TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
This sort of thing depends a lot on the company. If you think tool fixation is a thing of the past, think again. In the past few months there must have been a dozen times I've heard something like "Oh, you haven't worked with Tool X - sorry, we can't use you." Or "Well, you do have Tool Y on your resume but we want someone who's used it for 4 years and you've only used it for 2 years - sorry, better luck elsewhere."
A lot of times, companies get their procedures wrapped around using one particular tool. From then on they insist on people with a lot of experience with that tool because everyone is used to dealing with it - their entire process is based on knowing what to put into it and dealing with what comes out of it. They're afraid of what might happen if they try something else. That is just as prevalent today as it ever was.
All things considered, I think it's probably better to include all the tool mentions that you logically can. Sometimes, mention of a tool can date you too much. But I think problems coming from doing that are less likely than problems coming from not listing tools. Suppose you haven't used Novell Netware since it was DOS-based. If you put "Netware 2.1" on your resume, you've dated yourself out of the running. But, there's nothing that says you have to indicate the version on your resume. If they want to know they can ask you, and there's a chance they won't.
I figure on applying for any job I think I could do, regardless of how much time with tools they specify. Maybe my resume will be read by someone other than the guy who prepared the ad that describe the position requirements. Sometimes the ad is prepared by people who don't know that much about the actual production process, so they get it wrong when they put down the years-required figures. Maybe if I have less experience with a tool than they want, they may get interested anyway because they may think they can me you at a lower rate. At least that might get some contact started. Small chance is better than none.
Since the whole thing about what you put on a resume is about getting a foot in the door, I figure a resume should list everything that might knock at a frequency they can hear.
--- On Tue, 3/16/10, Janoff, Steve <Steve -dot- Janoff -at- Teradata -dot- com> wrote:
> From: Janoff, Steve <Steve -dot- Janoff -at- Teradata -dot- com>
> Subject: RE: How do hiring companies view TW resumes?
> To: "Peter Neilson" <neilson -at- windstream -dot- net>, "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
> Date: Tuesday, March 16, 2010, 3:03 PM
> Larger issue that this addresses to
> me is being misunderstood in an
> interview, whether with HR or someone else toward the front
> end of the
> process, and feeling like Josef K. from "The Trial."
>
> Years ago I used to have a section on my resume with legacy
> tools, and
> someone would see vi or TeX and go, "Oh, you used
> TeX? I *love* TeX! I
> used to use that..." and we'd have this great conversation
> about how
> wonderful TeX or vi was. Didn't guarantee I'd get the
> job but it made
> the process more pleasant and got me in some doors.
>
> I shortened the resume over the years (it's now 1 page),
> and there was a
> period where I'd agonize over whether to remove a tool or
> not. For
> example, I'd remove RoboHELP and the very next recruiter or
> HR person
> would say, "We're looking for someone with RoboHELP
> experience, sorry."
> And then you start explaining, "But I... but... but... 5
> years...
> but..." -- too late. Or you take out a term that's
> too
> military-oriented and then turns out they want that.
> Then you put it
> back in and for space reasons take out another one that you
> think is
> dated and then the next person wants exactly that.
>
> And years ago they were so hung up on tools that if you
> didn't have
> exactly the number of years they wanted on exactly the
> version they
> wanted, you were out. We're only using 10% of the
> power of any of these
> tools, if that. Later versions amplify the other
> 90%. Probably the
> best job I ever got, the ad said years of JavaScript
> experience and I
> wasn't as confident about that, and almost didn't
> apply. I plowed
> through and ended up getting the job, and ended up using
> almost NO
> JavaScript on the job.
>
> There's just no rhyme or reason to the whole thing.
> That's why it pays
> to just network like crazy and get the inside track, and
> get to know
> your peers in hiring positions -- 5 years down the line,
> they may want
> to bring you over to their shop.
>
> Steve
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: techwr-l-bounces+steve -dot- janoff=teradata -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> [mailto:techwr-l-bounces+steve -dot- janoff=teradata -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com]
> On Behalf Of Peter Neilson
> Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2010 5:24 AM
> To: TECHWR-L
> Subject: How do hiring companies view TW resumes?
>
> My resume necessarily contains many arcane terms, some of
> which are
> flagged by MS Word as spelling errors. (Y'all's resumes
> have the same
> feature, of course.) Personally, I use MS Word's spelling
> correction
> magno cum grano salis, but I've just discovered, to my
> surprise, that
> some HR departments might be judging the soundness of a
> writer's ability
> by MS Word's count of misspellings in his resume.
>
> An agent at a placement firm asked me, "There seems to be a
> spelling
> error here, the word 'emergy'. That should be energy,
> right?" The word
> itself is cute, esoteric and unfortunate, but it was indeed
> the subject
> of a thesis that I helped a PhD candidate rewrite.
>
> I had a sinking feeling that my rejection for "perfect" job
> matches,
> getting no interview where it was rather clear to me that I
> was the most
> appropriate candidate, could be from my inability to spell
> that word
> "correctly."
>
> The next version of my resume will omit it.
>
> Does anyone else have evidence that HR people might be so
> misaligned
> with reality as to assume that they can spell technical
> terms better
> than tech writers?
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Use Doc-To-Help's XML-based editor, Microsoft Word, or HTML
> and
> produce desktop, Web, or print deliverables. Just write (or
> import)
> and Doc-To-Help does the rest. Free trial: http://www.doctohelp.com
>
> Explore CAREER options and paths related to Technical
> Writing,
> learn to create SOFTWARE REQUIREMENTS documents, and
> get tips on FUNCTIONAL SPECIFICATION best practices. Free
> at:
>http://www.ModernAnalyst.com
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as klhra -at- yahoo -dot- com -dot-
>
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/klhra%40yahoo.com
>
>
> To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>
> Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
> Visit
>http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.
>
> Please move off-topic discussions to the Chat list, at:
>http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/listinfo/techwr-l-chat
>
>
Use Doc-To-Help's XML-based editor, Microsoft Word, or HTML and
produce desktop, Web, or print deliverables. Just write (or import)
and Doc-To-Help does the rest. Free trial: http://www.doctohelp.com
Explore CAREER options and paths related to Technical Writing,
learn to create SOFTWARE REQUIREMENTS documents, and
get tips on FUNCTIONAL SPECIFICATION best practices. Free at: http://www.ModernAnalyst.com
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
