Skills Are the Only Security

Skills are so fundamental to finding and holding a job that it seems silly to even write about this. But the reality I find is that, for some people, they don't make the obvious connection.

I will not paint everyone with this broad brush, but I recall an interview I saw a couple of years ago. The young man being interviewed had a very high opinion of himself and what he was worth. But not what the job market thought he was worth. No, this person said flat out and straight-faced that he would not take a job under $85,000 a year and under no circumstances would lower himself to work for minimum wage.

Ok, no problem..except for several problems: by his own admission he had no skills, had not made much progress toward a college degree, and his arrogance would not do well in a job interview.

I almost felt a bit sorry for him. He was so utterly clueless about what "working" means that he did not know he was clueless. His view was not "What do I have to offer." His view was, "This is what I expect."

As I say, I almost felt sorry for him.

But even older people can have startlingly distorted ideas about getting from where they are to where they want to be.

Many years ago I wrote an essay for my professional website about learning new technical skills. The example I used from my own experience was how I wanted and needed to learn a new and popular programming language called C++ (C plus-plus). I wrote that this was so important to me and the future of my family that after working at my day job, I would stay up until midnight or 1 a.m. in the morning learning this language, writing and testing my programs. I ended the article saying that the only criteria for security in today's job market was skills, and I wanted to learn the skills that were critical in programming at that time.

I received an interesting email from a man who read my little story. The comment he made was, "That's great for you but I have a family, I work all day, and I don't have the time to do all that."

How would you reply to someone who said this? Does this sound like someone charging ahead, even 1 small step at a time, to become more valuable on the market?

I took a couple days to reply because I wanted to my response to be measured and unemotional. I sent him a brief email that said, "I understand you feel very constrained but I did not share in my website article that I have two preschool children. I do not start my programming until after they are in bed. I don't watch television at all because that will not give me skills for the future. I spend these hours learning the skills that will open doors that will benefit my family. We all must do what we feel we can do. I wish you well in whatever you choose."

I never heard back from him.

What does this have to do with finding a job? It has everything to do with finding a job, because - and I repeat - the only security in today's job market is the skills you bring to an employer or client, skills that are in demand today, not skills that went out of demand several years ago.

How one identifies skills that she should obtain is not always easy. But in the Internet era no one should say they cannot find some information to make informed decisions. Gaining knowledge at little or no cost is possible through books, the Internet, libraries, even community colleges. Gaining hands-on experience and practice requires a more focused approach. Learning programming knowledge as I discuss above is more an investment of time than money. However, I recently made a decision to learn the practices and techniques of an Emergency Medical Technician. I want to be able to help people in distress from trauma or medical emergencies - certainly my own family. Learning how to put in an airway device or splint a broken leg can really only be learned by doing so I enrolled in a 6-month EMT course at a local technical college.

The four most important words in life: There are always options. Pursuing them may not be easy or comfortable. But little in life that is valuable can be achieved without sacrifice. Don't give up too easily.

Jargon in Resumés

Should resumés contain jargon? That is, vocabulary or terms that are specific to a narrow job area and understood only by persons familiar with that job area?

Yes, and No. It depends on your goal.

Yes, you should include (some) jargon if your resumé is targeted to the particular job area that employs that jargon. Technical (e.g., engineering), professional (e.g. legal or medical) and military job domains all have their own vocabulary, abbreviations and idioms. If your experience is in one of these domains, and you are submitting your resumé to be considered for a position in one of these domains, yes, you should include some jargon.

Note I say "some" jargon. I have seen resumés that go so overboard in this area that a) they become tedious and difficult to read, and b) the litany of abbreviations, acronyms, and specialized words leave a strong impression that the author was listing these words just to take up space. Every word in your resumé should provide value to the reader. Overuse of jargon can create the opposite impression.

I work in the computer software field. I write programs in several languages. I am skilled at software design and architecture. Most of my projects have been conducted producing software solutions on the Microsoft Windows operating environment, but some have involved the Unix environment as well as other less-familiar ones.

Here is an illustration of how I might include jargon to describe a project I have worked on.

* Led 6-member team in delivery of embedded, multi-threaded, RTOS/CAN-Bus implementation of automated, robotic-driven, fluid assay platform constrained by hard, 12-second cycle times from sample injection to result report. Followed Scrum approach with 2-week sprints. Component architecture implemented using GOF Design Patterns including: Abstract Factory, Decorator, State, and Strategy. Robust OO implementation in C++ rigoursly followed SRP, OCP, LSP, ISP, and DIP principles.

Now, if I am submitting my resumé to an organization that is doing RTOS and C++, this language and content may be perfect because the hiring manager in such an organization can reasonably be expected to be familiar with these terms and concepts.

However, if this illustration is all "Greek" to you, that is perfectly normal. If you have not worked in this area you would not be expected to understand all of this. But, and this is my real point, a lot of software managers who would receive my (or your) resumé also would not understand all of this because not everyone in software has worked in some of these niche topic areas either. Even an experienced software manager leading delivery of business applications would not necessarily be familiar with many, or any, of these terms or acronyms, and might decide I am being condescending or just trying to show off. I don't ever want to create that impression.

So, could I tone down the jargon? Sure I could. Here is the same description as the illustration above, but simply written for a reasonably intelligent reader - not for me the author:

* Served as Technical lead for 6-member team in delivery of a medical device that performed analysis of patient body fluid samples in an assessment cycle that could not exceed 12 seconds. Device was implemented in C++ in a real-time operating environment. I led the selection of appropriate design patterns and principles to assure desired quality and ease of maintenance.

Hopefully this is a bit more understandable even if you do not work in this narrow area of software. And just as importantly, it should be more understandable to a hiring manager who generally understands software delivery and just wants to get a clear, uncluttered idea of what I have done in the past.

And this is where I have to say that if your resumé is targeted to obtain a position different from those on your resumé, No, you should not include jargon. Or, at best, only a little, but include some explanatory descriptions. If I were to submit a resumé for a management position in, say, a financial area, the reader of my cover letter and resumé can be assumed to know little or nothing about low-level technical software concepts. So I would want to write a new "management" resumé for such a position, tailoring each set of responsibilities and accomplishments to show how I used or grew management skills in my previous jobs.

Here is the same illustration above, but now tailored to showcase the management skills I used:

* Served as Technical lead for 6-member team in delivery of a new medical device. Managed team staffing, and maintained budget tracking for executive sponsors. Provided first-level input on team member Pay for Performance assessments. Evaluated supply-chain vendors for device components and monitored their compliance to our agreed Service Level Agreements on defect correction. Assisted legal department in negotiating hardware contracts and costs.

Is this a different job that the RTOS/C++ illustation? No, actually it is not. It's just a different view on what I did on that project. Some of what I did with that team was highly technical. Some of what I did was purely project and product management. But in this third example there is no need for technical jargon: the content is for a potential management position.

I hope this clarifies that the answer to using jargon in your resumé really is Yes and No. And I hope it also strengthens your appreciation that having at least two versions of your resumé is a really prudent approach: one for continuing in your current job area if you find such openings; another version that is more immediately understandable to the reader if you pursue a new job area.

27 Weeks and Discouraged

Since I wrote Hired! I have had contact with many jobless people across the salary spectrum and diverse job skills. A fairly consistent percentage of newly unemployed are understandably grateful that state jobless benefits are available to them to lessen their shock. But a recent article in The Atlantic comments on darker transitions for the long-term unemployed, that is, those out of work for more than 27 weeks.

First, longer periods of unemployment can have a very detrimental effect on lifetime income. Future earnings after one returns to the job market suffer, and this occurs disproportionately based on the national unemployment rate: lifetime earning losses are much greater when the national rate is above 8 percent than if it is below 6 percent.

Second, persons who experience long-term unemployment are eventually forced to take jobs that are lower-paying than the job they lost. The imperative to take such a job is certainly driven by the termination at 26 weeks of unemployment benefits in most of the United States.

Third, as I write about in Hired!, the grinding toll of job search, confusion about how and where to apply for work, dismal employer responses, and sheer discouragement lead many to simply give up. These people become invisible: they do not have jobs, and are not counted in the government's job statistics because they are not actively looking for jobs.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics' (BLS) February 2015 jobs report indicates that 31% of people unemployed in that month have been out of work for 27 weeks or more. This is a stunning number but five years ago the number was worse, reaching 45% in 2010.

What do these numbers mean? For me they are a reminder of the damage that unemployment can do - if we allow it to do so. I have not forgotten the first night when I was completely ready to just give up. I was only 4 weeks into my search and every job I interviewed for just yielded nothing. It was a very rough night. The next morning I woke early from anxiety, went into my office and in the quiet of that morning I started to analyze: What have I been doing? What am I doing wrong? What do I need to change? That brief morning escape gave me two new ideas to try and that gave me some new motivation.

When I was making notes for Hired! and helping my grown children find jobs, I wrote out daily goals for them on 4" x 6" index cards. When I could see real discouragement in them, I gave them the day off - to regroup their thoughts and recharge themselves, not to sit around the house.

The BLS February report does indicate that our jobs economy is improving, but still at the lowest rate for any economic recovery since the Great Depression of the 1930s. However, your personal jobs economy may still be stagnating or declining. I encourage you to be vigilant to the discouragement that is inevitable whether you work on a road crew, or you are a CEO.

The biggest danger of long-term unemployment is that we might allow it to become too-long unemployment.

I wrote Hired! to help with issues of job targeting, finding hiring managers, how to learn about job openings without going through Human Resources and more. But I do not have magic words for holding off the discouragement that can put you in this fraternity of "27 weekers." Discouragement is going to hit you - probably hard. Be ready and accept that it will come. Deflect it. Do not just "settle" for government benefits. Do not spend 25 weeks looking for the same job you lost. You are not a job title, and your skills are valuable in many different job areas.

There is a little post floating around Facebook that is relevant here:

An old man told his grandson,
"My son, there is a battle between
two wolves inside us all.
One is Evil. It is anger, jealousy, greed,
discouragement, inferiority, lies and ego.
The other is Good. It is joy, peace,
love, hope, humility, kindness,
empathy and truth."

The boy thought about it, and asked,
"Grandfather, which wolf wins?"

The old man quietly replied,
"The one you feed."

There is wisdom here.

Job Titles in Your Resumé

Today I had a conversation with Yvonne, a woman who is a former HR Manager. She raised an important issue with respect to resumé clarity. Her observation was that many people list their current and past job titles on their resumé, and this can actually make the resumé more difficult to understand.

Here is an example. Janet's resumé lists her current job title as Process Design Consultant II. Her responsibilities and activities in this position include: website support, contract negotiation, software development consulting within the company, and running an interactive community of business people.

Is this what the reader of her resumé would expect from the title "Process Design Consultant II"? Is there a basis for real concern in this mismatch of expectations? Indeed there is.

First, the reader's company probably has a totally different set of job titles and will not be immediately able to map between the two sets of terms.

Second, Janet's list of responsibilities and accomplishments might not align with the reader's expectation based on the job title the writer associates with those responsibilities.

Last, this misalignment resulting from the reader's expectations can create suspicion about Janet's integrity when the real issue is simply the misuse or misassignment of job titles by the Janet's employer.

What is the solution?

The simplest solution is to omit company-specific job titles like "Process Design Consultant II" or "Consulting Analyst" and instead list the role, or roles, you have filled. Roles are more easily understood than job titles because role names are not specific to a company. So, list "Java Developer" rather than "Consulting Analyst"; "Project Manager" rather than "Vice President"; "Business Analyst" rather than "Technical Delivery Manager."

When you have your telephone or face to face interview you can explain that you have listed the role names for clarity, and you will be happy to provide the actual job titles if requested.

And as Yvonne emphasized you really must list the actual job titles when you submit a Job Application with a candidate company. This is a legal and moral issue: if you are not completely above-board and the candidate company does its due diligence and uncovers a discrepancy, that may very well be the end of your relationship with them before it actually begins.