No, I haven't joined the military. But I did get a job!
Surprise of surprises, I had 3 interviews in a row, and received 3 job offers. To top it off, all 3 job offers were higher than my highest expected salary, and 2 of them offered overtime compensation. Other than that, the 3 jobs were more or less competitive in benefits. One job was in Pulaski, TN (I would have lived in Columbia, TN), and the others were in Huntsville. Long story short, I picked one of the Huntsville jobs, which coincidentally was both the highest paying and the smallest in size (seriously, that was a coincidence, as the salaries were close enough to each other).
So I now work for Invariant Corporation in Huntsville. I chose them because what they do sounded way cooler than what the other 2 companies were working on. Also, I just decided that there were so many opportunities for technical jobs in Huntsville, it was just time to move on. That, and my job is going to be really nerdy 8-)
Of course, Emily (my wife) had a huge say in this. Her reaction was completely different from what I expected, though, so the decision to go to Huntsville came fairly naturally. The decision was still really hard to make, and the representative from the Pulaski job sounded almost heartbroken on the phone. All 3 companies were great places, but I decided to go with the smaller guys with the cool, scientific work. Plus, small size usually means greater risk, but greater possibilities.
Anyway, wish me luck! Mostly, wish me luck in finding a place to rent. I'd like to go ahead and get settled in Huntsville so I can concentrate on my career.
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Entertainment Genius
Another Lunatic Genius, Joss Whedon, just completed a project called "Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog". It's an online mini-series starring Neil Patrick Harris, along with several of Whedon's friends. I didn't catch it until a couple of hours before it went download-exclusive, so I couldn't post it here in time to be seen online for free. Not that anyone is reading this blog...yet (mwa-hahahaha).
"Dr. Horrible" is such a good show, that I almost forgive Joss for the Serenity tragedy. I don't mean the part where Firefly got canceled, because that was caused by stupidity on the part of Fox. I mean the part where Joss put the nail in the coffin by killing major characters in the movie. "Dr. Horrible", however, again proves that Joss is a genius, even if he did make Angel into its own series.
"Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog" is about 36 minutes long altogether, and costs $3.99 to download at iTunes. It is supposedly going to make it to DVD at some point. Either way, it's worth the price of half a movie ticket, especially if you show your friends. I personally think it's the best example of film-making that I've seen in a long time.
Oh right, links:
Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog Website
DHSAB on iTunes
"Dr. Horrible" is such a good show, that I almost forgive Joss for the Serenity tragedy. I don't mean the part where Firefly got canceled, because that was caused by stupidity on the part of Fox. I mean the part where Joss put the nail in the coffin by killing major characters in the movie. "Dr. Horrible", however, again proves that Joss is a genius, even if he did make Angel into its own series.
"Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog" is about 36 minutes long altogether, and costs $3.99 to download at iTunes. It is supposedly going to make it to DVD at some point. Either way, it's worth the price of half a movie ticket, especially if you show your friends. I personally think it's the best example of film-making that I've seen in a long time.
Oh right, links:
Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog Website
DHSAB on iTunes
Friday, July 18, 2008
The Adventures of "Stupid Cliff"
Some of you know me, and I'm sure some people reading this don't. Those of you who don't know me will learn, if I post often enough on this blog, that I feel like I should print out business cards that, like a popular Looney Toons character, should read "Clifford D. Taylor, Super Genius". You will also learn that doing so would almost be justified ;-)
You will also probably learn that I have an alter ego that is, let's admit it, an idiot. He mostly comes out when I'm preoccupied with deep thought, and handles all the day-to-day operations of my life. Basically anything that doesn't involve talking to people, he takes care of without me noticing. The problem is, he's an idiot, and a bit contemptible at that.
Recently, some of you learned that I was short a 160GB, $350 Black iPod Classic. I had determined that it had not been stolen, and even remembered taking it out of my car. It hasn't come up yet in conversation, but it turns out Stupid Cliff threw it in the bottom of the trash pick-up bin while I was thinking about the Decision Source job offer. I found it before we put the trash out by digging out all the trash from the bin -- and there it was. I only found it by guessing that it was the only place I hadn't looked.
Well, he struck again two years ago, but I just now found out. Turns out he did it for my own good this time.
A couple of years ago, I felt like I was stiffed on my 401K contributions when I left my job at Emdeon. I had even paid taxes on it in 2006. I had guessed up until this point that Emdeon had given me the balance in my final check, and I just didn't do the math, since it isn't worth Emdeon or Fidelity's trouble to steal such a small amount from me.
Turns out Stupid Cliff just hid it from me. In searching for some software to install on a computer I'm upgrading for my parents, I found an unopened envelope from Fidelity in the bottom of a drawer. Upon opening it, I find a statement of my last 401K balance, and a check for nearly $800 (my short-term contribution less taxes). The check doesn't expire, but even if it did Fidelity would gladly issue me a new one to get their accounts balanced.
So, in the long run, Stupid Cliff took care of me. Although it looks like I may get several (very lucrative) job offers by the end of next week, I might come up short in paying my car insurance if I don't get paid right away. My insurance will run me just about $800, and this check gets me close enough :-)
You will also probably learn that I have an alter ego that is, let's admit it, an idiot. He mostly comes out when I'm preoccupied with deep thought, and handles all the day-to-day operations of my life. Basically anything that doesn't involve talking to people, he takes care of without me noticing. The problem is, he's an idiot, and a bit contemptible at that.
Recently, some of you learned that I was short a 160GB, $350 Black iPod Classic. I had determined that it had not been stolen, and even remembered taking it out of my car. It hasn't come up yet in conversation, but it turns out Stupid Cliff threw it in the bottom of the trash pick-up bin while I was thinking about the Decision Source job offer. I found it before we put the trash out by digging out all the trash from the bin -- and there it was. I only found it by guessing that it was the only place I hadn't looked.
Well, he struck again two years ago, but I just now found out. Turns out he did it for my own good this time.
A couple of years ago, I felt like I was stiffed on my 401K contributions when I left my job at Emdeon. I had even paid taxes on it in 2006. I had guessed up until this point that Emdeon had given me the balance in my final check, and I just didn't do the math, since it isn't worth Emdeon or Fidelity's trouble to steal such a small amount from me.
Turns out Stupid Cliff just hid it from me. In searching for some software to install on a computer I'm upgrading for my parents, I found an unopened envelope from Fidelity in the bottom of a drawer. Upon opening it, I find a statement of my last 401K balance, and a check for nearly $800 (my short-term contribution less taxes). The check doesn't expire, but even if it did Fidelity would gladly issue me a new one to get their accounts balanced.
So, in the long run, Stupid Cliff took care of me. Although it looks like I may get several (very lucrative) job offers by the end of next week, I might come up short in paying my car insurance if I don't get paid right away. My insurance will run me just about $800, and this check gets me close enough :-)
Saturday, July 12, 2008
The Employment Paradox
NOTE: I promise all my posts won't be this long, when I do post, but this is a place where I'm going to look at issues from my perspective, which is usually very deeply examined and a little against-the-grain. Feel free to disagree with me in the comments section, but don't take it personally if I deconstruct your argument. I'll try to make the next one a little more "cool", at least.
Before I get into my theory, let me give you a little background. I have been looking, albeit casually at first, for a full-time job in Software Development (or something related) since November. I completed my Master's in Computer Science in May, while I was doing contract work for a small consulting firm in the Nashville (Tennessee) area. The firm offered me a full-time position, but their benefits weren't really that great and they didn't offer me nearly enough money, on top of the fact that they are moving farther away from where I live (I own my house). Since they only gave me 4 hours to make a decision, I had to say no.
So, I've been looking hard for a real job since early June. And now, well... I'm still looking.
Heres the trouble: the Nashville market is doing relatively poorly in the technology field, supposedly due to this "recession" we're in, which to be honest, probably hasn't had much impact on the technology field anywhere. As a result, all of the companies that need software developers in the Nashville area only want developers that have quite a bit of experience. The problem is, all of those people already have jobs or have moved on to bigger places. In fact, there seems to be a small exodus of experienced developers, which I guess accounts for the large number of jobs that require experience :)
I even had one company interview me, say they thought I was a great fit for the position, and then say they decided to redefine the position to require more experience. Little did they know that they moved from an open market to a stagnating market where I've been watching positions go unfilled for months now.
So, here's the "Employment Paradox" problem, as it applies to a given area (here, Nashville):
A) All companies want developers with experience.
B) All the available developers have little or no experience.
C) The companies won't hire the inexperienced developers.
D) Therefore, the developers can't get experience, so no one can fill the companies' positions.
There's an easy solution to this problem. That solution is hire the inexperienced developers and train them as necessary, or just wait for them to catch up. That negates the whole paradox, because the positions get filled, the developers get experience, and even if some experience-only positions remain, there will soon be more experienced developers to fill them.
There is a better argument for hiring inexperienced developers, however, assuming this is not a management or "domain expert" position. In fact, there are several arguments:
1. Inexperienced developers can be hired cheaper -- MUCH cheaper. He will remain cheaper beyond the point that he becomes an experienced developer in most cases, as people moving to a new company usually ask for more money.
2. An inexperienced, but well educated developer can perform at least 50% of the functions of an experienced developer immediately after being trained on a system. After 6 months, that developer will be able to perform at least 75% of the functions of the experienced developer. After 1 year, you will find little difference between the skill levels of the developers. These are estimates, and often you will find the inexperienced developer to be just as capable as an experienced developer, and you got to train him to do things your way.
3. Inexperienced developers have fewer bad habits than experienced developers and are more likely to ask questions when they are not sure what to do.
4. It is much easier to fill entry level positions with good developers, because more people are qualified to apply. This gives you a better selection. Some "experienced" developers may not be experienced in the specific things you require, but may actually be overqualified for the job, yet you'll miss out on talking to this person.
More importantly with that last item, is that I've worked in the real world around "experienced" developers. I have to say that, while I am pretty skilled for someone with my "lack of experience", you'd be surprised how often the inexperienced developer is more qualified than the developer with experience. By having an arbitrary requirement of 1-2 years of experience, you will be missing out on the opportunity to hire some of the best employees you will ever get, fresh out of college or even graduate school.
So, if anyone out there reading this (hi Mom) is in the position of interviewing candidates for a job, consider lowering your requirements, especially for positions that only require 1-3 years of experience. You might find some bright young individual straight out of the classroom who is the best person for the job. Worst case scenario, you'll end up talking to a few unqualified kids on the phone for 10 minutes, and you'll scare off fewer applicants. And keep in mind that inexperienced is usually just another way to say "trainable".
P.S. Thankfully, other markets, where "defense contractors" tend to hang out (Washington DC, Huntsville, Atlanta, etc.), haven't convinced themselves that they can't handle entry-level computer experts. There's still, as always, at least a trickle of entry-level jobs around these areas. Wish me luck!
Before I get into my theory, let me give you a little background. I have been looking, albeit casually at first, for a full-time job in Software Development (or something related) since November. I completed my Master's in Computer Science in May, while I was doing contract work for a small consulting firm in the Nashville (Tennessee) area. The firm offered me a full-time position, but their benefits weren't really that great and they didn't offer me nearly enough money, on top of the fact that they are moving farther away from where I live (I own my house). Since they only gave me 4 hours to make a decision, I had to say no.
So, I've been looking hard for a real job since early June. And now, well... I'm still looking.
Heres the trouble: the Nashville market is doing relatively poorly in the technology field, supposedly due to this "recession" we're in, which to be honest, probably hasn't had much impact on the technology field anywhere. As a result, all of the companies that need software developers in the Nashville area only want developers that have quite a bit of experience. The problem is, all of those people already have jobs or have moved on to bigger places. In fact, there seems to be a small exodus of experienced developers, which I guess accounts for the large number of jobs that require experience :)
I even had one company interview me, say they thought I was a great fit for the position, and then say they decided to redefine the position to require more experience. Little did they know that they moved from an open market to a stagnating market where I've been watching positions go unfilled for months now.
So, here's the "Employment Paradox" problem, as it applies to a given area (here, Nashville):
A) All companies want developers with experience.
B) All the available developers have little or no experience.
C) The companies won't hire the inexperienced developers.
D) Therefore, the developers can't get experience, so no one can fill the companies' positions.
There's an easy solution to this problem. That solution is hire the inexperienced developers and train them as necessary, or just wait for them to catch up. That negates the whole paradox, because the positions get filled, the developers get experience, and even if some experience-only positions remain, there will soon be more experienced developers to fill them.
There is a better argument for hiring inexperienced developers, however, assuming this is not a management or "domain expert" position. In fact, there are several arguments:
1. Inexperienced developers can be hired cheaper -- MUCH cheaper. He will remain cheaper beyond the point that he becomes an experienced developer in most cases, as people moving to a new company usually ask for more money.
2. An inexperienced, but well educated developer can perform at least 50% of the functions of an experienced developer immediately after being trained on a system. After 6 months, that developer will be able to perform at least 75% of the functions of the experienced developer. After 1 year, you will find little difference between the skill levels of the developers. These are estimates, and often you will find the inexperienced developer to be just as capable as an experienced developer, and you got to train him to do things your way.
3. Inexperienced developers have fewer bad habits than experienced developers and are more likely to ask questions when they are not sure what to do.
4. It is much easier to fill entry level positions with good developers, because more people are qualified to apply. This gives you a better selection. Some "experienced" developers may not be experienced in the specific things you require, but may actually be overqualified for the job, yet you'll miss out on talking to this person.
More importantly with that last item, is that I've worked in the real world around "experienced" developers. I have to say that, while I am pretty skilled for someone with my "lack of experience", you'd be surprised how often the inexperienced developer is more qualified than the developer with experience. By having an arbitrary requirement of 1-2 years of experience, you will be missing out on the opportunity to hire some of the best employees you will ever get, fresh out of college or even graduate school.
So, if anyone out there reading this (hi Mom) is in the position of interviewing candidates for a job, consider lowering your requirements, especially for positions that only require 1-3 years of experience. You might find some bright young individual straight out of the classroom who is the best person for the job. Worst case scenario, you'll end up talking to a few unqualified kids on the phone for 10 minutes, and you'll scare off fewer applicants. And keep in mind that inexperienced is usually just another way to say "trainable".
P.S. Thankfully, other markets, where "defense contractors" tend to hang out (Washington DC, Huntsville, Atlanta, etc.), haven't convinced themselves that they can't handle entry-level computer experts. There's still, as always, at least a trickle of entry-level jobs around these areas. Wish me luck!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)