My Dad asked me if I was dating Sasquatch yet, and I said no, I'm not fond of hairy men with poor hygiene, but that if he could test, I'd like to talk to him. We could always use Febreeze to fumigate out his pod.
Hiring in the Great Northwest has thus far been an interesting experience. First, the candidates are generally of higher quality. I believe that's because Intel, Microsoft, Google, and Amazon aren't too far away.
However.
The pool of available bodies is much, much smaller. And those who are looking want top dollar. I've got a budget, and it's reasonable. But I need 33 people and can't afford to pay every one of them top dollar. I can't pay an analyst with 4 years of experience senior dollars. If you've never worked on a multi-million dollar effort with global impact, I can't use you at all. And experienced people are in demand; if you find a candidate you like, you'd best make an offer immediately. Because they'll have 4 offers by the end of the week.
That's the FTE side (full-time employee). On the consulting side, things are much more normal. We get a lot of schlock. They pick up whomever they can from the net who fit into their profit margins and send them on, hoping we'll bite. Not. Some firms send us better candidates than others, particularly after they realize a candidate who can't even spell the word "test" isn't going to make the cut. It's a learning experience for them and most consulting firms go through the same process with everyone as they learn what they can and can't submit to a given client. This is where it's an advantage to a company to have experienced resources on board selecting their personnel. The fact of the matter is that those unqualified resources are and have been working for SOMEONE. But if you have a critical effort underway and need sharp, experienced personnel, you certainly don't want it to be YOU.
The only requirements for people on my team are talent, experience, and passion for the work. That's it. Oh, and they have to appear to be nice. Not sugar-candy, sweety-sweety nice, which would make us all gag, but "normal" nice, where they'd pitch in to help someone out, recognize that they might not be the center of universe, and don't appear to have any serious mental illnesses. We have all had experiences with evil trolls on our teams and generally feel we can do without them. One bad apple can bring down the entire tree. So no one perpetually stuck in Martyr Mode, where everything is everyone's fault but their own, no one so ambitious they would happily step on the bloodied bodies of their compadres and people who have helped them in order to get ahead, and no fanatics of any kind - religious or other. They're a pain in the behind , since they're categorically incapable of recognizing the worth of anyone's opinion but their own. Merely being a bit weird is totally acceptable. Welcome to Portland.
Talent is kind of a tricky thing to identify, but it's worth the time and effort. We ask a combination of questions; some technical, some situational, and gauge the answers accordingly as best we can. On a number of them there is no "best" answer; we just want to see how someone thinks. Or if someone CAN think. Federal law prohibits us asking someone if they're a total whack job, so we're stuck with our instincts on that one. Even though our need for people is critical, taking the time to find the RIGHT people is time well-spent. There's a world of difference between "competent" and "talented". The talented people give a damn and are self-regulating in terms of the quality of their work. No one is harder on a talented person than the person themselves. You know what I mean. Chances are good if you're reading blogs about testing, you're an overachiever yourself. A testing geek. Someone who cares about what they do. Competent people just do what they need to do without putting anything extra into it. Competent people are fine, if you have the time and size for just "getting by" on a given effort. Something involving a lot of regression testing with pre-defined tests is a good example. But it's not good enough for an 'A" team, if you know what I mean. And everyone puts agile testing and automation on their resumes. But they know nothing, and I do mean nothing, about agile test techniques and have never actually automated squat. They know detailed manual test cases and that's it. And given their lack of capacity for creative thinking, it's doubtful their detailed tests were anything to write home about either.
I had a firm that supposedly knows all about "agile best practices" telling me they need detailed test cases to do their job. First, there's no such thing as "best practices" - one size does not fit all. There are good practices that can be adapted to your environment and that can become a best practice for your particular organization, but you certainly have to be familiar with them before you can adapt them! This particular firm is about 15 years behind the rest of the field. And they want to be involved in "helping" us with our process and procedure!!! Argh!!!!!
I had a candidate that had written "a couple" test cases a few years ago; it took them 2 or 3 days! Per test!! Good grief; unless you were writing the Test Case From Hell and writing 50-page test cases, how could documenting one test take 3 days? And how is that AGILE?I had a candidate that waxed poetic about what they wanted to do when they retired. And their primary goal was to retire early. But passion for their chosen field until they reached that goal? Nada.
And no one had read any books, blogs, or was interested/curious in what's going on in our field. How can build something cutting-edge with a bunch of lackadaisical stumps? YOU are in control of your career and nothing stops you from learning. Your circumstances might keep you from PRACTICING at a given company, but if this is your chosen career, you should freaking know something about it!! Why should I pay big bucks for someone who'd be just as happy to be a sales clerk, if the money were there?
Pardon me, I must go plunge my head into a bucket of cold water before it explodes. And I'll clean up the flying spittle as I appear to be foaming at the mouth. But this is a personal sore point with me - talking to people who don't care, shouldn't be in the field, or who expect people they know are experienced to swallow a bunch of bullshit they give to people who don't know the field (whilst smiling and remaining professional). It sucks the life out of me. And my leads and managers are hating life right now, since they're involved in the process as well and just want to hire some help and Get On With It. We all have ten thousand things to do and hiring staff takes TIME. We're all working long hours and don't even have time to eat or take care of certain necessary bodily functions during the day; I think my skin is turning yellow. We're considering requesting porta-potties as part of our standard office equipment.
So If we find some talented Sasquatch (I don't know the plural!), I'll post a picture of them, cups of coffee next to their PCs and entering tests in-between casually picking lice out of each other's fur...
Sunday, April 17, 2011
IT AIN'T YOUR MOMMA'S QA.....
Wow, what a whirlwind! Functional testing. Services testing. Cloud testing. SOX compliancy. Hiring. Processes. A metrics program. Contracts.
It's not so much what to do, it's where to start. So I thought I'd start at the beginning.
One of the biggest problems any new QA/QC manager has is the existing staff's preconceptions of "what testing should be" and "how testing should work". They base that on what they've experienced in past companies.
The problem with that is often "QA" at those former companies was (ahem) somewhat less than what it could have been. Perhaps the testing staff weren't especially valued, and their sole contribution came at the end of the project where the problems they found inevitably led to project delays, or a product with problems in production due to lack of time to fix those problems. Sometimes they didn't test a certain type of application at all. Often they were ignored throughout the entire project cycle. Or never got the information or interaction they require to do their jobs well.
The challenge here is to build a testing organization that supports the development process, which is in somewhat of a flux. While I'm building the testing organization, development is building out their organizations as well. There hasn't been a settling into one project methodology. The quasi-methodology in place isn't followed across the board. The IT organization as a whole is still making decisions in regards to process. It's likely the final result will be an agile process with enough structure to support a large global community, executive reporting, and auditing requirements.
This is not a weird situation, just a tough one. It requires complete responsiveness and a willingness to change course in midstream to "whatever works". I'm sure this sounds familiar to many of you.
A good QA department is collaborative. That means it doesn't matter what kind of documentation is produced or what kind of project methodology is chosen. As long as we have access to people who can answer questions, it's all good. But when you're working with people who have never had QA involved early in the process, they may or may not want to work with you. At the same time, there's usually an expectation that some kind of deliverable will be produced by QA; usually "test cases". And that they'll be produced before the development effort begins. Well, look at your schedule. Test cases take about an hour per to develop and a level of detail that might not be available at the time required to write them. One of the first challenges of a new QA manager is getting the point across that testing staff do not have ESP. Especially when every component of a system is new. If you were coding changes to an existing system, it might be possible to write test cases. If your UI design was done, it might be possible to write test cases. But when you're looking at at a piece of a piece of functionality on a service level where you'll need a virtualization tool just to mock up basic throughput, no. If you, as a designer, developer, or BA, don't know how the whole piece is going to work, neither will the testing staff. And standard test cases are not necessarily useful for services testing. So after you look at the schedule, do you have time to write test cases? If not, you need to start that education process right away. Most reasonable people realize you probably can't spend 10,000 hours writing test cases due in 4 months. The problem with staff living in the past is that they often came from shops in "maintenance mode". So writing 4 test cases that reflect a few changes in an existing screen wouldn't be a big deal. What you have to remember when dealing with someone else's testing baggage is that they've never actually done the work themselves. So a patient explanation of how long those activities take is usually all that is required. Executive management is different; inevitably they will be more with the program on this kind of issue than individual staff members or PMs from highly structured shops. Executive management is HIGHLY interested in any testing methodology that will allow the work to be done more quickly and cheaply, with the same level of robustness and ability to be successfully audited. And you'll find that with executive management on your side, the rest of the organization will give you the support you need as well.
So how can one deal with individual situations where expectations differ according to an individual's sometimes skewed perception of how testing should operate? All I can answer is with my own experience. So my answer is, "With patience, grasshopper.".
First, I'm not the least bit worried about testing. I inevitably hire a kick-ass staff that can test anything. That's how I roll. So when I have the opportunity, I politely point out what we need to have happen in order to find errors early in the process and the consequences if we don't collaborate early and often. But what is always in the back of my mind is the knowledge that my points will be graphically illustrated later down the line. The fact of the matter is that I always want a given project to be successful and I'll do everything I can to help make that happen. But without being totally obnoxious, which is a very unsuccessful way to operate, I can't "force" people to throw away their blankies and build something brand new. They're still tied to their own comfortable preconceptions of what happened where they "grew up". But maybe, just maybe, someone out there makes a better vegetable soup than Mom. Reality will force the issues for me later on and while the lessons might be painful, they'll help us all move in the right direction. I can save the organization from that painful reflection period, but will I get the level of collaboration I need to do that here at this company? I don't know. Time is not on my side. The project managers are, however. The development managers "get it" as well. The staff is hugely talented, so overall the chances of developing an organization that really works for the company is higher than it might be elsewhere. Executive management is what I would call "visionary". I like them. Visionaries in the IT world are not all that common. If you could see what we're building here, it would make you weep in envy. It's that sophisticated, and the technology is cutting edge. We're breaking new ground, and the technology is awesome. The opportunity to test it makes me drool openly. So I'm happy to be here. I know that issues regarding what people expected from their OLD testing organizations will eventually change. So I do what I can, and focus on my own group's work, knowing that eventually everything will work out. And I think that's the key to success. Do what you can early, make your points, and move on. I've seen many a manager become so frustrated, obnoxious, and loud, no one wants to work with them. You CAN'T HAVE EVERYTHING YOU WANT right away. You need to get what you can and allow time and experience to help you move the mountain an inch at a time. Remember that some people's past experience with testing organizations was terrible and they'll have to see with their own eyes the kind of value you add to the process before they'll start to trust you and feel comfortable with working with you. If someone you need to work with really goes over the line and is impacting the progress of your group, do what you can with them, report it unemotionally as an issue, and move on. And keep your sense of humor! The person in charge of your attitude is you and you can't accomplish anything with a negative attitude. And it will make you unpleasant to be around. One of my favorite people in my new company is a project manager. She takes every issue that is given to her and works it positively without slipping into Martyr Mode; she has a great sense of humor and while she has the kind of knowledgeable cynicism that is healthy and keeps her grounded in reality, she moves forward in a confident and positive way. Every time. i admire it; good project managers are hard to come by and she is one of the best I've worked with to date. I've had many, many opportunities to move into project management and have turned them down every time; in my opinion, it is the most thankless, difficult job in IT. But the lesson there is obvious; everyone enjoys working with that PM and respects/supports her; if she was flogging everyone and was unpleasant to work with, people would ignore her as much as they could. Don't YOU avoid unpleasant people? I do. Who wants to work with someone that yells at them all the time? So don't become that person.
Thus far, on the testing side, we've made tool selections, we're staffing up, and we're writing test outlines (a hierarchical list of test conditions) as we get information. Think of it as a testing shopping list. Those lists will keep us SOX compliant, allow us to test, and enable us to gather metrics in regards to pass/fail information. Actual service tests will be imbedded in the tool itself. By the way, I forgot to mention that part of the executive vision is Sigma 3 quality levels. Oh baby. Nothing like high expectations! Hence the need for a metrics program. I know a lot of you spit upon metrics, but large chunks of this baby are being developed by vendor partners and the company has written quality expectations into their contracts to ensure we don't get sold any snake oil (that in itself is pretty visionary). So it has to be measured. Frankly, I've never worked for any company that hasn't needed some sort of metrics; I have to say I've never understood the kickback from QA/QC professionals on this one. It's like babies saying "I don't wanna!". So what? You need them to get the job done at a managerial level. So suck it up and just do it. I've personally seen some great things accomplished through the intelligent use of metrics.
But I digress (too long since I've blogged!). Since January, I've added a services/integration testing guru and a test engineering manager (automation) to my posse. I've got two Killer QA leads. So we're small, but mighty. Another 33 people to go...
I'm going to have to post about hiring in the Great Northwest, and you'll probably get a boatload of comments about services testing. Many of you have tested services - heck, I've "been there, done that" myself. But this effort is building EVERYTHING from scratch, including the services layer, and it's a different animal. Fascinating stuff. Kind of like standard services testing on steroids. I'll have to contemplate how to convey information regarding testing processes without giving away specifics; I seem to recall signing quite a few documents regarding confidentiality when I came on board!
It's not so much what to do, it's where to start. So I thought I'd start at the beginning.
One of the biggest problems any new QA/QC manager has is the existing staff's preconceptions of "what testing should be" and "how testing should work". They base that on what they've experienced in past companies.
The problem with that is often "QA" at those former companies was (ahem) somewhat less than what it could have been. Perhaps the testing staff weren't especially valued, and their sole contribution came at the end of the project where the problems they found inevitably led to project delays, or a product with problems in production due to lack of time to fix those problems. Sometimes they didn't test a certain type of application at all. Often they were ignored throughout the entire project cycle. Or never got the information or interaction they require to do their jobs well.
The challenge here is to build a testing organization that supports the development process, which is in somewhat of a flux. While I'm building the testing organization, development is building out their organizations as well. There hasn't been a settling into one project methodology. The quasi-methodology in place isn't followed across the board. The IT organization as a whole is still making decisions in regards to process. It's likely the final result will be an agile process with enough structure to support a large global community, executive reporting, and auditing requirements.
This is not a weird situation, just a tough one. It requires complete responsiveness and a willingness to change course in midstream to "whatever works". I'm sure this sounds familiar to many of you.
A good QA department is collaborative. That means it doesn't matter what kind of documentation is produced or what kind of project methodology is chosen. As long as we have access to people who can answer questions, it's all good. But when you're working with people who have never had QA involved early in the process, they may or may not want to work with you. At the same time, there's usually an expectation that some kind of deliverable will be produced by QA; usually "test cases". And that they'll be produced before the development effort begins. Well, look at your schedule. Test cases take about an hour per to develop and a level of detail that might not be available at the time required to write them. One of the first challenges of a new QA manager is getting the point across that testing staff do not have ESP. Especially when every component of a system is new. If you were coding changes to an existing system, it might be possible to write test cases. If your UI design was done, it might be possible to write test cases. But when you're looking at at a piece of a piece of functionality on a service level where you'll need a virtualization tool just to mock up basic throughput, no. If you, as a designer, developer, or BA, don't know how the whole piece is going to work, neither will the testing staff. And standard test cases are not necessarily useful for services testing. So after you look at the schedule, do you have time to write test cases? If not, you need to start that education process right away. Most reasonable people realize you probably can't spend 10,000 hours writing test cases due in 4 months. The problem with staff living in the past is that they often came from shops in "maintenance mode". So writing 4 test cases that reflect a few changes in an existing screen wouldn't be a big deal. What you have to remember when dealing with someone else's testing baggage is that they've never actually done the work themselves. So a patient explanation of how long those activities take is usually all that is required. Executive management is different; inevitably they will be more with the program on this kind of issue than individual staff members or PMs from highly structured shops. Executive management is HIGHLY interested in any testing methodology that will allow the work to be done more quickly and cheaply, with the same level of robustness and ability to be successfully audited. And you'll find that with executive management on your side, the rest of the organization will give you the support you need as well.
So how can one deal with individual situations where expectations differ according to an individual's sometimes skewed perception of how testing should operate? All I can answer is with my own experience. So my answer is, "With patience, grasshopper.".
First, I'm not the least bit worried about testing. I inevitably hire a kick-ass staff that can test anything. That's how I roll. So when I have the opportunity, I politely point out what we need to have happen in order to find errors early in the process and the consequences if we don't collaborate early and often. But what is always in the back of my mind is the knowledge that my points will be graphically illustrated later down the line. The fact of the matter is that I always want a given project to be successful and I'll do everything I can to help make that happen. But without being totally obnoxious, which is a very unsuccessful way to operate, I can't "force" people to throw away their blankies and build something brand new. They're still tied to their own comfortable preconceptions of what happened where they "grew up". But maybe, just maybe, someone out there makes a better vegetable soup than Mom. Reality will force the issues for me later on and while the lessons might be painful, they'll help us all move in the right direction. I can save the organization from that painful reflection period, but will I get the level of collaboration I need to do that here at this company? I don't know. Time is not on my side. The project managers are, however. The development managers "get it" as well. The staff is hugely talented, so overall the chances of developing an organization that really works for the company is higher than it might be elsewhere. Executive management is what I would call "visionary". I like them. Visionaries in the IT world are not all that common. If you could see what we're building here, it would make you weep in envy. It's that sophisticated, and the technology is cutting edge. We're breaking new ground, and the technology is awesome. The opportunity to test it makes me drool openly. So I'm happy to be here. I know that issues regarding what people expected from their OLD testing organizations will eventually change. So I do what I can, and focus on my own group's work, knowing that eventually everything will work out. And I think that's the key to success. Do what you can early, make your points, and move on. I've seen many a manager become so frustrated, obnoxious, and loud, no one wants to work with them. You CAN'T HAVE EVERYTHING YOU WANT right away. You need to get what you can and allow time and experience to help you move the mountain an inch at a time. Remember that some people's past experience with testing organizations was terrible and they'll have to see with their own eyes the kind of value you add to the process before they'll start to trust you and feel comfortable with working with you. If someone you need to work with really goes over the line and is impacting the progress of your group, do what you can with them, report it unemotionally as an issue, and move on. And keep your sense of humor! The person in charge of your attitude is you and you can't accomplish anything with a negative attitude. And it will make you unpleasant to be around. One of my favorite people in my new company is a project manager. She takes every issue that is given to her and works it positively without slipping into Martyr Mode; she has a great sense of humor and while she has the kind of knowledgeable cynicism that is healthy and keeps her grounded in reality, she moves forward in a confident and positive way. Every time. i admire it; good project managers are hard to come by and she is one of the best I've worked with to date. I've had many, many opportunities to move into project management and have turned them down every time; in my opinion, it is the most thankless, difficult job in IT. But the lesson there is obvious; everyone enjoys working with that PM and respects/supports her; if she was flogging everyone and was unpleasant to work with, people would ignore her as much as they could. Don't YOU avoid unpleasant people? I do. Who wants to work with someone that yells at them all the time? So don't become that person.
Thus far, on the testing side, we've made tool selections, we're staffing up, and we're writing test outlines (a hierarchical list of test conditions) as we get information. Think of it as a testing shopping list. Those lists will keep us SOX compliant, allow us to test, and enable us to gather metrics in regards to pass/fail information. Actual service tests will be imbedded in the tool itself. By the way, I forgot to mention that part of the executive vision is Sigma 3 quality levels. Oh baby. Nothing like high expectations! Hence the need for a metrics program. I know a lot of you spit upon metrics, but large chunks of this baby are being developed by vendor partners and the company has written quality expectations into their contracts to ensure we don't get sold any snake oil (that in itself is pretty visionary). So it has to be measured. Frankly, I've never worked for any company that hasn't needed some sort of metrics; I have to say I've never understood the kickback from QA/QC professionals on this one. It's like babies saying "I don't wanna!". So what? You need them to get the job done at a managerial level. So suck it up and just do it. I've personally seen some great things accomplished through the intelligent use of metrics.
But I digress (too long since I've blogged!). Since January, I've added a services/integration testing guru and a test engineering manager (automation) to my posse. I've got two Killer QA leads. So we're small, but mighty. Another 33 people to go...
I'm going to have to post about hiring in the Great Northwest, and you'll probably get a boatload of comments about services testing. Many of you have tested services - heck, I've "been there, done that" myself. But this effort is building EVERYTHING from scratch, including the services layer, and it's a different animal. Fascinating stuff. Kind of like standard services testing on steroids. I'll have to contemplate how to convey information regarding testing processes without giving away specifics; I seem to recall signing quite a few documents regarding confidentiality when I came on board!
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
HOLY HIRING BLITZ, BATMAN!!!!
It's been Quite the Whirlwind, but I'm in the beautiful city of Portland, and my delayed belongings are actually supposed to arrive (3 weeks late) tomorrow.
A woman can become quite Evil without her shoes. That's all I have to say. I've had exactly 4 things to wear and have alternated them every day for 3 weeks, cleaning them repeatedly. And yes, one measly pair of shoes. No PC. No TV. One air mattress and a very confused dog. After two and a half weeks in a hotel, I decided I was moving to my new place no matter what, and just packed up little Elvis in his crate and did it.
I MISSED THE PITTSBURGH GAME.
Talk about sacrifice...
But the job, my dears, THE JOB. It has been worth all the trials and tribulations, the sun is shining, I can see Mt. Hood from my window, and I'm going to love Portland. It's funky, it's beautiful, and I work within walking distance of some really great Thai food. Life is good.
So I've met all the players, and my first priority is hiring. I'll be looking for a team lead for the testing efforts, 6 senior and/or leads in the testing area, and a manager for the test engineering group (automation, load, stress, and performance testing). That's just the start; we're staffing from the top down. If you're the best of the best and you're looking, drop me a line via this blog. I won't publish it, but I'll send you the particulars. I'm also going to see if I can get my requisitions on the Software Testing Club site. We're building the entire IT organization from scratch, so the Quality Services Department will be able to make decisions and recommendations for EVERYTHING; tools are the next item on my list after staffing. I start discussions about test environments shortly. The freedom and the authority to do and purchase what makes most business sense, rather than being bound by old agreements or technologies, is both a big responsibility and a total joy. The environment will definitely be agile; I almost wept openly. Usually I've been in the position of gradually turning structured environments into more um, adaptable organizations. This one is being built to be flexible from the get-go. It will be hard work, it will be fun, and I'm looking forward to building a team that can help make it happen!
I'll certainly post about my activities and the lessons I learn along the way when my own equipment arrives; in the meantime, my best to everyone and a special "thank you" to my former staff for all of their support and good wishes; once you all get sick of that weather and get a craving for some really killer crab phad thai, drop me a line!
A woman can become quite Evil without her shoes. That's all I have to say. I've had exactly 4 things to wear and have alternated them every day for 3 weeks, cleaning them repeatedly. And yes, one measly pair of shoes. No PC. No TV. One air mattress and a very confused dog. After two and a half weeks in a hotel, I decided I was moving to my new place no matter what, and just packed up little Elvis in his crate and did it.
I MISSED THE PITTSBURGH GAME.
Talk about sacrifice...
But the job, my dears, THE JOB. It has been worth all the trials and tribulations, the sun is shining, I can see Mt. Hood from my window, and I'm going to love Portland. It's funky, it's beautiful, and I work within walking distance of some really great Thai food. Life is good.
So I've met all the players, and my first priority is hiring. I'll be looking for a team lead for the testing efforts, 6 senior and/or leads in the testing area, and a manager for the test engineering group (automation, load, stress, and performance testing). That's just the start; we're staffing from the top down. If you're the best of the best and you're looking, drop me a line via this blog. I won't publish it, but I'll send you the particulars. I'm also going to see if I can get my requisitions on the Software Testing Club site. We're building the entire IT organization from scratch, so the Quality Services Department will be able to make decisions and recommendations for EVERYTHING; tools are the next item on my list after staffing. I start discussions about test environments shortly. The freedom and the authority to do and purchase what makes most business sense, rather than being bound by old agreements or technologies, is both a big responsibility and a total joy. The environment will definitely be agile; I almost wept openly. Usually I've been in the position of gradually turning structured environments into more um, adaptable organizations. This one is being built to be flexible from the get-go. It will be hard work, it will be fun, and I'm looking forward to building a team that can help make it happen!
I'll certainly post about my activities and the lessons I learn along the way when my own equipment arrives; in the meantime, my best to everyone and a special "thank you" to my former staff for all of their support and good wishes; once you all get sick of that weather and get a craving for some really killer crab phad thai, drop me a line!
Monday, December 13, 2010
THE EAGLE, ER, VULTURE, HAS LANDED....
Well, maybe not a vulture. They defecate and urinate on themselves to keep cool. They consume nasty things. And their primary mode of defense is projectile vomiting.
Yes, I know. I am a fount of unusual and largely useless information. It comes from a lot of late nights of testing and waiting for limping systems to be brought back up. I can also tell you about the reproductive habits of earthworms, minutiae on leprotic armadillos, and the fact that camels can swim, although they don't enjoy it.
But to get back to the point, I've been pretty quiet, blog-wise, for a few months because I've been travelling as part of my job search. And I've just accepted an offer from the Great Northwest. Portland, to be exact.
Did I get everything I wanted? Well, my title isn't "Queen of QA", so I fell down a bit on that one. Everything else, yes. I'll be establishing and managing a quality services organization for a 3-billion dollar company. Am I excited? Boy, howdy. Opportunities like this one don't grow on trees; I'm totally pumped up about it! The biggest glitch in my generic happiness at the moment is finding a place to live and getting my house in Central Ohio on the (depressed) market in time to start January 10!
So it might be another 6 weeks or so before I blog again; I'll be getting situated. But expect a lot of of information about the work involved with setting up an organization from scratch; I'll be new to the Northwest area, so I'll have to start building a network and working through the challenges of finding great people in a new area.
To summarize The Search, I planned a 6-month search and it took 5 months and 2 weeks. Whew! Talk about running it close to the line!! I stopped counting inquiries at somewhere around 160 in October. That sounds impressive, but what it really means is I heard about every opportunity available in the country, from assistant tester in Asswipe, North Dakota, to proud owner of my Very Own Franchise. Most of the people who called me hadn't even read my resume. Only a handful were really interesting opportunities at a management level. I almost ended up in Texas. Twice. I love Texas, and evidently they love me too. But Portland, well, Portland had everything. The job. The environment. The peers. The boss. The lone employee (talented, funny). The job. The job. The job. "And what about the MONEY, Linda?". Yes, they had that too. Other than having to pay for parking, which would be damn petty to complain about under the circumstances, I was satisfied with the money too. Unfortunately, I won't be grossing the same as Donald Trump, but my paycheck should keep me and my Sheltie, Elvis, off the streets.
So for those of you looking or planning to look, I can tell you in all honesty that there's a lot of opportunity out there, especially if you're at a lead level or below. If you're at a manager-level or above, plan for longer haul. But that will happen too, especially if you're persistent in your search and follow up on all your leads. I think I've had about 20 free lunches talking about various opportunities, over a hundred phone calls and even more EMails. Some plane trips as well, especially lately. It became a bit tiresome sometimes, since a lot of it was "I know person X at company Y; I'll give him a call...", but it was worth it in the end. And sincerely, all, I appreciate everyone who showed an interest and gave me a call. It kept things hopping. I did take a few short-term consulting gigs to keep from getting bored, but I didn't want to commit to anything long-term that would interfere with interviews, etc. And searching for a job IS a job. And oddly enough, I thought things would slow down to a crawl after Thanksgiving, and they didn't. In fact, management opportunities actually INCREASED. I assume it's because companies want to get their new management on board for the new year (and new budget!). So if you're searching and you've got experience, that Perfect Job might be right around the corner; don't get discouraged. And don't forget to put your resume in paragraph format (LOL!).
So thank you all for your good wishes and support; have a wonderful holiday season! All I can say is that I'm mighty glad the search is over at last and can't wait for the New Year!
Yes, I know. I am a fount of unusual and largely useless information. It comes from a lot of late nights of testing and waiting for limping systems to be brought back up. I can also tell you about the reproductive habits of earthworms, minutiae on leprotic armadillos, and the fact that camels can swim, although they don't enjoy it.
But to get back to the point, I've been pretty quiet, blog-wise, for a few months because I've been travelling as part of my job search. And I've just accepted an offer from the Great Northwest. Portland, to be exact.
Did I get everything I wanted? Well, my title isn't "Queen of QA", so I fell down a bit on that one. Everything else, yes. I'll be establishing and managing a quality services organization for a 3-billion dollar company. Am I excited? Boy, howdy. Opportunities like this one don't grow on trees; I'm totally pumped up about it! The biggest glitch in my generic happiness at the moment is finding a place to live and getting my house in Central Ohio on the (depressed) market in time to start January 10!
So it might be another 6 weeks or so before I blog again; I'll be getting situated. But expect a lot of of information about the work involved with setting up an organization from scratch; I'll be new to the Northwest area, so I'll have to start building a network and working through the challenges of finding great people in a new area.
To summarize The Search, I planned a 6-month search and it took 5 months and 2 weeks. Whew! Talk about running it close to the line!! I stopped counting inquiries at somewhere around 160 in October. That sounds impressive, but what it really means is I heard about every opportunity available in the country, from assistant tester in Asswipe, North Dakota, to proud owner of my Very Own Franchise. Most of the people who called me hadn't even read my resume. Only a handful were really interesting opportunities at a management level. I almost ended up in Texas. Twice. I love Texas, and evidently they love me too. But Portland, well, Portland had everything. The job. The environment. The peers. The boss. The lone employee (talented, funny). The job. The job. The job. "And what about the MONEY, Linda?". Yes, they had that too. Other than having to pay for parking, which would be damn petty to complain about under the circumstances, I was satisfied with the money too. Unfortunately, I won't be grossing the same as Donald Trump, but my paycheck should keep me and my Sheltie, Elvis, off the streets.
So for those of you looking or planning to look, I can tell you in all honesty that there's a lot of opportunity out there, especially if you're at a lead level or below. If you're at a manager-level or above, plan for longer haul. But that will happen too, especially if you're persistent in your search and follow up on all your leads. I think I've had about 20 free lunches talking about various opportunities, over a hundred phone calls and even more EMails. Some plane trips as well, especially lately. It became a bit tiresome sometimes, since a lot of it was "I know person X at company Y; I'll give him a call...", but it was worth it in the end. And sincerely, all, I appreciate everyone who showed an interest and gave me a call. It kept things hopping. I did take a few short-term consulting gigs to keep from getting bored, but I didn't want to commit to anything long-term that would interfere with interviews, etc. And searching for a job IS a job. And oddly enough, I thought things would slow down to a crawl after Thanksgiving, and they didn't. In fact, management opportunities actually INCREASED. I assume it's because companies want to get their new management on board for the new year (and new budget!). So if you're searching and you've got experience, that Perfect Job might be right around the corner; don't get discouraged. And don't forget to put your resume in paragraph format (LOL!).
So thank you all for your good wishes and support; have a wonderful holiday season! All I can say is that I'm mighty glad the search is over at last and can't wait for the New Year!
Thursday, September 2, 2010
I SMELL SULPHUR.....
Well, I had to take some time off from my blogging to do what I've been talking about - job hunting. The past few weeks have been hoppin'....
I'd like to talk about some peculiarities specific to placing your resume out on job boards.
First, you'll get responses from people who aren't even in your field. It has become evident to me that every insurance company in the U.S. needs potential "account executives" who might make IN EXCESS of 60K per year!!! In return for this potential largesse, all you have to do is knock on doors in areas even the local police avoid, make cold calls to people who hate you, and hit up your family and friends to buy expensive insurance policies. You'll make minimum wage during this training period. How long is the training period? Eternity.
The second phenomenon involves the Wretched State of Your Resume. I had no idea I was such a squid, and I'm eternally grateful to these philanthropic organizations for setting me straight.
I have a simple, 2-page resume, primarily consisting of easy-to-read bullet points.
My God, I've been such a fool! I expected potential employers to appreciate the ability to read the entire thing in ten minutes. That's right - I thought they'd actually read it! Now that I'm enlightened, however, I realize that looks are much more important, and the look needs to say "I have so much experience, I had to rewrite War and Peace" and "I know Really Big Buzzwords". I'm embarrassed to admit that that I don't use the word "synergistic' even once.
Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea culpa.
So now I realize I can't expect a hiring manager to figure out my value without switching my resume over to a Paragraph Format. The current state of my resume indicates I live in a double-wide, go bowling in my spare time, and date Walmart greeters.
My new, altruistic buddies at the resume-writing firms would be more than happy to correct my deficiencies in return for a large wad of cash. What these bloodsucking, carrion-eating, bottom-feeders do for a living is take money from those who are least able to afford it, without any expectation or guarantee that the results will leave anyone better off than they were to begin with. In other words, they prey on the fears and misfortunes of others.
Well, now that I know the truth about the inadequacies of my resume, far be it from me to buck a trend. All of you know I'm a Born-again Follower. As I passed 8th grade grammar, however, a simple template will do for me; I'll re-vamp my resume myself and use the savings for stupid stuff like food and my mortgage.
Since you have to TELL hiring managers, in engaging prose, why you are the Greatest Thing Since Sliced Bread, I'm currently working on ways to incorporate such moving testaments to my Goodness into my resume.
For example, in dog years, I have 175 years of experience. Fortunately, I started my testing career in the womb, which means I still retain all of my original body parts and hardly ever drool, spit, or wet myself.
While I do not golf, possess gonads, give a damn about college football, or play poker with influential buddies, hiring me will do nice things for a company's EEO policies and show everyone that they do SO have diversity, no matter what all their employees have to say.
I am a Testing Goddess. I am the Marquesa of Methodologies. I am the Baroness of Budgets. I am The Walrus. Ku-ku-ka-choo.
I've synergistically optimized corporate quality methodologies, negotiating actionable solutions, whilst simultaneously optimizing productivity and profitability. And that's just during my spare time.
With my new, improved resume, is there any doubt that I'm destined for Greater Things? Ah, Dream Corp! Here I come....
What I'm saying here, in essence, is that you need to believe in yourself. The market is tough, especially the higher up you are in the food chain, but you don't need someone who's never even worked in your field telling you what is and what is not important. Get a colleague to look at your resume if you're unsure about it, and then stop second-guessing yourself. The firm that has the right job for you is going to see a match when they review your resume - regardless of format. Using a thesaurus to craft 10 pages of bullshit is only going to help you out if you're looking for the type of company that wallows in the type of politics that most of us find stifling.
So good luck to all of you out there pounding the pavement and here's hoping we all have reason to celebrate shortly!!
I'd like to talk about some peculiarities specific to placing your resume out on job boards.
First, you'll get responses from people who aren't even in your field. It has become evident to me that every insurance company in the U.S. needs potential "account executives" who might make IN EXCESS of 60K per year!!! In return for this potential largesse, all you have to do is knock on doors in areas even the local police avoid, make cold calls to people who hate you, and hit up your family and friends to buy expensive insurance policies. You'll make minimum wage during this training period. How long is the training period? Eternity.
The second phenomenon involves the Wretched State of Your Resume. I had no idea I was such a squid, and I'm eternally grateful to these philanthropic organizations for setting me straight.
I have a simple, 2-page resume, primarily consisting of easy-to-read bullet points.
My God, I've been such a fool! I expected potential employers to appreciate the ability to read the entire thing in ten minutes. That's right - I thought they'd actually read it! Now that I'm enlightened, however, I realize that looks are much more important, and the look needs to say "I have so much experience, I had to rewrite War and Peace" and "I know Really Big Buzzwords". I'm embarrassed to admit that that I don't use the word "synergistic' even once.
Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea culpa.
So now I realize I can't expect a hiring manager to figure out my value without switching my resume over to a Paragraph Format. The current state of my resume indicates I live in a double-wide, go bowling in my spare time, and date Walmart greeters.
My new, altruistic buddies at the resume-writing firms would be more than happy to correct my deficiencies in return for a large wad of cash. What these bloodsucking, carrion-eating, bottom-feeders do for a living is take money from those who are least able to afford it, without any expectation or guarantee that the results will leave anyone better off than they were to begin with. In other words, they prey on the fears and misfortunes of others.
Well, now that I know the truth about the inadequacies of my resume, far be it from me to buck a trend. All of you know I'm a Born-again Follower. As I passed 8th grade grammar, however, a simple template will do for me; I'll re-vamp my resume myself and use the savings for stupid stuff like food and my mortgage.
Since you have to TELL hiring managers, in engaging prose, why you are the Greatest Thing Since Sliced Bread, I'm currently working on ways to incorporate such moving testaments to my Goodness into my resume.
For example, in dog years, I have 175 years of experience. Fortunately, I started my testing career in the womb, which means I still retain all of my original body parts and hardly ever drool, spit, or wet myself.
While I do not golf, possess gonads, give a damn about college football, or play poker with influential buddies, hiring me will do nice things for a company's EEO policies and show everyone that they do SO have diversity, no matter what all their employees have to say.
I am a Testing Goddess. I am the Marquesa of Methodologies. I am the Baroness of Budgets. I am The Walrus. Ku-ku-ka-choo.
I've synergistically optimized corporate quality methodologies, negotiating actionable solutions, whilst simultaneously optimizing productivity and profitability. And that's just during my spare time.
With my new, improved resume, is there any doubt that I'm destined for Greater Things? Ah, Dream Corp! Here I come....
What I'm saying here, in essence, is that you need to believe in yourself. The market is tough, especially the higher up you are in the food chain, but you don't need someone who's never even worked in your field telling you what is and what is not important. Get a colleague to look at your resume if you're unsure about it, and then stop second-guessing yourself. The firm that has the right job for you is going to see a match when they review your resume - regardless of format. Using a thesaurus to craft 10 pages of bullshit is only going to help you out if you're looking for the type of company that wallows in the type of politics that most of us find stifling.
So good luck to all of you out there pounding the pavement and here's hoping we all have reason to celebrate shortly!!
Thursday, July 29, 2010
BLUE LIGHT SPECIAL IN AISLE 9.....
This is blog post #4 in a series about job hunting. This piece of the Continuing Saga deals with the job climate overall and salaries.
Nothing has changed in terms of companies trying to snatch up bargains. If they have two candidate that are equal in other respects, they'll choose the cheapest.
What HAS changed is that their expectations are lower.
The market is flooded, and I do mean flooded, with poorly-qualified personnel who have 5-10 years of experience. That's work experience, not necessarily "good" experience. These are the people who have hopped from job to job all over the country, never holding one job for longer than a year. All of them consider themselves "leads" or higher. You know who they are - you've interviewd or worked with them. The problem is that in terms of pay, they will undercut you every time. This glut of unqualified warm bodies has degraded the market.
That would not be true if all interviewers and hiring managers were as experienced and discerning as you are, dear reader. Unqualified people would not get work and the market would turn around.
Unfortunately, our field is still not necessarily well understood. Experience is not necessarily valued above certifications, degrees, and above all, cost. And there is little understanding of what is (and is not!) important in terms of experience. Consider a resource who has had a new job every 6-12 months for the past 5 years. They are applying for "lead" jobs. You cannot gain the type of maturity and experience you need to be a lead when you're starting anew at every position and only stay for a matter of months.
At my level, competition comes from Project Managers, and managers/directors, etc. in other IT areas. I don't know about your region, but here in the midwest U.S., PMs are a dime a dozen. There are a bizillion of them. They have no background in QA/QC specifically and they've never actually done the work. But they present themselves as managing development, operations, QA, etc. - which isn't exactly untrue. On a project basis. Many interviewers do not understand that there's a big difference between a matrix manager and a line manager. Matrix managers do not handle the same problems as a line manager, and they rarely have to have detailed knowledge about the problems facing a test team. Nor do they have to worry about career paths, mentoring, training, process/procedure, automation, tools, and solutions to knotty testing issues. Some have never even had to handle personnel evaluations. The same is true with managers/directors of other areas of IT. Managing a team of DBAs is different than managing a team of testers.
So if the interviewer doesn't know the difference between a qualified and an unqualified resource, they will inevitably choose the cheapest resource or the one with the best patter. At my level, that's an issue; one thing PMs are extraordinarily good at is patter. Considering their entire career is based on negotiation, that's not a surprise. So if you're at a manager level or above, you HAVE TO BE ON YOUR GAME when interviewing.
Particularly if you're not this week's special at K-Mart.
Overall, if an interviewer goes with "cheapest" every time, one can reason that at least they do their company a service financially, if not in any other way. Going cheap in leadership positions is a false economy, whether you're talking about a full-time employee or a consultant. It's the best, most experienced personnel that are going to know how to save you money and maintain service levels. This is an advantage you'll have over other applicants. Talk about the Great Things you've done to increase efficiency and cut costs while improving testing services. They may ask those questions of the next applicant, who won't be able to answer them.
The problem of "cheapest" has been fueled by offshoring and poor policies on the part of consulting firms. While I've certainly seen some differences in the FTE market, consulting has changed significantly in the past 5 years. And I have to say that I'm totally sympathetic to their woes. You've got to be both tough and smart to remain profitable in today's market.
Consider that local consulting firms have to compete for dollars against offshoring concerns. That means cutting their rates to make their applicants more attractive to potential clients.
In order to keep their admin and marketing arms alive, most consulting firms prefer a 40% margin or better on their billing rates. That means if they want to lower their rates to their clients, it is infinitely preferable to hire cheaper people than to lower their profit margins.
Again, many consulting firms don't know the difference between a good or bad QA/QC resource. They will hire resources on which they can realize the highest profit margin. And they're smart about it - normally you aren't hired at all until you've interviewed and have been selected by a client. The problem is that the highly-talented sales personnel will be presenting the candidate in glowing terms, and the client may not know what they're buying and just trust those things are true. Or they may not get ANY candidates they really like and just pick the best out of a bad bunch.
Regardless, client expectations are lower now than they used to be, staff are less experienced, and companies have become accustomed to paying less for resources. Their lowered expectations have bled into the FTE side as well.
So where does that leave today's job hunter?
Well, the good news is that you're still going to get plenty of opportunities. The market is good for QA/QC. The bad news is that you'll have a lot of competition from less experienced and cheaper resources.
I can't give advice in regards to compensation, because it depends on you, your situation, and your region. If you have a familly, mortgage, etc., maybe you'll want to take what you can get and just keep looking until the right thing comes along.
If, however, you can afford to be selective for at least a period of time, I'd suggest you do what your momma always told you. Don't give it away. Why not look for a company that offers you something that makes you look forward to going to work every morning?
I'm pretty practical, myself, and it's important to know the market. What's the going rate for your position in your region? Trying to get more isn't going to work in most cases. And if you're considering relocating, you wouldn't want to lateral into a position where the cost of living is double what you're accustomed to. You might have to move into a double-wide and take on roommates. When I'm offered a relocation opportunity, the first thing I do is spend some time on the net, researching the area.
Talented resources are, as they have always been, at a premium. It's easy to get depressed or discouraged when looking for something new, but nothing outside of you need affect the inside of you. Your attitude is something you come up with all by yourself. You need to honestly assess the market, yourself, and set your expectations accordingly. Then you need to hang tough. Every company won't be looking for the best. But some will. And those are the people you want to talk to, because chances are good you'd get a chance to work with others that are also the best at what they do. There's nothing like working for a company that gives "excellence" more than lip service.
You just need to tell yourself that you are not the Blue Light Special in Aisle 9. You are a BMW and not a rusted-out Pinto.
In terms of salary, I have a bottom line and if it isn't met, I won't even consider the position. Beyond that, I know the market, and I consider the position being offered before I decide what is fair compensation for that particular position. Just because I have a bottom line doesn't mean I want to come in at that level. My bottom line is not necessarily what I made last year plus 5K. My bottom line is what I require in order to maintain some level of comfort and pay my bills. I negotiate on terms until the company and I either reach an agreement or decide we won't be able to reach an agreement.
This is where your own faith in yourself, your worth, and your abilities kicks in.
You have to be willing to walk away if a company can't meet your expectations. And don't count on that company calling you back if you do. Yes, some will sweeten their offer. But some won't. You have to be willing to give it up without regret if the offer isn't what you feel is fair.
Your best chance to get what you want, need, and feel is fair is during the hiring process. If they aren't willing (or can't) pay you now, do you think that's likely to change once you're an FTE? Promotions, bonuses, etc., are not guaranteed. Ever. So if it's not "right" now, it may never be right. Do you want to spend the next 4 or 5 years just getting back to where you were before you joined them?
I'm probably like most you; I always feel bad about turning down an opportunity and wonder if I did the right thing. Second-guessing yourself is a favorite pasttime of job hunters. But I have to say, I've never actually regretted anything I've turned down. But I have, in the course of my career, regretted several opportunities I've accepted.
So overall, it's a jungle out there. But I'm wearing my trusty pith helmet (the one that matches my Coach bag), looking out for quicksand and hoping I don't get torn apart by a pack of rabid hyenas....
Nothing has changed in terms of companies trying to snatch up bargains. If they have two candidate that are equal in other respects, they'll choose the cheapest.
What HAS changed is that their expectations are lower.
The market is flooded, and I do mean flooded, with poorly-qualified personnel who have 5-10 years of experience. That's work experience, not necessarily "good" experience. These are the people who have hopped from job to job all over the country, never holding one job for longer than a year. All of them consider themselves "leads" or higher. You know who they are - you've interviewd or worked with them. The problem is that in terms of pay, they will undercut you every time. This glut of unqualified warm bodies has degraded the market.
That would not be true if all interviewers and hiring managers were as experienced and discerning as you are, dear reader. Unqualified people would not get work and the market would turn around.
Unfortunately, our field is still not necessarily well understood. Experience is not necessarily valued above certifications, degrees, and above all, cost. And there is little understanding of what is (and is not!) important in terms of experience. Consider a resource who has had a new job every 6-12 months for the past 5 years. They are applying for "lead" jobs. You cannot gain the type of maturity and experience you need to be a lead when you're starting anew at every position and only stay for a matter of months.
At my level, competition comes from Project Managers, and managers/directors, etc. in other IT areas. I don't know about your region, but here in the midwest U.S., PMs are a dime a dozen. There are a bizillion of them. They have no background in QA/QC specifically and they've never actually done the work. But they present themselves as managing development, operations, QA, etc. - which isn't exactly untrue. On a project basis. Many interviewers do not understand that there's a big difference between a matrix manager and a line manager. Matrix managers do not handle the same problems as a line manager, and they rarely have to have detailed knowledge about the problems facing a test team. Nor do they have to worry about career paths, mentoring, training, process/procedure, automation, tools, and solutions to knotty testing issues. Some have never even had to handle personnel evaluations. The same is true with managers/directors of other areas of IT. Managing a team of DBAs is different than managing a team of testers.
So if the interviewer doesn't know the difference between a qualified and an unqualified resource, they will inevitably choose the cheapest resource or the one with the best patter. At my level, that's an issue; one thing PMs are extraordinarily good at is patter. Considering their entire career is based on negotiation, that's not a surprise. So if you're at a manager level or above, you HAVE TO BE ON YOUR GAME when interviewing.
Particularly if you're not this week's special at K-Mart.
Overall, if an interviewer goes with "cheapest" every time, one can reason that at least they do their company a service financially, if not in any other way. Going cheap in leadership positions is a false economy, whether you're talking about a full-time employee or a consultant. It's the best, most experienced personnel that are going to know how to save you money and maintain service levels. This is an advantage you'll have over other applicants. Talk about the Great Things you've done to increase efficiency and cut costs while improving testing services. They may ask those questions of the next applicant, who won't be able to answer them.
The problem of "cheapest" has been fueled by offshoring and poor policies on the part of consulting firms. While I've certainly seen some differences in the FTE market, consulting has changed significantly in the past 5 years. And I have to say that I'm totally sympathetic to their woes. You've got to be both tough and smart to remain profitable in today's market.
Consider that local consulting firms have to compete for dollars against offshoring concerns. That means cutting their rates to make their applicants more attractive to potential clients.
In order to keep their admin and marketing arms alive, most consulting firms prefer a 40% margin or better on their billing rates. That means if they want to lower their rates to their clients, it is infinitely preferable to hire cheaper people than to lower their profit margins.
Again, many consulting firms don't know the difference between a good or bad QA/QC resource. They will hire resources on which they can realize the highest profit margin. And they're smart about it - normally you aren't hired at all until you've interviewed and have been selected by a client. The problem is that the highly-talented sales personnel will be presenting the candidate in glowing terms, and the client may not know what they're buying and just trust those things are true. Or they may not get ANY candidates they really like and just pick the best out of a bad bunch.
Regardless, client expectations are lower now than they used to be, staff are less experienced, and companies have become accustomed to paying less for resources. Their lowered expectations have bled into the FTE side as well.
So where does that leave today's job hunter?
Well, the good news is that you're still going to get plenty of opportunities. The market is good for QA/QC. The bad news is that you'll have a lot of competition from less experienced and cheaper resources.
I can't give advice in regards to compensation, because it depends on you, your situation, and your region. If you have a familly, mortgage, etc., maybe you'll want to take what you can get and just keep looking until the right thing comes along.
If, however, you can afford to be selective for at least a period of time, I'd suggest you do what your momma always told you. Don't give it away. Why not look for a company that offers you something that makes you look forward to going to work every morning?
I'm pretty practical, myself, and it's important to know the market. What's the going rate for your position in your region? Trying to get more isn't going to work in most cases. And if you're considering relocating, you wouldn't want to lateral into a position where the cost of living is double what you're accustomed to. You might have to move into a double-wide and take on roommates. When I'm offered a relocation opportunity, the first thing I do is spend some time on the net, researching the area.
Talented resources are, as they have always been, at a premium. It's easy to get depressed or discouraged when looking for something new, but nothing outside of you need affect the inside of you. Your attitude is something you come up with all by yourself. You need to honestly assess the market, yourself, and set your expectations accordingly. Then you need to hang tough. Every company won't be looking for the best. But some will. And those are the people you want to talk to, because chances are good you'd get a chance to work with others that are also the best at what they do. There's nothing like working for a company that gives "excellence" more than lip service.
You just need to tell yourself that you are not the Blue Light Special in Aisle 9. You are a BMW and not a rusted-out Pinto.
In terms of salary, I have a bottom line and if it isn't met, I won't even consider the position. Beyond that, I know the market, and I consider the position being offered before I decide what is fair compensation for that particular position. Just because I have a bottom line doesn't mean I want to come in at that level. My bottom line is not necessarily what I made last year plus 5K. My bottom line is what I require in order to maintain some level of comfort and pay my bills. I negotiate on terms until the company and I either reach an agreement or decide we won't be able to reach an agreement.
This is where your own faith in yourself, your worth, and your abilities kicks in.
You have to be willing to walk away if a company can't meet your expectations. And don't count on that company calling you back if you do. Yes, some will sweeten their offer. But some won't. You have to be willing to give it up without regret if the offer isn't what you feel is fair.
Your best chance to get what you want, need, and feel is fair is during the hiring process. If they aren't willing (or can't) pay you now, do you think that's likely to change once you're an FTE? Promotions, bonuses, etc., are not guaranteed. Ever. So if it's not "right" now, it may never be right. Do you want to spend the next 4 or 5 years just getting back to where you were before you joined them?
I'm probably like most you; I always feel bad about turning down an opportunity and wonder if I did the right thing. Second-guessing yourself is a favorite pasttime of job hunters. But I have to say, I've never actually regretted anything I've turned down. But I have, in the course of my career, regretted several opportunities I've accepted.
So overall, it's a jungle out there. But I'm wearing my trusty pith helmet (the one that matches my Coach bag), looking out for quicksand and hoping I don't get torn apart by a pack of rabid hyenas....
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
A ROSE BY ANY OTHER NAME....
I had to take a few days to actually work on my job hunt, but here's #3 in a series of blogs about job hunting. I'd like to talk about titles...
I don't think this will be particularly applicable to consultants. If you're a consultant, your title at a given company is "The Consultant", whether you're acting as a tester, lead, manager, or director. Your authority will be derived from whomever hired you. The client is not going to care what your actual title is and they don't have to worry about fitting your position into their permanent corporate hierarchy. Any title they associate with a consultative opportunity is merely an indication of the level of expertise they require, if they even bother with that. For example, if they say they need a lead, they don't necessarily care if you have 5 or 25 years of experience, as long as you can get the job done within the rate they have in mind.
If you're looking for a full-time opportunity, however, your title is important whether or not you personally care about such things. In the corporate world, your title establishes your placement in the corporate hierarchy. This isn't just for you or for your ego. This tells OTHERS in the company where you fit in, what you control, and what kind of authority/responsibility you bear. Your title alone tells others how they need to interact with you. It can smooth your path, or place difficult obstacles in your way.
Every person at your level is your peer. So if you work in a company with 200 test managers, it's likely your responsibilities will be similar to that of a lead and you will not have authority that extends beyond the testing products of a group responsible for one application or suite of apps. In addition, the way your group operates may be dictated to you.
So even if you've worked as "just a lead" elsewhere, if it was a small shop and you ran the show, you might find the position somewhat restrictive, to say the least. Still, if you're presently a lead, this might be a good career move, if other aspects of the job are appealing. Having the word "manager" in your title can open other doors.
Because titles are unique to each company, they should be largely disregarded when exploring a job opportunity. But the title's placement within the hierarchy should never be disregarded. The opportunity you accept should place you in a slot that gives you the best opportunity to be successful within that environment.
Consider, for example, that the actual job that needs to be done is to establish and manage a testing function, with all that implies. The position is called "QA Manager". Pretty standard, right? But say upon further investigation, you find the highest-ranking development and operation managers with whom you would work are senior managers and directors. They report to a VP who reports to the CIO. The QA Manager position reports to a director who has no specific QA or testing experience. They may report to the same VP that handles operations and development. What does this tell you?
Well, a prudent advisor would tell you that it would be tacky to leave a job interview screaming "Noooo!!!!!" while fleeing the premises. It doesn't really tell you "DON'T TAKE THIS JOB, FOOL!!". It does, however, tell you in clear and honest terms, what kind of issues you'll be working through if you choose to take the position. Your position is at least 2 levels below the highest-ranking managers you'd be working with and need to influence. In short, they're gonna outrank you.
Anyone at a level above you will have more clout and a closer link to those that control your world. They are not, in unspoken corporate reality, obligated to negotiate with you, listen to you, or treat you like a peer. In fact, if they don't like your shoes, they might decide to undermine your efforts. You need the authority to do what you need to do, and a title automatically sets the expectations of OTHERS to a certain level. If you're a peer, even if others are predisposed to not want to work with you (and this can be based on many things, not because you're not a Great or Talented Individual), your status within the hierarchy requires them to treat you as an equal and try to work things out. Or else you have the same options for escalating problems that they do.
So if you don't have the title, it means you need to understand and accept that successfully performing the job is going to require you to be exceptionally confident, persuasive, and determined. It's possible that even those qualities won't help; you won't know unless you take the position. If you have not historically been an outstanding negotiator with people predisposed to dislike you or testing groups in general, you might want to consider this opportunity carefully. One of the realities of life is that people often dislike, fear, or mistrust change. Your presence in the company is going to represent some level of change. You need to be ready to act as an agent of change, and that's not easy if you don't have the authority to do so.
And promises are just that - promises. They are not what represents actual reality right now and they may or may not come to pass. I've found (for myself) that it is infinitely better to look at a position as it exists and assume it will remain that way. Are you accepting a position you want right now, or the position you hope it might become? What if your wishful thinking never comes to pass? Will you still be satisfied? Ruthless management of your own desires and expectations can help you find the right position.
Likewise with being swayed by title and money. What if that Executive Director of Quality or Associate VP position has no direct reports and no budget? That makes you a cat with no claws. You'll still be able to yowl, but you won't win any fights. And that's OK, if you prefer yowling to fighting anyway. As long as your expectations are met and you have the authority to do what you need to do, it's All Good.
Generally, I think you need to "trust your gut". If something smells bad, it probably IS bad. If, however, the job makes you salivate, you continue to think about what you'd do and how you'd tackle the job at all hours (as opposed to just thinking about how you'd spend your paycheck), then you're In Love and it's probably best to ignore titles, if you can, and just go for it. I passed by director and AVP titles for my last position, which was a "mere manager", because the job itself was what I wanted to do. And I have to say it was the right decision. For ME. Sexy titles might be a deciding factor for you - there's nothing wrong with that if it makes you happy. I know MANY people where status is spice that makes everything else worthwhile. I think they're nice-to-haves. I certainly wouldn't pass by a Juicy Title if everything else was in line with my career goals, but it doesn't tempt me otherwise.
I spend a good half of my time sorting out what a given opportunity's title actually means; if you fling yourself into the job market, you'll probably find yourself in the unenviable position of doing the same. It doesn't help that some contracting and placement firms send you every opening they've got available without actually reading your resume. I've found that being clear in your cover letters is helpful, as well as requesting a job description from (whomever) contacts you. From there, questions regarding "who reports to whom" are best covered in the actual interview (s).
So here's hoping I find a "Queen of QA" position that doesn't end up being either "Untouchable Goddess With No Staff", or "Wretched Serf With Less Authority Than a Rutabaga". Now if you'll excuse me, I've just received an inquiry as to my interest and availability for a "tester" position for which I'd have to relocate to
Upper Mongolia. I've always wanted to live in a yurt.....
I don't think this will be particularly applicable to consultants. If you're a consultant, your title at a given company is "The Consultant", whether you're acting as a tester, lead, manager, or director. Your authority will be derived from whomever hired you. The client is not going to care what your actual title is and they don't have to worry about fitting your position into their permanent corporate hierarchy. Any title they associate with a consultative opportunity is merely an indication of the level of expertise they require, if they even bother with that. For example, if they say they need a lead, they don't necessarily care if you have 5 or 25 years of experience, as long as you can get the job done within the rate they have in mind.
If you're looking for a full-time opportunity, however, your title is important whether or not you personally care about such things. In the corporate world, your title establishes your placement in the corporate hierarchy. This isn't just for you or for your ego. This tells OTHERS in the company where you fit in, what you control, and what kind of authority/responsibility you bear. Your title alone tells others how they need to interact with you. It can smooth your path, or place difficult obstacles in your way.
Every person at your level is your peer. So if you work in a company with 200 test managers, it's likely your responsibilities will be similar to that of a lead and you will not have authority that extends beyond the testing products of a group responsible for one application or suite of apps. In addition, the way your group operates may be dictated to you.
So even if you've worked as "just a lead" elsewhere, if it was a small shop and you ran the show, you might find the position somewhat restrictive, to say the least. Still, if you're presently a lead, this might be a good career move, if other aspects of the job are appealing. Having the word "manager" in your title can open other doors.
Because titles are unique to each company, they should be largely disregarded when exploring a job opportunity. But the title's placement within the hierarchy should never be disregarded. The opportunity you accept should place you in a slot that gives you the best opportunity to be successful within that environment.
Consider, for example, that the actual job that needs to be done is to establish and manage a testing function, with all that implies. The position is called "QA Manager". Pretty standard, right? But say upon further investigation, you find the highest-ranking development and operation managers with whom you would work are senior managers and directors. They report to a VP who reports to the CIO. The QA Manager position reports to a director who has no specific QA or testing experience. They may report to the same VP that handles operations and development. What does this tell you?
Well, a prudent advisor would tell you that it would be tacky to leave a job interview screaming "Noooo!!!!!" while fleeing the premises. It doesn't really tell you "DON'T TAKE THIS JOB, FOOL!!". It does, however, tell you in clear and honest terms, what kind of issues you'll be working through if you choose to take the position. Your position is at least 2 levels below the highest-ranking managers you'd be working with and need to influence. In short, they're gonna outrank you.
Anyone at a level above you will have more clout and a closer link to those that control your world. They are not, in unspoken corporate reality, obligated to negotiate with you, listen to you, or treat you like a peer. In fact, if they don't like your shoes, they might decide to undermine your efforts. You need the authority to do what you need to do, and a title automatically sets the expectations of OTHERS to a certain level. If you're a peer, even if others are predisposed to not want to work with you (and this can be based on many things, not because you're not a Great or Talented Individual), your status within the hierarchy requires them to treat you as an equal and try to work things out. Or else you have the same options for escalating problems that they do.
So if you don't have the title, it means you need to understand and accept that successfully performing the job is going to require you to be exceptionally confident, persuasive, and determined. It's possible that even those qualities won't help; you won't know unless you take the position. If you have not historically been an outstanding negotiator with people predisposed to dislike you or testing groups in general, you might want to consider this opportunity carefully. One of the realities of life is that people often dislike, fear, or mistrust change. Your presence in the company is going to represent some level of change. You need to be ready to act as an agent of change, and that's not easy if you don't have the authority to do so.
And promises are just that - promises. They are not what represents actual reality right now and they may or may not come to pass. I've found (for myself) that it is infinitely better to look at a position as it exists and assume it will remain that way. Are you accepting a position you want right now, or the position you hope it might become? What if your wishful thinking never comes to pass? Will you still be satisfied? Ruthless management of your own desires and expectations can help you find the right position.
Likewise with being swayed by title and money. What if that Executive Director of Quality or Associate VP position has no direct reports and no budget? That makes you a cat with no claws. You'll still be able to yowl, but you won't win any fights. And that's OK, if you prefer yowling to fighting anyway. As long as your expectations are met and you have the authority to do what you need to do, it's All Good.
Generally, I think you need to "trust your gut". If something smells bad, it probably IS bad. If, however, the job makes you salivate, you continue to think about what you'd do and how you'd tackle the job at all hours (as opposed to just thinking about how you'd spend your paycheck), then you're In Love and it's probably best to ignore titles, if you can, and just go for it. I passed by director and AVP titles for my last position, which was a "mere manager", because the job itself was what I wanted to do. And I have to say it was the right decision. For ME. Sexy titles might be a deciding factor for you - there's nothing wrong with that if it makes you happy. I know MANY people where status is spice that makes everything else worthwhile. I think they're nice-to-haves. I certainly wouldn't pass by a Juicy Title if everything else was in line with my career goals, but it doesn't tempt me otherwise.
I spend a good half of my time sorting out what a given opportunity's title actually means; if you fling yourself into the job market, you'll probably find yourself in the unenviable position of doing the same. It doesn't help that some contracting and placement firms send you every opening they've got available without actually reading your resume. I've found that being clear in your cover letters is helpful, as well as requesting a job description from (whomever) contacts you. From there, questions regarding "who reports to whom" are best covered in the actual interview (s).
So here's hoping I find a "Queen of QA" position that doesn't end up being either "Untouchable Goddess With No Staff", or "Wretched Serf With Less Authority Than a Rutabaga". Now if you'll excuse me, I've just received an inquiry as to my interest and availability for a "tester" position for which I'd have to relocate to
Upper Mongolia. I've always wanted to live in a yurt.....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
