due to the industry or business domain.

I don't understand not considering tweaking your resume for each application. I could write a novel on what I've done in the last year - how do I narrow that down for a resume? I can't buy into the idea that I could write 5ish bullet points today and think it would be the best way for me to represent myself to every position I might apply for.

I don't know what proof you need this is useful - you're selling yourself, so make sure to sell what they're trying to buy.

I don't customize my resume, but if a recruiter asks me to highlight a particular technology, I will temporarily add it to my resume if they legitimately think it will help.

For shotgunning applications, I don't customize. Way too much effort.

> Example of a bad bullet point (Used javascript to build a user-facing dashboard). Example of a good bullet point (Built a new dashboard product that manages x for y number of users. Ultimately drove z result.

Master Drywall Contractor

Built walls using 5/8 in. x 4 ft. x 12 ft. Firecode X Drywall over 178,000 sq. ft. resulting in client generating $1.1b in revenue annually.

I need more understanding with this line of thinking. In the context of a single software engineer, I have a hard time believing that measurable business outcomes are substantially attributed to the actions of a single engineer 99% of the time.

Happy to have my mind changed.

> Example of a bad bullet point (Used javascript to build a user-facing dashboard). Example of a good bullet point (Built a new dashboard product that manages x for y number of users. Ultimately drove z result.

This is one of the most repeated pieces of advice I see, but, as a person who reviews CVs and does interviews, I would rather see the first point. From there, we would have a discussion about the technology you used and the features built for users. It could have been a dashboard that ultimately wasn't useful for users and had little to no result - I don't care. I care that you're able to build it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com