I just refused a job applicant simply because they had bad writing in their resume ("I have advance knowledge ..."), although their skillset actually looked relevant. I've done it before, will likely do it again. Is that unfair?
Not at all... if part of the job they're applying for requires good communication skills. (And these days, even the most heads-down programmer needs that... bug reports, support docs, etc.)
That said, I think grammatical errors from an ESL speaker aren't the be-all end-all of good communication. It would really depend on what else I had to go on. Was there a cover letter? "Responsibilities" section of his/her resume?
Often extremely clear thinkers more than compensate for non-native language skills with incisive, compelling expression.
tl:dr Bad writing (communication) is just cause for putting a resume to the side. But one-off grammatical errors wouldn't be the only think I'd go on.
I've seen many resumes that contain 1 or 2 small grammatical errors or typos. I don't get too hung up on those.
However, if the resume is poorly constructed overall, I usually won't choose that candidate for further consideration.
Every part of our jobs todays involves communications with others. I personally HATE chat-speak in email. "R u going 2 lunch 2day" drives me fucking bonkers, and I don't care if you're typing it on a phone where you have to tap 2 wires together to spell out the message in morse code. So, for me, I really don't want to interact with someone where every other communication is likely to make me want to strangle them. Similarly, even if they have poor English, I don't want people to require a decoder-ring to dissect their every message.
So, depending on the exact details of the resume, I would have probably done the same thing. The exceptions tend to be when you require a particular skill set that seems to be most predominant in someone that is not a native English speaker. EG: if I were hiring an expert on Russian social networks, I would not expect to find an ideal candidate that didn't also make some grammatical errors at times.
Since you're trying to hire developers, you are undoubtedly aware that roughly 100% of the people who apply for your job are completely unqualified to program computers. Anything you can do to narrow that stack of 300 incompetents down to the 4 you can actually interview is worth doing.
So yes, ditch anybody who can't be bothered to proofread their resume. As other people have said, communication is an important skill for a developer. You have in your hands proof that they're not particularly good at it. Toss it and move on.
I think this is the key issue for me. My wife is a PhD but admits that she can't spell. However, she has others look over any important documents or emails before sending them out. Someone who won't do this for something as important as a job application communicates (to me) either arrogance or troubling lack of self-awareness of their weaknesses.
Somewhat. They might not be a native English speaker, and granted while some would argue that should be mentioned very early or at least at all, I tend to say what employers ought to be looking for are the things that directly impact the candidates ability to prove they're worth the salary the position offers. This does involve communication, but it's not, nor should it serve as a be-all-end-all.
If nothing else, it's worth it to the employer and the employee to invest in a course audit at a local university to help improve those skills. You might be surprised to see if that helps improve retention and reduce the attrition of human capital. Especially if you include those types of programs to your organization to improve key skills.
If someone claims they have "excellent verbal and written communication skills" and then has a litany of spelling and grammar errors in their application, it goes to the circular file.
It doesn't take much to have another person review the thing for correctness. If you don't know anyone who can, spend the money to have a professional check it over.
It's not unfair and I've done the same thing. A resume is the first impression you give to a prospective employer; if you can't bother to make sure the details are right on it, how likely are you to bother with details on all the projects you'll be doing over time when the boss isn't necessarily looking over your shoulder?
That said, "I have advance knowledge..." isn't necessarily incorrect, if they are talking about their prophetic talents and not their level of expertise. :)
If you were hiring them to write documentation, then yes. If you were hiring them to understand and build complex systems, where the occasional grammar error in a comment is not only forgiveable but extremely likely, then your nitpicking may have just cost you a good candidate.
My resume gets tailored as often as once per application, and the occasional mistake does end up on there. I fix them when I find them, but I expect their presence should not impact the essence of the resume for a manager with a clear understanding of the requirements they're hiring for.
> but I expect their presence should not impact the essence of the resume for a manager with a clear understanding of the requirements they're hiring for.
I read that as: if you're not prepared to get the details right when you're applying for the job why should I expect you'll get the details right when you're on the job?
Why stack the odds against yourself? Given two equivalent candidates, one who appears (by virtue of their application) to get the details right and the other doesn't, I'm going to pick the former.
Making technology do things for people is a highly-complex skill, the foremost part of which is communication, not programming. (Sucks to say that, though. In our hearts I think all programmers would like programming to be some kind of super-intellectual puzzle. But it's really more along the lines of understanding other people, then making yourself understood, then finally going through a bit of technical fun)
Communication Skills should be evaluated as a part the total sum evaluation. When going through a stack of resumes, I look for clarity, not grammar, and if I can spot your spelling mistakes, you're in trouble. :)
Communication gaps are like any other quality/time/scope/cost factor when managing people. If the lack of language skills aren't counterbalanced by brilliance in other areas, you'll end up with a net loss in investing in the employee.
Evaluating whether the poor language skills is a sign of being lazy, hasty, arrogant or simply from another native language group, you could miss a good deal of other high-value talents.
When all candidates alike have to write Greek or Latin
verse, it is relatively easy to decide which verse is the
best. Men thus selected on their classical performance were
then sent forth to govern India. Those with lower marks
were retained to govern England.
The current "system" for getting hired might be arbitary and unrelated to programming ability, but it does at least present a consistent and knowable environment in which candidates have to operate. So you have to question the judgement of someone who makes basic errors like this.
Are good writing skills a requirement of this position?
I'm sure pretty much everyone here has worked with people, who don't know how to write English worth a damn. For example in my last job I worked with this Scandinavian dude, whose written English was atrocious. It was so bad we made jokes about it (with him, not at him). I had to repeatedly correct his writing.
But the dude was a brilliant technologist. Innovative, incredible work ethic and he just got s* done at an unbeliavable pace. The projects we were working on were much better off with him than without him.
If there is a huge stack of resumes and the chances of finding the right fit is good, then no harm to you.
But if (like everyone else) you are looking through a huge pile of chaff for the one right person who may not even be in the pile, then you are doing it wrong.
Nitpicking grammer, or paper color choice, or resume-writing skills in general, is probably not the critical skill your job requires (unless you are starting WriteYourResumeHere.co of course).
Good communication trumps good programming skills. As for non-native speakers, they tend to get a native speaker have a look over their CV or provide a CV in their native language.
If they have no native-lang CV which you could understand, you will almost certainly have troubles communicating with them, which means no hire. If they didn't go through the trouble of getting a native English speaker to edit their CV, then how badly do they really want the job anyways?
In my experience most of the programmers I know and consider to be very talented also have good writing skills, at least in their native language. When I meet a programmer who writes poorly I immediately suspect they're not going to program well either.
However, I'm willing to concede that I might be engaging in a bit of stereotyping. I'm not sure your actions can be legally or even logically justified, but I can say that I would probably do the same thing.
Sometimes it's worth doing a phone interview, as applicants with English as a second language may just have significantly worse written skills than spoken. As long as they can communicate verbally, then it might not be that relevant. I am assuming that you're all working at the same geographic location, thus making talking way more important than email.
One word for you: foreigners (or people that English is not their main language).
Very capable, very smart and awesome to work with (most of the time), but can make some silly mistakes when writting in english... Specially on things that a spell checker wouldn't catch.
Not unfair, but you could miss a lot of good people by doing that.
Short answer: No.
Long answer: Yes.
Correct Answer: It's a poor question. Given the limited data you provided, anyone here passing judgement is basing it off insufficient information. Furthermore, the information provided (a typo) doesn't make the described situation ("bad writing"). Furthermore, you provide no information regarding the candidate.
Anyone giving you an answer is doing so without all the information. Expecting an answer after providing such limited information is unreasonable.
It's not insufficient information. I've disregarded resumes before because of a single typo. Usually in situations where I have more than enough candidates to choose from, but still. A one page document that is your primary and in some cases sole reference upon which to have an employer judge you, should be proofread multiple times and should have no errors. There's really no excuse. If you don't have sufficient skill to ensure there are no errors by proofreading it yourself, then have someone who can ensure that proofread it. Come on, it is the single major document you give to someone to evaluate your potential as an employee, and in most cases it is (or should be) a single page, so it's not like you're editing a book here. "Attention to detail" is not only important, it's crucial when evaluating an employee. Even one typo on a resume can demonstrate a lack of that vital skill. I wouldn't blame someone for overlooking the error or not, it's a judgment call, but as to whether it's "unfair" to toss someone's resume because of it, the answer is unquestionably NO, it is not unfair.
[+] [-] howardtharp|15 years ago|reply
That said, I think grammatical errors from an ESL speaker aren't the be-all end-all of good communication. It would really depend on what else I had to go on. Was there a cover letter? "Responsibilities" section of his/her resume?
Often extremely clear thinkers more than compensate for non-native language skills with incisive, compelling expression.
tl:dr Bad writing (communication) is just cause for putting a resume to the side. But one-off grammatical errors wouldn't be the only think I'd go on.
[+] [-] petervandijck|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] brk|15 years ago|reply
I've seen many resumes that contain 1 or 2 small grammatical errors or typos. I don't get too hung up on those.
However, if the resume is poorly constructed overall, I usually won't choose that candidate for further consideration.
Every part of our jobs todays involves communications with others. I personally HATE chat-speak in email. "R u going 2 lunch 2day" drives me fucking bonkers, and I don't care if you're typing it on a phone where you have to tap 2 wires together to spell out the message in morse code. So, for me, I really don't want to interact with someone where every other communication is likely to make me want to strangle them. Similarly, even if they have poor English, I don't want people to require a decoder-ring to dissect their every message.
So, depending on the exact details of the resume, I would have probably done the same thing. The exceptions tend to be when you require a particular skill set that seems to be most predominant in someone that is not a native English speaker. EG: if I were hiring an expert on Russian social networks, I would not expect to find an ideal candidate that didn't also make some grammatical errors at times.
[+] [-] jasonkester|15 years ago|reply
Since you're trying to hire developers, you are undoubtedly aware that roughly 100% of the people who apply for your job are completely unqualified to program computers. Anything you can do to narrow that stack of 300 incompetents down to the 4 you can actually interview is worth doing.
So yes, ditch anybody who can't be bothered to proofread their resume. As other people have said, communication is an important skill for a developer. You have in your hands proof that they're not particularly good at it. Toss it and move on.
[+] [-] teach|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] iamdave|15 years ago|reply
If nothing else, it's worth it to the employer and the employee to invest in a course audit at a local university to help improve those skills. You might be surprised to see if that helps improve retention and reduce the attrition of human capital. Especially if you include those types of programs to your organization to improve key skills.
[+] [-] petervandijck|15 years ago|reply
Really, you think that's worth it?
[+] [-] paulhart|15 years ago|reply
It doesn't take much to have another person review the thing for correctness. If you don't know anyone who can, spend the money to have a professional check it over.
[+] [-] pzxc|15 years ago|reply
That said, "I have advance knowledge..." isn't necessarily incorrect, if they are talking about their prophetic talents and not their level of expertise. :)
[+] [-] forgotusername|15 years ago|reply
My resume gets tailored as often as once per application, and the occasional mistake does end up on there. I fix them when I find them, but I expect their presence should not impact the essence of the resume for a manager with a clear understanding of the requirements they're hiring for.
[+] [-] follower|15 years ago|reply
I read that as: if you're not prepared to get the details right when you're applying for the job why should I expect you'll get the details right when you're on the job?
Why stack the odds against yourself? Given two equivalent candidates, one who appears (by virtue of their application) to get the details right and the other doesn't, I'm going to pick the former.
But then again, I'm not a manager. :)
[+] [-] petervandijck|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] DanielBMarkham|15 years ago|reply
You did the right thing.
[+] [-] JoeAltmaier|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|15 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] eengstrom|15 years ago|reply
Communication gaps are like any other quality/time/scope/cost factor when managing people. If the lack of language skills aren't counterbalanced by brilliance in other areas, you'll end up with a net loss in investing in the employee.
Evaluating whether the poor language skills is a sign of being lazy, hasty, arrogant or simply from another native language group, you could miss a good deal of other high-value talents.
[+] [-] d4nt|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|15 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] gorbachev|15 years ago|reply
I'm sure pretty much everyone here has worked with people, who don't know how to write English worth a damn. For example in my last job I worked with this Scandinavian dude, whose written English was atrocious. It was so bad we made jokes about it (with him, not at him). I had to repeatedly correct his writing.
But the dude was a brilliant technologist. Innovative, incredible work ethic and he just got s* done at an unbeliavable pace. The projects we were working on were much better off with him than without him.
[+] [-] petervandijck|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JoeAltmaier|15 years ago|reply
If there is a huge stack of resumes and the chances of finding the right fit is good, then no harm to you.
But if (like everyone else) you are looking through a huge pile of chaff for the one right person who may not even be in the pile, then you are doing it wrong.
Nitpicking grammer, or paper color choice, or resume-writing skills in general, is probably not the critical skill your job requires (unless you are starting WriteYourResumeHere.co of course).
[+] [-] nikreiman|15 years ago|reply
If they have no native-lang CV which you could understand, you will almost certainly have troubles communicating with them, which means no hire. If they didn't go through the trouble of getting a native English speaker to edit their CV, then how badly do they really want the job anyways?
[+] [-] compay|15 years ago|reply
However, I'm willing to concede that I might be engaging in a bit of stereotyping. I'm not sure your actions can be legally or even logically justified, but I can say that I would probably do the same thing.
[+] [-] unknown|15 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] ceilingfish|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sucuri2|15 years ago|reply
Very capable, very smart and awesome to work with (most of the time), but can make some silly mistakes when writting in english... Specially on things that a spell checker wouldn't catch.
Not unfair, but you could miss a lot of good people by doing that.
[+] [-] petervandijck|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] DjDarkman|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Ben_Dean|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] damoncali|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jasonlotito|15 years ago|reply
Short answer: No. Long answer: Yes. Correct Answer: It's a poor question. Given the limited data you provided, anyone here passing judgement is basing it off insufficient information. Furthermore, the information provided (a typo) doesn't make the described situation ("bad writing"). Furthermore, you provide no information regarding the candidate.
Anyone giving you an answer is doing so without all the information. Expecting an answer after providing such limited information is unreasonable.
[+] [-] pzxc|15 years ago|reply