December 15, 2010 at 8:03 am
I'd say that there's an argument for the fact that we are a meritocracy. That is of course counting interpersonal skills as a merit too. Although, since interpersonal skills can only be assessed with a great deal of subjectivity, there will always be "room for interpretation" & thereby making a meritocracy somewhat of a paradox... :blink:
December 15, 2010 at 8:12 am
Ok, now for the real world. As long as cronyism continues to be rampant in this industry achieving a true meritocracy will never happen. I once knew a person at Citrix that was promoted directly up to a Programmer Analyst IV position (skipping all three prior levels) and had never programmed before! However, he was very good friends with the manager there. 😀
"Technology is a weird thing. It brings you great gifts with one hand, and it stabs you in the back with the other. ...:-D"
December 15, 2010 at 8:24 am
Jeff Moden (12/14/2010)
I'll take both, please. You've got to know your stuff and be able to work with people to get the job done. Well... unless you're flippin' your own burgers. 😛Thanks for the great editorial, Steve.
If your job involves having to influence people in order to get things done, then how well you do so still plays into your overall job skill. The issue you bring up is that it's hard to test accurately for the "soft skills", but then again, testing accurately for the actual real skills you usually need is very hard as well.
In theory - if the test were balanced and gave a fair assessment of all skills (technical, interpersonal, etc...) needed to perform the job, then I would have no issue with taking such a test. That said - I don't subscribe to the concept that memorizing the book definition of certain concepts with no understanding of how to use them constitutes a valid test.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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?
December 15, 2010 at 8:38 am
OCTom (12/15/2010)
Get along? Are you kidding me Steve? Did we just take a trip to namby-pamby land? (to quote a recent U.S. commercial) I don't need to be best buds with my co-workers. We only need to be adults and act professionally. That gets work done. Maybe you would define that as getting along.
Getting along doesn't mean best buds. Heck, it doesn't mean we even agree or like each other. It means that we can work and respect each other. I am all for a team of diverse people, especially those that have different viewpoints.
Arguing and debating is one thing, being an *ss that others can't work with overwhelms any skill you have. Unless you're working along on something, which I would argue, is rare.
Sorry for being a tad harsh there, Steve.
Follow me on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/way0utwest
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
My Blog: www.voiceofthedba.com
December 15, 2010 at 8:41 am
TravisDBA (12/15/2010)
Ok, now for the real world. As long as cronyism continues to be rampant in this industry achieving a true meritocracy will never happen. I once knew a person at Citrix that was promoted directly up to a Programmer Analyst IV position (skipping all three prior levels) and had never programmed before! However, he was very good friends with the manager there. 😀
Picking people that you can work with/get along with doesn't have to be cronyism/nepotism. I'm against those, for the same reasons you are.
However most people are hired because the person interviewing them a) likes them and b) doesn't know how to evaluate skills well.
We need to reverse the second, not necessarily the first.
Follow me on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/way0utwest
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
My Blog: www.voiceofthedba.com
December 15, 2010 at 8:49 am
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (12/15/2010)
However most people are hired because the person interviewing them a) likes them and b) doesn't know how to evaluate skills well.We need to reverse the second, not necessarily the first.
This reminds me of when I was interviewing for SQL jobs after moving across country.
I was answering questions like "what is the differance between a clustered and non-clustered index" and "how would you execute a backup plan" with my real world experiance answers.
My personal skills are good enough to realize that this was not working, so I memorized the short versions of the M$ SQL BOL answers to these questions.
I got an offer at the very next interview with a company I still work for.
That was three years ago.
December 15, 2010 at 8:50 am
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (12/15/2010)
TravisDBA (12/15/2010)
Ok, now for the real world. As long as cronyism continues to be rampant in this industry achieving a true meritocracy will never happen. I once knew a person at Citrix that was promoted directly up to a Programmer Analyst IV position (skipping all three prior levels) and had never programmed before! However, he was very good friends with the manager there. 😀Picking people that you can work with/get along with doesn't have to be cronyism/nepotism. I'm against those, for the same reasons you are.
However most people are hired because the person interviewing them a) likes them and b) doesn't know how to evaluate skills well.
We need to reverse the second, not necessarily the first.
I agree, but having the first doesn't mean doodly squat if the person does not have the skills to get the difficult job we do done, and the fact is most brilliant DBA's I know were not hired to win a personality contest. The primary emphasis was on skillset. Finding both is very difficult in todays world. You can be the nicest guy in the world but if you can't assign a login then you are of no use to anyone.:-D
"Technology is a weird thing. It brings you great gifts with one hand, and it stabs you in the back with the other. ...:-D"
December 15, 2010 at 9:00 am
I'm an SQL contractor.
Skills get you the interview.
Personality and attitude get you the job. 🙂
_____________________________________________________________________
MCSA SQL Server 2012
December 15, 2010 at 9:04 am
Richard Warr (12/15/2010)
I'm an SQL contractor.Skills get you the interview.
Personality and attitude get you the job. 🙂
Displayed personaility and attitude in the interview that gets you the job can be manufactured quite easily. That does not necessarily mean that will actually be a person's personality and attitude on the job and under pressure. Interviews can be quite deceiving. 😀
"Technology is a weird thing. It brings you great gifts with one hand, and it stabs you in the back with the other. ...:-D"
December 15, 2010 at 9:08 am
Richard Warr (12/15/2010)
I'm an SQL contractor.Skills get you the interview.
Personality and attitude get you the job. 🙂
Unfortunately, other things too. I read an allegedly serious survey of HR interviewers a while back and was appalled that significant numbers of them actually responded that the quality of the handshake, whether the person's eye movement displayed nervousness, whether they nervously touched their hair, and other totally irrelevant characteristics played a significant part in their choice.
That same day I read an article on the success of Asperger's syndrome people in IT, and I realized that none would even get consideration by the HR folks in that survey.
...
-- FORTRAN manual for Xerox Computers --
December 15, 2010 at 9:28 am
TravisDBA (12/15/2010)
I agree, but having the first doesn't mean doodly squat if the person does not have the skills to get the difficult job we do done, and the fact is most brilliant DBA's I know were not hired to win a personality contest. The primary emphasis was on skillset. Finding both is very difficult in todays world. You can be the nicest guy in the world but if you can't assign a login then you are of no use to anyone.:-D
You're making a huge leap here that one doesn't preclude the other. I think it is much easier than you think to find someone that has technical ability and can learn, as well as a team player. They don't have to be a superstar, they need to be competent and willing to learn. From my experiences at a few dozen SQL Saturdays over the last 2 years, I think there are plenty of people like this out there.
Follow me on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/way0utwest
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
My Blog: www.voiceofthedba.com
December 15, 2010 at 10:18 am
I think you should hire for corporate culture first then the ability to grow and learn then skill. If they are not compatible with the culture they will be unhappy and will make others unhappy. If they are not able to grow and learn more they will get bored or will be a useless hunk of meat. Finally if they don't have any skills they will flounder in the job.
Russ
December 15, 2010 at 12:59 pm
Mark Dalley (12/15/2010)
Hey, what's that in English? You're clearly saying something profound here.
:w00t:
We oughta do less regurgitating BOL and more thinking that some very simple words mean really disparate things to different people.
Don't do profound, just pragmatic, I'll leave the profound to the religions.
Peter Edmunds ex-Geek
December 15, 2010 at 2:02 pm
99zardoz (12/15/2010)
Absolutely. There are some people out there with great tech skills and a great attitude but in general when someone goes through life being told they are a "guru" in anything they start getting a big head.
This struck a chord with me. I started working for my company at 22 years old and by 25 I was promoted through the ranks to the top-level engineering team in IT. All along the way I kept getting the treatment from co-workers (almost resentfully, in some cases) that I was some genius or rockstar and that no-one could stand against my solutions. I *hated* it. Nobody would accept my explanation that the simple truth is (1) I have good problem-solving skills, (2) I know how to use a search engine, and (3) I have a very strong work ethic (thanks, Dad). It's usually not pure talent or omniscience that makes people valuable in IT, it's experience and work ethic.
Even with the so-called "gurus" , there is no dark magic that grants them supernatural powers of awesome. I think "big head" syndrome is a major problem (both perceived and actual) in our industry. The sooner people realize the difference between skills and talent, the better off we'll be. Skills can be developed, all that's needed is the ability to learn and the willingness to work hard. The former is an almost universal trait, but unfortunately the latter is a dwindling virtue.
December 15, 2010 at 2:10 pm
Nobody would accept my explanation that the simple truth is (1) I have good problem-solving skills, (2) I know how to use a search engine, and (3) I have a very strong work ethic (thanks, Dad). It's usually not pure talent or omniscience that makes people valuable in IT, it's experience and work ethic.
Hey bro, it is what it is. Don't feel you have to explain it or apologize for it to no one. That's their problem.:-D
"Technology is a weird thing. It brings you great gifts with one hand, and it stabs you in the back with the other. ...:-D"
Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 44 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply