Category: business advice

  • People like us – could poor hiring practices bring down Silicon Valley?

    People like us – could poor hiring practices bring down Silicon Valley?

    A strange little story appeared in Business Insider a few weeks back, 9 Things Your Resume Needs if you want to be Hired by Apple or Google is a curious view into the mindset of Silicon Valley.

    Purporting to be an extract from a book written by a former recruiter who claims to have worked for Apple, Google and Microsoft, the story exposes a weakness in Silicon Valley and the technological elite which may cause the very disruptions they have unleashed to work against them.

    The nine items are fascinating for the elitist, US-centric view of the world they portray and each is worth investigating on their own.

    If you graduated from an elite college, your chances of getting an interview vastly improve

    Yes, where you went to school does matter to the tech giants. Of course there are exceptions, but McDowell says an Ivy League or other top university will get you noticed.

    There’s not much more to add to this, except to note that the vast majority of students whose families can afford such an education are from the upper middle class.

    The Googles and Apples like to see relevant internship experience.

    If you waited tables when you were 19, that isn’t attractive.

    If you are lucky enough to get into a an Ivy League school on a scholarship or manage to scrape together the money you may still not make the cut.

    To the author, only those with sufficient wealth to participate in unpaid internships are going to get jobs at the top Silicon Valley companies.

    Your major matters

    Sorry liberal arts people or chemical engineers, you’ll need another way in to Google or Apple.

    This is an interesting one, Silicon Valley boosters often talk about the creative process and how coders are artists however according to the recruiter that’s just lip service.

    She encourages students to pick majors that are directly relevant to Google or Apple. Finance, accounting, marketing or computer science majors have the best shot of being noticed by a tech recruiter.  At the very least, minor in one of those fields.

    A focus on finance, accounting and marketing is the same as any old corporation – you could be going for a job with AT&T, Goldman Sachs or the government with qualifications like that. So much for unique.

    Dissing chemical engineering is particularly interesting as Chem Eng graduates have passed one of the toughest university degrees. Whats more, the demands of mobile computing devices means battery technology is one of the most pressing issues facing Silicon Valley at the moment. Chemical Engineers are the folk who will solve this problem.

    Big tech companies like to see people giving back to their communities.

    Volunteering can be a great way to buff up your resume. That said, McDowell warns: “don’t serve soup in a soup kitchen.”

    Instead she suggests hunting for a sales or marketing position, or offering to help a charity with its website and design.

    This is a really obnoxious statement – basically saying we want to you volunteer, but we don’t want you to help people.

    Just how many sales and marketing people are needed by soup kitchens, volunteer fire brigades or community pantries is open to debate.

    A bigger issue with this mentality is that it favours bureaucrats and paper shufflers rather than doers. Which again is something anathema to the public statements of Silicon Valley’s leaders.

    They also like good spellers and speakers.

    Writing and communications skills aren’t just necessary for media jobs. They’re important in any career you’ll have.

    Well, duh.

    If you are buddies with college professors, that’s a plus.

    Professors aren’t just impressed by how you do in their classes.  McDowell suggests helping them with research projects, asking for help and attending office hours, or becoming a teaching assistant.

    That doesn’t hurt, but it’s pretty basic vanilla advice and again it’s tough luck if you have to do a shift at the local fast food restaurant so you can feed yourself.

    Show you understand multiple positions at Google or Apple

    If you want to work at one of the top tech companies, it helps to have at least a basic understanding of multiple positions in the organization.  McDowell calls this being a Generalist.

    On one hand this advice makes sense but on another many technical roles are not generalist positions.

    Generally having a knowledge of the company’s structure and roles is going to look good to any interviewer, assuming you can get past the gatekeeper at the recruitment company.

    Entrepreneurs have a better shot of being hired.

    This is a funny one, if you’re a real entrepreneur then the thought of working in cubicle at Apple or Microsoft while answering to a middle manager straight out of a Dilbert cartoon ranks with getting hot pine needles thrust under  your toenails.
    One of the conceits of modern corporate life is that they value entrepreneurs and the free-wheeling spirits – the truth is they don’t and the first true hint of entrepreneurialism among the ranks will be smothered quickly with a deluge of paperwork.
    Funnily enough, being a successful tech entrepreneur is a path to getting a good job at a tech company although it’s more likely to happen as an acqui-hire than through a recruiter.

    Good news: Your GPA doesn’t matter very much

    Most people think tech companies, Google in particular, harp over candidates’ GPAs. McDowell says there is little truth to that rumor.

    This is only good news if you’ve ticked most of the other boxes, which means you’ll be considered if you’re middling graduate from Stanford or Harvard but forget it if you went elsewhere, regardless of how good your marks are.

    The danger of recruiters

    What the Business Insider story really illustrates are the risks of relying on third party recruiters as gatekeepers to filter out new employees.

    Regardless of how good the recruitment consultant is they are going to apply their own cultural filters and biases onto the selection process and as a result knock out most good candidates.

    More importantly, a company risks developing a monoculture if the recruitment process is too effective at filtering out people who don’t fit a narrow stereotype.

    A new breed of officemen?

    Reading the Business Insider story leaves one with the feeling that many of these companies are beginning to look like IBM in the 1960s – monocultures more concerned about the colour of an employee’s tie and choice of shirts rather than the talents they bring to the organisation or the value they can add to customers.

    This is probably the greatest risk of all to the tech industry, that they end up with an insular group of people with fixed mindsets.

    Should that happen, then the wave of disruption Silicon Valley has unleashed on the world will end up being the industry’s undoing as smart kids working out of garages in Michigan or slums in Delhi will out innovate the staid, comfortable incumbents.

    It’s also interesting to consider how many other industries are now suffering after several decades of similar recruiting practices where leading businesses are now dominated by insular, unworldly monocultures.

    Image courtesy of Alexfurr on SXC.HU

    Similar posts:

  • It’s too late, baby – when digital reality bites

    It’s too late, baby – when digital reality bites

    Yesterday Sensis announced it would restructure for digital growth by sacking staff, offshoring and “accelerate its transition to a digital media business”.

    The directory division of Telstra has been in decline for years, a process that wasn’t helped by then CEO Sol Trujillo embarking on his expensive “Google Schmoogle” diversion.

    A decade later, Managing Director John Allen has announced another 650 jobs to go from the remaining 3,500 workforce.

    John’s comments are worth noting.

    Until now we have been operating with an outdated print-based model – this is no longer sustainable for us. As we have made clear in the past, we will continue to produce Yellow and White Pages books to meet the needs of customers and advertisers who rely on the printed directories, but our future is online and mobile where the vast majority of search and directory business takes place.

    Carol King put it best – it’s too late, Baby. These are words that should have been said a decade ago.

    Similar posts:

  • Have we come to the end of the middle class era?

    Have we come to the end of the middle class era?

    Technology has transformed workplaces over the last century, drove huge income growth and moved many into the middle classes. Are we now seeing computers and robots displacing those middle class jobs?

    At Tech Crunch Jon Evans warns Get Ready To Lose Your Job  as “this time it’s different” – unlike earlier periods of industrialisation where jobs shifted to the new technologies such coach builders became car makers – robots and computers are making humans redundant.

    So I see no mystical Singularity on the horizon. Instead I see decades of drastic nonlinear changes, upheaval, transformation, and mass unemployment. Which, remember, is ultimately a good thing. But not in the short term.

    In The Observer John Naughton, professor of the public understanding of technology at the Open University, says Digital Capitalism Produces Few Winners.

    Professor Naughton’s view is that high volume, low margin businesses like Amazon mean there’s fewer well paid jobs available and many of the lower positions will be soon replaced by robots.

    At the other end of the digital marketplace, the high margin businesses like Apple, Google and Salesforce don’t need many staff to generate their profits, so wealth is concentrated among a small group of managers and owners.

    While the low paid and manufacturing workers have been squeezed for decades in the West, it’s now the turn of the middle classes to feel the pain of automation, outsourcing and restructuring.

    There’s two ways we can look at these changes, the optimistic is that our economy is going through a transition to a different structure; those out of work coachbuilders a hundred years ago didn’t immediately get jobs building cars and the same adjustments are happening again.

    A more pessimistic view is that the Twentieth Century was an aberration.

    It may be that Western world’s steady climb into middle class prosperity was itself a transition effect and we’re returning to the economic structures of the pre-industrialised age where the vast majority of people have a precarious income and only the fortunate few can afford middle class luxuries.

    The next decade will give us some clues, but the portents aren’t good for the optimistic case, the Pew Research Centre shows America’s middle classes has been shrinking for forty years.

    For those Americans still in the middle class, the Pew research shows their incomes have been falling for a decade.

    Regardless of which scenario is true, the dislocation is with us. As individuals we have to be prepared for changes to our jobs, however safe they look today. As a society we have to accept we are going through a period of economic and social upheaval with uncertain long term consequences.

    What’s particularly notable is how today’s political and business leaders seem oblivious to these changes and are locked in the ‘old normal’ of thirty or fifty years ago.

    One wonders what it will take to wake them up to the changes happening around them and what will happen when reality does bite them.

    Picture of a nice, middle class house by Strev via sxc.hu

    Similar posts:

  • Going insane with government subsidies

    Going insane with government subsidies

    Albert Einstein is said to have defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.

    When it comes to funding the film industry it’s hard not to think that governments, and those who want a strong local film making communities, have all gone insane.

    As discussed previously, the global producer incentive industry is a scam perpetuated by the major movie studios on gormless governments desperate for the glitz and glamour of having a Hollywood star or two come to town.

    In Australia, governments are scratching around to raise change to attract a high profile Hollywood production once again – unsurprisingly to subsidise another remake of a fifty year old hit.

    This is dressed up in the guise of helping build or maintain the local skill base or infrastructure. The water tank that’s expected to be used should the Aussies win the bid was built by the Queensland government in 2007 to attract aquatic themed movies, as the minister at the time said;

    “As a result of having the water tank facility, the Government’s Pacific Film and Television Commission and Warner Roadshow Studios are currently in negotiations with a number of major studios requiring water tank facilities for their next major films.

    “These projects under negotiation have an estimated value of $US370 million.”

    Little of that money made it down under and the Gold Coast water tank stands largely unused as the Queensland and Federal governments failed to interest subsidy hungry movie producers.

    When governments win those subsidised productions the local industry has brief sugar rush as providers struggle to find caterers, crew and extras required to film Superman XVIII or the fourth remake of Herbie The Love Bug. After a few months, the big producer folds their tent and moves on to the next city that spent millions attracting the studios’ favours.

    Those involved in the big Hollywood production sadly go back to their day jobs and dreams of building careers in a vibrant local industry which has no chance of developing under the boom and bust cycle of major production attraction.

    And so the cycle goes. At least today’s Sydney accountants can tell their kids how they once stood next to Keanu Reeves as an extra on The Matrix.

    While Hollywood is the best organised at milking gullible governments, it isn’t just the film industry that pulls this scam off on taxpayers. If anything, the automobile manufacturers are probably the biggest beneficiary of government largess and produce more unloved bombs than the movie industry.

    What’s particularly notable when governments announce huge licks of money for multinational corporations is just how small support is for the local industry in comparison.

    A good example of this are the New South Wales film industry subsidies. The state’s Emerging Filmmakers Fund dispensed a grand $90,000 to local producers in 2012. This compares to the $6.6 million dollars spent by the state on attracting foreign productions.

    Even that $6.6 million number has to be treated with caution as major productions can be subsidised from the state’s Investment Attraction Scheme – a $77 million slush fund put aside for attracting ‘footloose’ multinational business operations.

    Generally payments from the IAS are ‘Commercial in Confidence’, or ‘Crooks in Collusion’ as some more cynical might put it, so it’s almost impossible for taxpayers to know how much has been lavished on attracting foreign businesses.

    What is clear though is the government subsidies for foreign operators, not just in the film industry, dwarf the support given to local businesses.

    During my short period working for the NSW Department of Trade and Investment more than one businessman asked me “why is your minister giving a slab of money to my overseas competitors rather than encouraging local businesses?”

    It’s difficult to find a diplomatic answer that doesn’t imply that political and public service leaders are blinding the glamour and prestige of being associated with rich multinational corporations.

    The real support local industries need is steady work producing products that play to their advantages, the sugar rushes of major movie productions or subsidised manufacturing only distort the market and may even damage the smaller local production companies as the wrong skillsets and infrastructure is built.

    Done strategically as part of a broader, long term plan targeted subsidies to global industry leaders can work, but unfortunately few of the movie industry incentives or investment attraction schemes have that sort of thinking underlying them.

    As budgets tighten with the deleveraging global economy, it’s going to be interesting to see how long governments can continue this sort of corporate welfare.

    Film clapper image courtesy of Chrisgr through SXC.hu

     

    Similar posts:

  • Can hyperlocal media work

    Can hyperlocal media work

    One of the hoped for futures of publishing was cheap, hyperlocal websites that report news on individual suburbs or neighbourhoods and get advertising from local businesses.

    Last week US TV network NBC abruptly closed down its Everyblock online service, leaving loyal users angry and bemused. Right now it appears though the hyperlocal concept isn’t working.

    The failure of Everyblock

    Founded five years ago, Everyblock had an interesting model of mashing up local data like Flickr pictures and government information with news so residents and visitors would have an accurate up-to-date picture of what was happening in their neighbourhood.

    Everyblock’s failure follows AOL’s struggle to get their hyperlocal play Patch working, although AOL reported in 2012 that Patch’s revenues have doubled.

    Whether that doubling is enough to save Patch remains to be seen, it’s quite clear that some question the sustainability of AOL’s growth in revenues and page views.

    All of this raises the question of why hyperlocal isn’t working.

    A game for amateurs

    The main reason is that there’s not enough money it –anybody who is going to run a hyperlocal site is going to be doing it for love or because there’s a dumb corporation burning shareholders’ equity on the venture.

    In most communities there simply aren’t enough advertisers interested to pay the bills and you can forget any paywalling.

    Most critically for local publishing ventures, the local advertising market has been suffocated by the web. Twenty years ago, the local plumber or cafe would hit most of their market by spending $2,000 on their Yellow Pages listing and probably double that with a weekly ad in the classified section of the local newspaper.

    Today, a web site with sufficient SEO smarts to come up on their first page of searches for their suburbs is enough, many can get away with a free Facebook or Google Plus for Business page, despite the dangers of using other people’s services to promote your business.

    For the telephone directories this change has been catastrophic while local newspapers only survive thanks to their less than healthy relationship with real estate agents.

    Local market failure

    The interesting thing with the evolving local media market is just how poorly the web giants have performed.

    Two years ago, Google appeared to have the sector sown up with the Google Places service but a combination of poor service, restrictive rules and an obsession with Google Plus have seen the company squander their advantage, leaving their local search service underused and irrelevant.

    Similarly, Facebook looked like they could take that market off Google but they too haven’t executed well.

    Which leaves local businesses reliant on their own websites and a hodge-potch of services like Yelp!, Tripadvisor and Urbanspoon.

    This doesn’t serve the business or the customer well.

    Where to for local news?

    A bigger question though is where do people go to find local news?

    Increasingly it looks like social media sites like Facebook and Twitter are the place as people see what their friends and neighbours post. It’s not great, but it’s better than the local newspapers increasingly stuffed with syndicated content with a few local stories from an overworked part-timer.

    It’s not clear that hyperlocal news has failed, but right now it’s not looking good. Perhaps it needs somebody with a truly disruptive model to find what works in our communities.

    image courtesy of davidlat on sxc.hu

    Similar posts: