Of course you can write about monads. But, can you defeat The Curse of the Monad? By which I mean that once one has gained an understanding of monads, they lose the ability to explain it to anyone else properly?
1. To help candidates get a foot in the door; i.e., to even get a response from the company they're applying to. The resume is often all the sourcer, recruiter, or hiring manager has to go on. Even if you know someone at your dream company who's willing to champion your candidacy, that person needs ammunition, primarily in the form of your resume, to campaign on your behalf.
2. They frame the conversation. The people chosen to interview a candidate, the questions they ask, and the internal discussions about comp and career expectations are all framed on the back of the resume.
An accurate resume is nice to have even if you're not applying for work. I keep my resume and LinkedIn roughly up to date so that when I meet someone in a professional context (when I'm interviewing a candidate, meeting a sales rep or vendor, etc.), they can quickly see my background. I find it helpful when the folks across the table have done likewise.
so, i assume you believe that traditional resumes still provide value / high-signal. where does LI sit in here or github profiles / stackxchange... etc... are they not also "resumes" but not in the traditional form?
Those sites are certainly part of our online footprints, but resumes are special. A candidate's resume is effectively their textual avatar throughout the recruiting process. Each company's Applicant Tracking Systems stores and displays a snapshot of each candidate's resume, and every manager who looks in the ATS starts with the resume. The resume is effectively a gatekeeper: It can link to GitHub, etc., but hiring managers will never even follow those links if the resume doesn't make the candidate look viable.
LinkedIn has the most overlap with the resume, but unlike a resume, it doubles as a place to share data with colleagues (often at different companies) even when we're not looking for new jobs. For example, if I see that a business partner worked at the same large company I did, then we can use familiar terminology and other shared experiences from that company.
Of course you can write about monads. But, can you defeat The Curse of the Monad? By which I mean that once one has gained an understanding of monads, they lose the ability to explain it to anyone else properly?
I guess we can out the hard way!
do you feel resumes still carry real "weight" in the industry?
Yes, in exactly two ways that matter:
1. To help candidates get a foot in the door; i.e., to even get a response from the company they're applying to. The resume is often all the sourcer, recruiter, or hiring manager has to go on. Even if you know someone at your dream company who's willing to champion your candidacy, that person needs ammunition, primarily in the form of your resume, to campaign on your behalf.
2. They frame the conversation. The people chosen to interview a candidate, the questions they ask, and the internal discussions about comp and career expectations are all framed on the back of the resume.
An accurate resume is nice to have even if you're not applying for work. I keep my resume and LinkedIn roughly up to date so that when I meet someone in a professional context (when I'm interviewing a candidate, meeting a sales rep or vendor, etc.), they can quickly see my background. I find it helpful when the folks across the table have done likewise.
so, i assume you believe that traditional resumes still provide value / high-signal. where does LI sit in here or github profiles / stackxchange... etc... are they not also "resumes" but not in the traditional form?
Those sites are certainly part of our online footprints, but resumes are special. A candidate's resume is effectively their textual avatar throughout the recruiting process. Each company's Applicant Tracking Systems stores and displays a snapshot of each candidate's resume, and every manager who looks in the ATS starts with the resume. The resume is effectively a gatekeeper: It can link to GitHub, etc., but hiring managers will never even follow those links if the resume doesn't make the candidate look viable.
LinkedIn has the most overlap with the resume, but unlike a resume, it doubles as a place to share data with colleagues (often at different companies) even when we're not looking for new jobs. For example, if I see that a business partner worked at the same large company I did, then we can use familiar terminology and other shared experiences from that company.