Strong understanding of objective C and iOS SDK Swift experience a plus Passion for design / UX Proven track record of quality apps in app store
That's literally all I had under qualifications.
Strong understanding of objective C and iOS SDK Swift experience a plus Passion for design / UX Proven track record of quality apps in app store
That's literally all I had under qualifications.
Also, I think you should mention some details:
The size of the team -- lone iOS developer, small team (2-4 people), or larger?
Whether the application is a standalone mobile app (and the business is built around it), or simply a frontend for a pre-existing web application/product. (i.e. Working on Tinder versus working on OKCupid's mobile app)
Disregard this if you included this already in the actual listing, and/or you're hiring for an iOS shop that will be dealing with outsourced projects
Degree of control/ownership that the developer will have on the project
I think you will attract different candidates based on these cases.
I did have some information about the work in there but nothing really about the team size - I'll keep that in mind for future listings. Completely agree on your statement that the type of candidate you'll attract depends on the team, the company, the project.
Another consideration: if there's ten roles I'm considering and yours is the only one which doesn't list compensation, I'm not going to waste my time applying for the role. You're competing in a marketplace for limited resources, failing to say how much you're willing to pay doesn't tell me anything about your company culture, it tells me you're unwilling to say how much you'd pay in compensation.
You're not marketing to employees - you're marketing to people who are not yet employees.
But, while I understand what you're saying, and for all I know maybe being humble works well for you as internal company culture, humble really isn't a good marketing strategy - there's a good reason why marketing if anything traditionally errors on the side of boastfulness! I don't advocate exaggeration, but if you really are offering good pay and good working conditions, you should specify this in your job listing. Remember, in many cases a candidate will start off knowing nothing about your company except what he sees in the listing.
1. Interview process MAX 1 afternoon. We commit to AFFIRMATIVELY giving you an accept or reject within 2 weeks. (in other words, we respect your time)
2. Need to hire for this position by [DATE]. (this is a real job opportunity and we are not just fishing)
3. We're not going to ask you to spend a weekend on a work sample or to write code for us for free. (again, we respect your time, and potentially your IP agreement with your current employer)
4. To apply, just upload your resume or send us your LinkedIn URL. You don't have to fill out a 500-form field online application. (see a pattern here?)
5. We offer detailed feedback after unsuccessful interviews. (we earnestly want you to re-apply later if you're better then)
6. If you're good but not an exact fit, we may suggest to you an alternate role rather than just reject and make you wonder if you should re-apply. (serious about finding talent rather than filling a specific narrow role)
I'd also love to see the company publish their current employee retention rate for similar roles, but I know that's asking for a lot.
When I already have a job, one of the main reasons I don't apply to other jobs more often, even ones that look very interesting, is that most hiring processes are opaque, endless, and generally painful. If you're not getting enough candidates into the funnel, maybe include something about how painless your particular funnel is.
But I just wanted to add that I don't think your #5 could ever work, because of liability. There's a good reason why companies don't do post-interview feedback— to avoid legal liability.
1.) Why go to the trouble? What's in it for us? Yes, we shouldn't leave you hanging and should in general behave professionally but detailed feedback as part of a formal process seems more than one can reasonably expect.
2.) It invites prolonging the process. A lot of people told that they have insufficient experience in X will want to respond that they really do and it must just not have come out in the interview.
3.) This may be truer for non-technical roles, but think of it like dating. A lot of the time people get rejected because the potential hiring company "Just wasn't that into them" or just preferred someone else better.
Everyone is expected to work hard. When it's explicitly spelled out in a job description, that is usually code for "long hours, required face time, leading to burnout". And Play hard? What does that even mean in the context of a job? I don't go to the office to play games.
Mainly when I see "work hard, play hard" I read "I'm way too old to be working there"
hrmm there's a million and one good buzzwords that make me lol but I can't remember them all right now.
What difference does it make whether they built an iOS app if they are a mobile app developer?
Also, why not look for a web app developer specializing in front end. Same skills, just a few minor technical details are different.
I think a lot of employers do not understand what the word "skill" actually means. Generally skills increase with years of experience and if you take someone at the right level and throw a new platform at them, they will spend a week on reading and tutorials and then dive into a prototype of the app they need to build.
After all, Google hires Apple and Microsoft engineers, then expects them to build stuff on the Google internal platform. And they DO!
They're not just "a few minor technical details." The toolchains are different, the UI design details are different, the event model is different, the model/backend details are different, and there are significant conceptual differences.
I would be astonished if someone could move from web dev to iOS dev in a week with no previous experience. A good coder can probably bolt together a twinky do-nothing hello world app that quickly from a cold start, but they'll be a long way short of what's needed for a solid commercial-grade app with useful features.
I can not fathom the mindset that goes into the line of thought "yeah he's clearly a great developer - sadly he is currently working from framework X and we would need him to work from framework Y". I can only hope that such an attitude leaves a company more likely to go out of business (and I suspect it does).
A strong engineer with a proven track record building enterprise-level applications is not going to become a shit-hot iOS developer in a week. However he will be just as likely to bring in 10x his salary in value to your company in his first year, as nearly anyone else you hire. But most hiring managers will probably not bother to promote such an applicant to even a phone screen, since it would take too much time out of everyone's daily 'where are all the iOS devs' bitch session on HN or proggit or whatever.