this is to inform you that for any company the right skill sets are always associated with good amout of experience. i hope you got the point .
Joined: Jan 05, 2001
Hi Raghav and all, May I ask what is good amount of experience, 3 months, 6 months or 2 years? ------------------ Have you tried this Mock Exam Testing Engin yet? www.geocities.com/pei4nan/index.html [This message has been edited by nan sh (edited August 03, 2001).]
The magical number (for experience) seems to be 3 years. I saw this in the trucking industry 15 yrs ago. Personally, I feel it's a technique used by HR departments & headhunters to control the number of resume's they receive. If a company were to put "entry level" on their advertisement - they would be literally swamped with resume's. If you know the subject and have done a project or two using the technology - then apply for the job. I usually ignore the "3 yrs of experience required" - unless the ad explicitly states "no junior or entry-level". I feel if there is a senior level person on the project - you can be assured there are going to be a few junior level folks as well. Consequently, I go ahead and fire the outfit a resume. What the heck, the most they can do is chuck your resume into the trash bin. On the other hand, it might just generate a lead. The Hewlett-Packard job I now have wanted 5 years of experience. But, I fired them a resume anyway. Guess what, I ended up scoring a great job. ---- BTW/ For those following my fishing exploits - I managed to hit up the Sacramento River (240 mi north of Sacramento, CA) last week. Nailed about a dozen wild rainbows - but only in the 10 inch class. John Coxey (email@example.com)
Regarding skill and experience: Out there in the real world -- believe me there are those who have been in the industry for many years, yet know not much. The HR manage cannot tell the skilled from the unskilled; so they usually just rely on the X-years experience stuff as a barometer for competence. I think the best set of people who can gauge a persons skill and competence would be the tech people themselves (i.e. the project manager, the lead programmer, etc.) What is worst is when a president of a company (who was never a programmer nor tech person) overrides the decision of his tech people -- regarding whom to hire. If I had my way, I'd axe these overpaid and feeble minded jokers.