Want To Work For a Cool Tech Company? Hone Your Social Skills

jfruh writes Big companies like Google may need to fill seats with high-skilled workers, but smaller companies — which often fit the profile of the hip workplaces people dream of — still have the luxury of picking and choosing. That's why applicants' social skills and "cultural fit" are so important, which may shatter your dreams of tech as a clique-free meritocracy.

Comments

I'll never be employed

[Anonymous Coward]

I like people well enough, but I'm a Morlock, not an Eloi. I want to get things done, not gab with your about the brats you spawned to replace yourself.

Re: I'll never be employed

[Anonymous Coward]

Sigh...then the Empire has already won...

Re:I'll never be employed

[cayenne8]

Seriously....develop a bit of personality, learn to get along with others, and develop some people skills.

It will often carry you much further than just being the best technically.

I've seen it over and over in my professional career and even with myself. At many jobs, I've been the least qualified as far as pure, hard core tech skills, but having people skills, being outgoing, and NOT being afraid to stand up in front of even a small group to give a presentation has carried me further than many people I knew starting out, and knew the tech far more than I did or still do.

It will help you get your foot in the door on many interviews, and it will carry you in the company quite often. You can't be an idiot and no clue about the technical skills required, but if you aren't the #1 tech stud in the group, having people skills can actually make you a stand out that will get promoted and allow you to progress in your career.

And , it also helps you get laid a bit more too, but that's a different thread.

Re:I'll never be employed

[gatkinso]

You would love it at NSA. Assuming you walk your talk and 1) actually get stuff done, and 2) you aren't a degenerate.

Re:I'll never be employed

[Anonymous Coward]

Drew? Is that you?

Re:I'll never be employed

[frank_adrian314159]

Hmmm... Never got past (2) - or at least what seems to pass for (2) in the TLA's eyes. Didn't care much. I guess that means I'm even more of a degenerate.

Re:I'll never be employed

[Sneftel]

...having people skills, being outgoing, and NOT being afraid to stand up in front of even a small group to give a presentation has carried me further than many people I knew starting out, and knew the tech far more than I did or still do.

That's a key point. I've known a lot of hugely gifted yet socially inept coders, who took their fear of personal interactions and reinterpreted it as disdain for the hoi polloi, and decided that the skills within their comfort zone were all they ever needed. And their employers saw them coming a mile away, and let them carve out their tiny moated kingdoms, for crap wages and zero upward mobility. The "genius nerd in his nerd cave" career track is a comfortable one. But it is so limiting.

Re:I'll never be employed

[Buck Feta]

I like people well enough, but I'm a Morlock, not an Eloi. I want to get things done, not gab with your about the brats you spawned to replace yourself.

Right on, man! (or woman!). I like your personality type. I think it adds to the cultural diversity of a workplace. Many places I've worked have had the person who "tells it like it is", and mostly, unless they're overtly hostile, people appreciate someone like you and learn to get along. "That Bruce is such a grump." "I know - I showed him a picture of my kid and he said 'I don't care about your kid'. He's such a character!" Seriously, a team comprised of diverse personalities may even be more productive than a team of people who all just want to show eachother pictures of their kids all the time. Be productive and don't rock the boat - don't be someone you're not.

Re:I'll never be employed

[Sneftel]

(the inability to get laid being not the least of those limitations)

Re:I'll never be employed

[Anonymous Coward]

(the inability to get laid being not the least of those limitations)

I am the sole definition of an introvert and despite what people say about the institution of marriage, I managed it. I'm not picking up girls at the bar (never did that actually) but I'm able to procreate and engage in various recreational activities related to that. My social skills where horrible, but there are women out there that will teach you if you let them.

Re:I'll never be employed

[davydagger]

I am pretty sure the NSA/Government/Mainstream concept of "degenerate" includes most wierdo geek types, slowly being kicked out of their own scene in favor of some dumb hipster broprogrammer shitheads.

Re: I'll never be employed

[donscarletti]

Great. You'll be pleased to know that the "cultural fit" referred to above is codeword for weeding out anyone with life commitments they would consider more important than work.

45 with three kids? No worries! Hope you like pizza fuelled all night gaming marathons and our monthly team trip to Vegas! Oh, you don't? Sorry, you aren't a cultural fit.

I'd decry the practice if I didn't know that I would do the exact same thing if it was my own money on the line. If you want success you need obsessive commitment from every layer. The only reason one would compromise would be if one simply couldn't find enough talented workers any other way. Experience goes a long way, one 40 year old bachelor or divorcee for every ten 20 year old virgins will keep the team functioning as if they were all greybeards. Diversity can be achieved by hiring some Indians and Asians too. There is no economic reason to hire someone who has interests outside of work over someone who doesn't.

Re:I'll never be employed

[gatkinso]

Clearly you are not familiar with the freakshow that is the NSA.

Re:I'll never be employed

[buddyglass]

Excellent. You sound like someone I wouldn't want to work with. Luckily, so long as you remain un (or self) employed we can both have our way.

Re:I'll never be employed

[Anonymous Coward]

(the inability to get laid being not the least of those limitations)

I am the sole definition of an introvert and despite what people say about the institution of marriage, I managed it. I'm not picking up girls at the bar (never did that actually) but I'm able to procreate and engage in various recreational activities related to that. My social skills where horrible, but there are women out there that will teach you if you pay them.

FTFY!
  I kid, I kid. Just seemed to good a bad joke to pass up. :-)

Re: I'll never be employed

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not that easy, I'm great in a technical stand point however I have no people skills. Anxiety and the pressure one puts on themself to try to be social is tough and strenuous to do. Be happy you find it easy to be social

Re:I'll never be employed

[ayesnymous]

having people skills can actually make you a stand out that will get promoted and allow you to progress in your career.

That's what people here DON'T want. They don't want to be promoted. They want to stay with coding forever.

Re: I'll never be employed

[buddyglass]

45 with three kids? No worries! Hope you like pizza fuelled all night gaming marathons and our monthly team trip to Vegas! Oh, you don't? Sorry, you aren't a cultural fit.

Fine by me if that's the criterion they want to use, so long as there are also companies out there refusing to hire young "rockster" devs who crave all-night gaming marathons and monthly team trips to Vegas in favor of 45 year-olds with kids. Honestly, if I applied at the company you describe, I'd be glad if they weeded me out due to "culture fit". It would save me the trouble of being hired then having to quit because of their ridiculous company culture.

Re: I'll never be employed

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not that easy, I'm great in a technical stand point however I have no people skills. Anxiety and the pressure one puts on themself to try to be social is tough and strenuous to do. Be happy you find it easy to be social

That's an incredibly self-defeating statement. Social skills are learned just like your coding skills are. You may never be a world-class entertainer and storyteller, but being able to meet someone, shake their hand, and engage in a few minutes of small talk and crack a joke or two is a learnable skill for anybody who decides to try.

Want to know the secret? Ask the other person open-ended questions about themselves. Just meeting them? Try any of these on: "Where you from? Are you married? How long? Any kids? Where'd you go to school? How long you been working at ? Any interesting projects you're working on currently?"

Once you've started them talking about themselves, pursue threads with more open-ended questions, and feel free to share some of your own stories and information in the process. That's known as a conversation, and you've just managed to have one.

Now, you'll probably say, "Oh but I don't CARE about that crap, it's just meaningless social boring shit about their ridiculous SPAWN and their ridiculous lives, and who cares." And if that's you response, then I'll say: lose your fucking ego. You're not that impressive or that important or that special that your life is any more interesting. If you can't sit there and tolerate 10 minutes of chat with a random person who you have no reason to dislike, then you're behaving like a sociopathic prima donna. Prejudging everybody you meet as "boring, not worth talking to, has nothing worth saying," is cutting you out of a lot of interesting and rewarding friendships and acquaintances in life.

But if you're willing to actually try, I just gave you an easy recipe for making small talk. Now go develop your social skills.

Re: I'll never be employed

[Anonymous Coward]

My current company is actually the exact opposite of that culture: we're a successful, fast-growing startup in the storage industry - in the past year, we've tripled in size in headcount and sales, far faster than any "similar" company we've been able to find information about.

And still, most of the engineers leave between 5 and 6 to go home and have dinner with their family and do other family things like that. We're a "mature" culture: people come into work between 8:30 and 9, get a shitload of work done because they're not gabbing all day and playing foosball, and then go home, spend time with their families, and often spend a couple hours online working after the kids have gone to bed.

45 with three kids? We've got at least 8 engineers that fit that description. Pizza-fueled all night marathons? Two engineers I can think of fit that description, and they're widely considered the "grumpy misfits" in our organization. They're smart, and they're good at what they do, but they're the unmarried gamers who everybody else smiles at and says "oh I remember those days."

Cultural fit works both ways - if you're a 45 year old with 3 kids, there's still plenty of successful companies that will allow you to have interests outside of work. But if your company values mid-day beer bashes that leave everybody doing nothing for 2 hours every afternoon, then yes, you're going to encourage a culture where family is incompatible. That doesn't describe every company though.

Re: I'll never be employed

[Anonymous Coward]

So 9 hours a day at work, plus some hours of work at home? I wouldn't do that even before I got any kids.

Re:I'll never be employed

[BVis]

I don't understand the downmods. This is a legitimate thing; I personally would much rather be a coder for the balance of my career than get pushed into a lead/management role where I'd be miserable and ineffective. Sure, I could probably learn enough to fake it, but it's not what I want to do. It's career-limiting, sure, but does it have to be that way? Doesn't actually doing useful work mean anything anymore? Is engineering turning into marketing? Do we want technical decisions to really be made based on who plays golf with whom?

I thought I left cliques and the "popular kids" bullshit back in high school. Why drag it into the workplace unless you don't have the actual skills to prove your usefulness even if you don't do the glad-handing presentation-to-pinhead-managers-who-wont-understand-it schmoozing-to-get-stuff-approved-instead-of-on-the-ideas-merits thing?

"People skills" are for MBAs and useless non-technical managers. They have their place, but that's not in the trenches where actual work gets done. Coders should be polite, reasonably groomed, with a useful attitude in meetings etc. but asking them to do the "people skills" thing is counter-productive and a waste of time and talent. Any time a coder spends cultivating his "people skills" is time they could be doing something more directly related to their job, like actual work.

Re: I'll never be employed

[TheRaven64]

Social skills are learned just like your coding skills are. You may never be a world-class entertainer and storyteller, but being able to meet someone, shake their hand, and engage in a few minutes of small talk and crack a joke or two is a learnable skill for anybody who decides to try.

Neil deGrasse Tyson made a great point in a (relatively old) video someone posted here last week: You can always become better at something. You might not ever become great at it, but if you practice then you can always become better.

Re:I'll never be employed

[jedidiah]

As a freak, I have always found it much easier to fit in with the small companies. It's the larger companies with all of the political nonsense and high degree of specialization that push your tech skills to the back burner.

Smaller companies have fewer of the kind of people that require better social skills to deal with.

Re:I'll never be employed

[Anonymous Coward]

I am Doctor Alexander Hartigan, you insensitive clod!

Just another reason

[deodiaus2]

to get rid of you.
but if you are valuable enough, then they will overlook issues.

Skilled Introverted programmers need not apply

[Anonymous Coward]

how discriminatory :(

but hey, natural selection/self-fulfilling prophecy for them I guess.

Re:Skilled Introverted programmers need not apply

[dbrueck]

Nah, you can be /somewhat/ introverted and still do well. But the fact of the matter is that social skills *are* crucial. It's not discriminatory, it's business, and a person who can't communicate well, who can't interact well, is a net negative, no matter how awesome a coder they are. It's not fair to the business and it's not fair to the rest of the team to have to "deal" with the guy or gal who just can't mesh with the team.

I've wasted so much time dealing with prima donnas and socially inept "geniuses" that I don't hire either these days. The very first interview is always a personality interview, and if I struggle seeing the person fitting in with the rest of the team, I don't even bother moving on to a technical/skills phase of the interview.

That doesn't mean we don't hire people that just geek out on tech, but they are people who are passionate but also kind of laid back, people with a good sense of humor, people who can express themselves clearly and can communicate well, people who don't get offended when someone disagrees with them, people just cocky enough to take some risks but who aren't arrogant - they have individual humility while still being very bullish on what they can do to help the team.

If a candidate doesn't have these qualities, then I genuinely don't care if they are the greatest developer in the history of the world - without the right personality type, they are just too much of a hassle and I pass on them and let them be some other company's problem.

Re:Skilled Introverted programmers need not apply

[Anonymous Coward]

Why are you are equating introverted personalities with an inability to communicate? Why are you equating them with primadonnas?

Re:Skilled Introverted programmers need not apply

[dbrueck]

*sigh* I wasn't. Read the article, then the parent subject line. I was saying that the more general issue is finding people who can be the right fit for a team, regardless of their skill level.

So that disqualifies various sets of people - those who are so extremely introverted that they can't interact with the rest of the team very well, those who are poor communicators, those who are prima donnas, and those who have poor reading comprehension.

Re:Skilled Introverted programmers need not apply

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm, employers picking and choosing candidates on a whim, wonder what that might say about the tech labor market. You would think with the massive shortage of skilled workers we keep hearing about they'd take anyone with a cs degree and a pulse!

Re:Skilled Introverted programmers need not apply

[dbrueck]

Oh, it's not on a whim at all. It's the realization that the degree to which a person can work well with, communicate with, interact with, etc. (basically, "fit in with") others is massively important, so much so that if a person is too lacking in those areas then it's better for your team and for your business to not hire them, no matter how good they look on paper.

Re:Skilled Introverted programmers need not apply

[jedidiah]

There are so many candidates that have such an obvious lack of any technical skill or talent, that companies really can't turn away people that are actually able to do the work. Perhaps this is part of the perception that there is some sort of "shortage". They want an ideal perfect fit but that simply doesn't exist.

If I could "do it all" I would not let someone else exploit my labor. I would work for myself and keep most of the value of my skill for myself instead of letting someone else take it.

Re:Skilled Introverted programmers need not apply

[dbrueck]

I turn away people who are qualified (in terms of technical skill) but don't pass the personality test *all the time*.

In the past month alone I've passed on 2 candidates who were very technically competent, but one could barely carry on a conversation and the other was obnoxiously arrogant and smug.

OTOH in the past 4-5 months I've hired about a dozen developers who have a variety of skill levels but are just great to be around and to work with - they have a good work-life balance, they aren't easily offended, they're personable and team-oriented.

It's not at all about finding a "perfect" fit but is about weighing all factors that matter, and things like communicating, being personable, and other social skills are *crucial* to success. Of course it doesn't mean you hire people that are fun to be around but are lousy developers, but it also doesn't mean that you jeopardize the team and/or the business by bringing on someone you have to constantly "deal with" in some way or another. Everyone has their quirks and off days, I'm not talking about that, but people that have to be coddled or who are hyper-sensitive or contentious or can't articulate thoughts or have a normal discussion - it's nearly impossible for really good technical skill to outweigh those kinds of drawbacks.

And for the record, while I agree that there are oodles of crummy candidates out there, I'm also skeptical there is some sort of widespread shortage - we don't seem to have trouble finding candidates that range from "very good" to "superstar" and everything in between.

Re:Skilled Introverted programmers need not apply

[mccrew]

Hiring is necessarily discriminatory. Is there a point here?

Re:Skilled Introverted programmers need not apply

[david_thornley]

I'm not just somewhat introverted. I'm seriously introverted, and if they'd had the Autism Spectrum Disorder stuff when I was in school I probably would have been diagnosed.

I set out to learn how to behave socially. It didn't come naturally to me, so I read stuff and observed and managed to get by. I don't do well at parties with lots of strangers, but I can usually avoid such and socialize with friends. Having a sense of humor really helped.

Early in my career, my manager told me that I was technically superb, but needed to communicate better, so I worked on that. That was the last time I heard that particular complaint. I found a way not to be intimidated by audiences, sort of seeing them as an audience rather than as lots of people. Worked for me.

Communication is vital in almost any job. It's a skill you need. My job depends on being a C++ whiz, but also being competent with English and communication. I've worked hard on both my C++ and my English, and it's paid off. I'm not a manager and never will be, and I'm fine with that. I'm doing a job I like and making enough money for a very nice lifestyle.

I think one key thing here is humility. I don't know everything, and fitting into the world on my terms works better than any alternative I've seen. Rather than figuring that the things I didn't do well on were unimportant, I considered them individually and worked on the ones I thought important.

One reason this worked is that I'm pretty intelligent. I can figure out how to learn things, and then learn them.

You could call my childhood issues some sort of handicap if you like, but it's what I am. I have had a successful life (wife and son I love, social life suited for me, job I like, enough money) while still being me.

Re:Skilled Introverted programmers need not apply

[dbrueck]

This post is excellent. You captured what I was trying to say and expressed it much better than I did, thank you!

Re:Skilled Introverted programmers need not apply

[Grishnakh]

That's fine, but then you have zero right to complain about a tech labor "shortage". If there's a shortage, then you should be hiring anyone who's qualified, no matter how bad their interpersonal skills are. It's your job as management to help them succeed as part of the team, and if you can't do that, then you are incompetent.

If you want to take the easy route and only hire people who are easy to manage, that's your prerogative, but you can't complain about any kind of shortage if you do this.

Re:Skilled Introverted programmers need not apply

[dbrueck]

Please read my other posts - not only did I not complain about a shortage, I went so far as to say that I don't really think there is a shortage.

Regardless, I think you're missing my point: my position is that some people, no matter how good their skills are, are a *net negative*, because tech skills are only a part of the equation (an equation that includes things like interpersonal skills), and that people/teams/companies that don't properly weigh that part of the equation end up paying the price for a long time to come and end being worse off than had they not hired that person. So, no, it's not a good idea to hire people just on the basis of technical qualifications.

Put another way, if someone is applying for a dev job at my company and they have really poor interpersonal skills, I'd argue they aren't qualified for the job. They're at best partially qualified, so we don't hire them.

And it's not the "easy route", not by a long shot. It's actually harder, especially up front, but you do it because you know it's better in the long run.

But is it putting an emphasis on people who are easy to manage? Absolutely. Anything else is insanity. I run a business, not some volunteer organization where you work with whatever you've got.

Re:Skilled Introverted programmers need not apply

[Grishnakh]

Please read my other posts - not only did I not complain about a shortage, I went so far as to say that I don't really think there is a shortage.

Sorry, I was only responding to your one post, and assuming that like so many other managers that you might buy into the whole tech-worker shortage idea.

Regardless, I think you're missing my point: my position is that some people, no matter how good their skills are, are a *net negative*,

I agree, at least the way modern companies do their management. I think it's entirely possible to get such people to be productive assets to the company, but almost no companies want to bother actually developing the people-management skills necessary to do so. It can't be done the way companies currently manage employees, and would probably require hiring a bunch of psychologists and developing the appropriate management methods, instead of what companies do now, which is basically take technically-skilled people, and simply promote them into management without any regard for actual skill at dealing with people.

But is it putting an emphasis on people who are easy to manage? Absolutely. Anything else is insanity. I run a business, not some volunteer organization where you work with whatever you've got.

Well it just depends on how much you want to invest in people, and how much you think you'll get out of them with that investment. With some brilliant people who are really, really hard to manage (requiring developing all-new management skills as I outlined above), you'll have to invest a lot of time and money and energy, but who knows, maybe you'll get some really brilliant new products that make your company a fortune. Of course, that's a big gamble. Maybe you'll get less out than other companies that take a safe route, or worse maybe your reinvented-management initiative will be a giant failure. But so many companies keep repeating this "tech worker shortage" mantra, so if there really were such a shortage, they should be doing just as I said, regardless of the risk, because a hard-to-manage employee is better than no employee at all.

Re:Skilled Introverted programmers need not apply

[dbrueck]

Good points. Yeah, I don't know if we've just been really lucky or what, but I haven't seen the tech worker shortage (despite all of the yelling about it).

Thanks for the discussion!

Want to work for a startup that fails?

[Anonymous Coward]

Want to work for a startup which is guaranteed to fail? Go look for employers who care more about having fun than getting shit done.
Don't like working with nerds and introverts? Then your tech business will fail.

Re:Want to work for a startup that fails?

[Anonymous Coward]

Nerds and introverts can have perfectly good social skills. Don't use your profession as an excuse to be a jerk.

Re:Want to work for a startup that fails?

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a simpler method ... pick any internet startup, your odds are good.

Re:Want to work for a startup that fails?

[buddyglass]

Exactly. I can attest that the overall thrust of this article is true. The company I work for, as well as past companies, have all taken into account "culture fit" when evaluating candidates. On the other hand, most of the crap in the comments about what people screen for, e.g. weeding out introverts and/or selecting only for rich white frat boys, is not something I've ever experienced or heard about.

"Culture Fit" is an excuse for discrimination

[ragethehotey]

Rich white frat boy "tech founders" like being around other rich white frat boys. Anyone that says otherwise, has never set foot in present day San Francisco.

Re:"Culture Fit" is an excuse for discrimination

[sribe]

Rich white frat boy "tech founders" like being around other rich white frat boys. Anyone that says otherwise, has never set foot in present day San Francisco.

What I keep reading here about "brogrammer" culture just blows my mind. I struggle to figure out if it is a generational thing, or subculture based on location. But I can assure you, it was nothing like that at startups in the Boston area in the late 80's... Particularly the attitude toward women--I assure you, anybody that had acted like some of the stories we've read lately, would have been instantly fired--and the rest of the guys would have been happy to see such a person booted out.

Re:"Culture Fit" is an excuse for discrimination

[cayenne8]

Rich white frat boy "tech founders" like being around other rich white frat boys.

You had me at rich.

:)

But seriously...if they got rich by knowing enough tech to found and build a startup, what's your beef with them? And, of course, most people like to hang out, and associate with people that reflect the same traits and beliefs that they do, that's just human nature.

But if YOU are a flexible person, you should be able to get along with most anyone. Me? I went through high school and ran with many crowds. I hung out with the potheads in the parking lot, I knew a lot of the jocks and went to parties with all strata of kids, many of whom had FAR more money than my family did, but that didn't stop me from connecting and making friends of all types.

I found that working early jobs in the service industry helped....bus boy, waiter, bar tender, retail sales all helped me learn even more about how to work with people.

Same skills took me from there to college and later to my professional life. Know what? I still am able to generally speak with and deal with and even schmooze with folks of all types in the world.

Learn some people skills, and don't get so hung up on what other people are like. So what if it is a rich white frat guy.

Learn to deal with them and it might get you in the circles of people that are getting wealthier and help you do the same.

Re:"Culture Fit" is an excuse for discrimination

[lgw]

The one startup I worked for in Silly Valley was run by an Indian guy, not so young, but extraordinarily colorful - not so much "flamboyantly gay" as "the Cat from Red Dwarf". I half expected him to click his heels and spin around every time he walked past. I'm sure he was rich, as this wasn't his first time as a startup CEO, but that's all he had in common with "rich white frat boy".

OTOH, my interview with him consisted of us discussing who I had worked for in the past that he knew - not quite a clique, but some overlap with people he trusted was key.

Re:"Culture Fit" is an excuse for discrimination

[Anonymous Coward]

"Brogrammer" is the new "hipster". As its use spread it's just become a synonym for programmers antisocial/introverted/etc people don't like.

Re:"Culture Fit" is an excuse for discrimination

[mewsenews]

I assure you, anybody that had acted like some of the stories we've read lately, would have been instantly fired

Bro. Not cool, bro

Re:"Culture Fit" is an excuse for discrimination

[Anonymous Coward]

Rich white frat boy "tech founders" like being around other rich white frat boys. Anyone that says otherwise, has never set foot in present day San Francisco.

Sorry if us white crackers don't get your quirks but with very few exceptions few of us care what skin color you have. What we DO mind is cultural differences and that you think we are out to get you when we aren't. Culture you can hide, but the chip on your shoulder is visible to all and I for one don't care to tip-toe around all the PC garbage.

Just be nice and don't blame your color when we look at you weird. Chances are we are just thinking about something else. Just smile and move on.

Re:"Culture Fit" is an excuse for discrimination

[khasim]

You had me at rich.

Know what you want and then go after it.

If you want "rich" then tech probably is not the career path for you.

But seriously...if they got rich by knowing enough tech to found and build a startup, what's your beef with them?

Some did get rich through their technical skills. But more did it through business skills, relationships and such.

So what if it is a rich white frat guy.

Because the rich, white, frat guy will hire his frat brothers instead of you. One of them will be named CTO/CIO and that person will hire a manager and that manager will hire you. They get the stock options and you get a salary.

If you want to be part of that group then you go to that school and you join that frat.

Learn to deal with them and it might get you in the circles of people that are getting wealthier and help you do the same.

And that is the core problem. You see the tech person as lacking something that needs to be improved in order to join the frat brothers.

What do the frat brothers bring to the company?

You are disposable. There will always be another one just like you that they can hire. They can get a dozen resumes with a single call. That's if they don't just get someone on a H1B visa.

Re:"Culture Fit" is an excuse for discrimination

[iMadeGhostzilla]

B/c those rich white frat boys want to make shit such as Groupon and Zynga. That is the real problem (for me), their outlook on life and their values result in things I don't consider useful or beautiful but just something that makes them richer and the rest of the world poorer and dumber.

Re:"Culture Fit" is an excuse for discrimination

[davydagger]

I think we should make a big contrast between most of the traditional hacker scene and these "startup" goofballs. While there is some supposed overlap I am beginning to see less and less. The bad old days of geeks vs suits might not return in full, and these might not be the suit and tie wierdos of yore, but its starting to get close. At very least, keep these assholes out of the hacker scene.

Re:"Culture Fit" is an excuse for discrimination

[gatkinso]

Sorry, but "I just don't like you" is not a federally defined form of discrimination.

Re:"Culture Fit" is an excuse for discrimination

[Anonymous Coward]

A significant percentage of managers tend to hire people like themselves, whether they be rich white frat boys, or gurl power fanatics, or a particular minority, or whatever. That is a problem when they value those characteristics at or above being able to actually do the job. It arises because most people think they know how to be an interviewer, but actually suck pretty badly at it, so they gravitate to what they do know, which is they know what/whom they are comfortable with.

Re:"Culture Fit" is an excuse for discrimination

[rtb61]

You get rich by specifically not sharing. So rich white frat boys tend to hang together and use money to establish a business and hire disposable staff to do all the work, whilst the rich white frat boys take all of the credit and the bulk of the money, often leaving the people who do the actual work with unpaid salaries and a bankrupt company. So want to work for a company where you actually do the work, you need three things, the skill, the willingness to work cheap and the willingness to work for promises and if you won't then they'll bring in foreigners on work visas.

So ignore cool and focus upon whether owners and managers or fair or just greedy douche bags. Scope out their personal life styles if you can (clothes, jewellery, cars and housing), after all, you'll the one that will be paying for it regardless of any claims they make.

Re:"Culture Fit" is an excuse for discrimination

[Anonymous Coward]

But seriously...if they got rich by knowing enough tech to found and build a startup, what's your beef with them?

Rich frat boys aren't rich because they made a lot of money. They're rich because their parents are rich and gave them a lot of money.

Re:"Culture Fit" is an excuse for discrimination

[cayenne8]

You see the tech person as lacking something that needs to be improved in order to join the frat brothers.

No, I do find tech people that ALSO have people skills. I'd be hiring them over someone that can't talk to his co-workers or employers very well.

Re:"Culture Fit" is an excuse for discrimination

[Grishnakh]

It's generational IMO. I never ran into this stuff when I was in college in the early/mid 90s.

Re:"Culture Fit" is an excuse for discrimination

[Anonymous Coward]

Me too (OK, actually late 80s-early 90s) but here is my take on it--I don't think it's generational per se, it's a social/cultural thing. Back then, tech companies were filled with us nerds (male and female) who grew up reading sci-fi, tinkering with primitive Atari computers with tape deck storage, and avoiding sunlight because it usually meant getting knocked over by the dipshit jocks who dominated the social pyramid and later went to business school. We did it because we liked solving problems and advancing space-age gear for the betterment of humanity. But now, "tech" is the cool thing and every bro-ski wants to get the next Great Idea and sit on the other coders until they make him into the next Zuckerberg. So it's not that this generation is different, it's just that the assholes who choose careers based on Potential Earnings now flock to "high tech" instead of "sales and marketing" or "finance".

Re:"Culture Fit" is an excuse for discrimination

[Grishnakh]

Good points. So we're basically victims of our own success? We should have thrown a wrench into things earlier on to keep the rest of society from getting so interested in this stuff...

General applicability

[Sneftel]

Want to work in a decent, non-dead-end job, with the opportunity to advance your career and make a meaningful difference to the world? Learn to interact with people. Learn empathy, learn communications skills, learn to temper your urge towards condescension and dismissal. If you're a coder, it's 50% of your job, assuming you're doing your job right.

Re:General applicability

[fahrbot-bot]

Want to work in a decent, non-dead-end job, with the opportunity to advance your career and make a meaningful difference to the world? Learn to interact with people. Learn empathy, learn communications skills, learn to temper your urge towards condescension and dismissal. If you're a coder, it's 50% of your job, assuming you're doing your job right.

If you're a hooker (or manager?), it's 100% of your job, assuming you're doing your job right...

Re:General applicability

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, honest interaction is part of it. But in that line of work there's a significant component of convincingly and shamelessly lying to people, of telling them what they want to hear so they'll give you what you want them to give.

That is, for managers, anyway. I'm not sure what's involved in being a hooker.

Re:General applicability

[Anonymous Coward]

Yup, this is just the yearly reminder that despite what a lot of us want to think, social skills matter, as most businesses tend to be staffed by human beings.

It's not even just about being liked. Programming has largely become a team sport. Sure you can still find programmers locked away in isolated offices, but the norm now is teams working together to produce/support something. Also if you have any interest in moving into more of a leadership type roll, even if you want to stay mostly technical (i.e. technical lead, software architect) social skills become even more important.

Re:General applicability

[Anonymous Coward]

For me, it was going to college, getting a biz degree and an MBA. I have mad haxor skills and was hanging out on #hack and #2600 in the 1990s but I had never gone to college. I went to college, and learned how to talk to people on the biz side, and became more successful.

Re:General applicability

[Tablizer]

Learn to interact with people. Learn empathy, learn communications skills...

This is Slashsparta! [*kerplunk*]

Re:General applicability

[mrbester]

Oh and you also need to know *everything* remotely technical so we don't have to employ more than one of you nerds. That's right, not only do you have to spend every hour of your life learning all the skills required for the job description, you should also have documented proof of you working insane hours, learning the new technologies we won't ever use (but that shows *passion*, right?) and yet still be a party animal seven days a week or you won't be considered a team player or a good cultural fit.

Re:General applicability

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean learn to fake empathy and communication skills. The people who shoot right up the corporate ladder are hardly masters at empathy and communicating; they are masters at influencing others' perception of themselves. Every VP I've seen come and go has the same thing in common: the ability to shape other people's perception. Knowledge, skills, experience, and even loyalty come second.

Re:General applicability

[Anonymous Coward]

There are lies, and even greater lies. There is no such thing as a non-dead-end job. Do the math- everything needs to plateau, and when you're the CEO, President, etc then all you've discovered is that you don't have any control over the horde of misanthropes that couldn't meet any of these standards of being "socially acceptable" or having "social skills". Too often this is confused with having a good vocabulary. People respect you more if you bring something fresh. When you become a boss, you'll understand.

Re:General applicability

[jedidiah]

I really have no desire to do nothing but sit in meetings all day.

That's what's meant by a position that's not a "dead end". You get promoted up into management where you no longer do technical work anymore. You need those "social skills" because those are the only skills you end up using.

My first tech manager quit his manager position in order to move on to a purely tech position.

Re:General applicability

[Grishnakh]

Also if you have any interest in moving into more of a leadership type roll, even if you want to stay mostly technical (i.e. technical lead, software architect) social skills become even more important.

Apparently spelling and grammar skills aren't that important.

Re:General applicability

[Grishnakh]

I disagree. When you're CEO, you now have a big golden parachute. So you can quit at any time and live an extremely comfortable lifestyle in your mansion and/or on your megayacht, and not have a care in the world about having to go without. That's not a dead end, that's a pot at the end of the rainbow.

Everyone else has to worry about saving enough for retirement so they aren't eating cat food when they're old.

Yup!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't you know? Only rich white frat boy social skills count as social skills.

workaholic's dream

[Anonymous Coward]

i've worked at a startup like this.
they may have pool tables & an in house chef, but they want people at the office 16 hours minimum. if you calculate an hourly wage, you're getting around $20/hr.
sure, if you are a workaholic, it's a great place to be; but the second you start to get a life outside work, you're out of the inner circle. "look who's going home and it's only 10pm"

Re:workaholic's dream

[Anonymous Coward]

"look who's going home and it's only 10pm"

Look who fucked up their code so bad they are working 'harder instead of smarter'.

Go the fuck home. Get a life. You are what you bring into a relationship which includes work... If you are always at work you bring nothing new in. You will stagnate.

Re:workaholic's dream

[Anonymous Coward]

Haha, yup.

Where I work, I regularly do crazy hours. A 70 hour week doesn't even raise eyebrows, and people have done way more. We don't have a pool table, or an in house chef. Hell we don't even get free coffee.

But you know what, cheap as this company is when it comes to amenities, we get paid for every hour we work!

Re:workaholic's dream

[Anonymous Coward]

Heh, sometimes.

A lot of times its shitty management letting things spiral out of control, and then a "panic mode" culture where putting in only a 40 hour week is perceived as not carrying your end.

When there is a huge back log, productivity doesn't actually matter optically so much as actual hours physically spent there. The perception becomes "well if you did x amount of work in 40 hours, you could do twice as much if you worked 80 hours!". Of course, intentionally or unintentionally, people scale down their productivity so they don't become zombies, which means they are doing in 80 hours what they used to do in 40.

Not saying any of this is good, just that it's common, and "they just suck at their job" isn't always the reason you see people consistently doing insane hours.

Re:workaholic's dream

[91degrees]

Right. Worked at these places and worked for bland corporate offices. After a while, the idea of working an 8 hour day and going home to relax appeals a lot more than a pool table.

Really what I want is a staff canteen, and an HR department that will respond to complaints of overwork. Going out with colleagues for beers once in a while is nice and so is interesting work but that should be as well as rather than instead of a healthy work-life balance.

Re:workaholic's dream

[buddyglass]

i've worked at a startup like this. [...] they want people at the office 16 hours minimum. if you calculate an hourly wage, you're getting around $20/hr.

Gotta ask: why? Are you not capable of getting paid more than $20/hr elsewhere? Or did you just want the extra hours/income? If any employer ever asked me to work more than 50 hr/week for more than 2 weeks in a row I'd probably take my ball and go home.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course they're all "rich" people. People who aren't rich can't start startups and can't go to school and can't gain what's defined by rich people as the only qualifying "social skills". What an asinine comment.

It's more nuanced than that

[CrankyFool]

Meritocracy:
1. government or the holding of power by people selected on the basis of their ability.
2. a ruling or influential class of educated or skilled people.

"skills" or "ability" don't just mean "technical skills," or "technical ability."

Personally, I find that in many tiny companies you actually see the opposite of "social skills" -- they become so deeply, desperately, dependent on the particular technical genius of one or two people that those people can basically do everything and anything they want to do, because the company doesn't think it could survive without them. I've worked in small startups where one of the three principal engineers was allowed to sexually harass an ex-girlfriend; in the same place, another principal engineer was such an asshole people basically routed around him. And the third one? He was a a perfectly pleasant guy I loved working with.

Getting things done, in most environments, includes working with other people. I'm a big fan of the "no brilliant jerks" rule. See "The No Asshole Rule" book for more discussion of this.

A what?

[smellsofbikes]

>your dreams of tech as a clique-free meritocracy

How is a meritocracy not just another type of clique?
How is hiring people for their excellent social skills not a meritocracy?
There are so many implicit values embedded in the statement that it becomes a declaration of an extremely specific type of workplace the submitter (or editor) wants and thinks everyone else should want as well. It's the equivalent of the guy without a knife asserting that the guy with the knife should drop it and fight like a man.

Re:A what?

[Anonymous Coward]

... the guy without a knife ...

That's why I carry a knife with a large handle; so my assailant knows he's going to lose. If I drop it, he'll think he's a better brawler than me. I've had a few years of martial arts training and can deliver one or two powerful punches in a brawl (Movies make it look easy but it isn't.) that will knock anybody down. Unfortunately trouble-makers can't see that, particularly when drunk. A big knife he can see and realize he isn't prepared. It takes a little training to attack with a knife. It takes a lot of training to defend against a knife.

... drop it and fight like a man.

Maybe I'll give him a knife and tell him to fight like a hero.

Re:A what?

[Anonymous Coward]

How is a meritocracy not just another type of clique?

It lacks the exclusivity component of the normal 'clique' definition, in the sense that achieving merit in some field (not necessarily in a given one, though) is in everyone's power. Unless you want to argue that professions are cliques and we're somehow back to a time of medieval guilds.

How is hiring people for their excellent social skills not a meritocracy?

If the job description has excellent social skills as the main requirement, then by all means, it is. If it's a and by the way, you should be able to fit in our group requirement on the last line, then ... well, perhaps leet social skillz might help some people to, for instance, encourage the 'socializing' of various bits of code pasted from stackoverflow. I'm not going to call that meritocracy, but I'm willing to accede that such a person would.

It's the equivalent of the guy without a knife asserting that the guy with the knife should drop it and fight like a man.

nah, it's more like the guy manning the machine gun nest asking his CO to stop recruiting soldiers into his unit based on their ability as a cook. It's unfair to the rest of the team and it's unfair to the new hires whom you'll have to tell to refrain from what they do better/best (socializing) in order to, you know, do the actual work for the position (which they're probably not as good with, seeing as they got hired not for competency, but for social skills).

Re:Or for the females in the audience

[Anonymous Coward]

Unless it's Apple. There it's the guys that need to.

Mmm...no.

[PopeRatzo]

Want To Work For a Cool Tech Company?

Thanks, I'm good.

Re:Mmm...no.

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly. I would rather work in a place with knowledgeable, opinionated, accomplished engineers who call out bullshit when they see it over the place who is more worried about their people being "hip". The first group will be too busy shipping products out the door to care about being "cool". The latter group, on the other hand, will be more concerned about constantly rewriting their software in the latest fad frameworks and languages and will never ship anything of value.

Become some hipster douche

[Anonymous Coward]

That's what this article says to me.

No thanks. I'm happy where I am both financially.

The captcha seems to think that's "improper".

Re:Become some hipster douche

[Anonymous Coward]

...both financially, and socially within the workplace.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

No, they're not and yes they can. You're just telling yourself a comforting lie because it's easier than facing a complicated reality.

IT workers

[DaMattster]

The reality of it is that there are more qualified IT professionals than there are jobs available. Competition is very stiff for many system admin and engineering jobs. System admins are overworked and under-appreciated: they are treated as very disposable. Screw that! I tell most folks to stay out of IT.

Re:IT workers

[Anonymous Coward]

Interesting, what do you recommend them instead. Doctors, lawyers, management, show business? Just curious. :)

Barking up the wrong tree

[Tablizer]

"Cool"? No. Nerds often want to work for an interesting and technically challenging start-up, NOT a "cool" start-up. Craig Newmark's approach is more to my style than say Twitter.

It's unhip, bland, outdated, but will probably outlast other sites, seeing how the herd transition from MySpace to FaceBook to Twitter to BorgFace (or whatever comes next) steps on the prior one. Craigslist is like Latin: it can't go out of style because it was never in style (in the post-Columbus era, at least). He has mooned and outlasted "cool".

Few accuse Craig of being "cool", except maybe in an eastern meditative libertarian nerd kind of way.

Re:Barking up the wrong tree

[pooh666]

It was kinda sorta in style during the Roman empire, just for a few centuries or so.

Re:Tech is over

[bobbied]

Dude... If you truly believe that tripe, you have some serious issues.

Contribution to the Steam Age AND to a greater extent the Information Age has been pretty much independent of one's specific plumbing as determined by the number of X and Y chromosomes you have. Where there has traditionally been male and female dominated careers, the contribution of both has not been one sided. I'd be careful claiming "male genius" as something better than the female kind because it is not.

Full disclosure... I'm a happily married white man with kids...

My social skills suck.

[antdude]

Since I was born with speech and hearing impediments. However, I can socialize online decently (like this /. post) but many people don't like those. :(

Re:My social skills suck.

[tlhIngan]

Since I was born with speech and hearing impediments. However, I can socialize online decently (like this /. post) but many people don't like those. :(

The impediments are only impediments if you treat them as such. If you want to talk to people, do. Social skills are social skills, and if you're a genuinely interesting person to talk to, people will accommodate.

It may help to just talk (and talk and talk to exercise the speech path) and try to normalize your speaking to aid comprehension, but if you're someone who people want to talk to for whatever reason, a speech impediment isn't. And the more you do it, the better you'll be at overcoming it.

Re:My social skills suck.

[antdude]

People says I have really poor social skills in person compared to typing. They prefer to talk and hear, but it is easier for me to communicate in texts like online.

Re:My social skills suck.

[Anonymous Coward]

No, people avoid you. They'll never give you the chance to decide if you're interesting or not.

Re:My social skills suck.

[david_thornley]

Impediments are impediments. They impede people. People can work around them, but that's treating them like impediments. If I had a habit of pretending my impediments weren't, I'd likely be dead by now.

Besides, you know nothing of GP's impediments. What you're saying may work if they're minor, but not if they're too serious.

Since we're discussing social skills, did anybody tell you it's rude to make assumptions about people and tell them what to do without asking further?

No shit

[Anonymous Coward]

Are people really so deluded that they think culture isn't an issue in every single workplace? It doesn't matter how good you are at your sweeping/filing/programming, if you can't get along with the other people in your workplace and cause disruptions of course you're going to be shown the door. I'm reminded of the old saying, "there's no I in TEAM." Unless you're lucky enough to run your own 1-person business you'll have to work as part of a team no matter where you work or what you do.

Want To Work For a Cool Tech Company?

[Anonymous Coward]

No.

Or wait for the Government to start a project

[Trax3001BBS]

Get picked off the street and made a certified nuclear reactor operator in 18 months. They will do all of the training required, you just need to be serious in your studies. Especially when you haven't clue one on the subject :}

I do qualify it as a tech job, I could write much to back that up but it'd be just be a lot of junk you wouldn't wish to read.

Just saying fate works in odd ways. I was unemployed for close to two years prior.

US Citizenship is an excuse for discrimination

[sethstorm]

You are disposable. There will always be another one just like you that they can hire. They can get a dozen resumes with a single call.

Only if citizens are not given their proper prioritization above non-citizens.

That's if they don't just get someone on a H1B visa.

That's an even bigger problem since it presumes that a US citizen is never competent enough.

Re:US Citizenship is an excuse for discrimination

[Anonymous Coward]

Only if citizens are not given their proper prioritization above non-citizens.

There is no proper prioritization of citizens over non-citizens.

That's an even bigger problem since it presumes that a US citizen is never competent enough.

You just said one sentence ago that the only reason there's always another person like you they can hire is because citizens aren't given priority over non-citizens. Make up your mind. Either there are plenty of US citizens just like you, or there aren't.

Re:US Citizenship is an excuse for discrimination

[Anonymous Coward]

That's an even bigger problem since it presumes that a US citizen is never competent enough.

No, that is the excuse. The assumption is that a US citizen will never be subservient enough.

Re:US Citizenship is an excuse for discrimination

[sethstorm]

Current immigration policy in the US, whether or not it was intended to do so, treats the citizen as having too good of a position in the world. Businesses read that as citizenship being business-hostile (unless it's their own).

Disparate Impact

[sethstorm]

Unfortunately, disparate impact can change that statement.

Re:Tech is over

[buddyglass]

#gamergate. AMIRITE?!?!

Sign of a larger sickness

[Anonymous Coward]

If they care more about social skills and connection than actual ability to get shit done(tm) their priorities are pretty fucked up. That type of attitude explains a lot of societal problems.

Re:Sign of a larger sickness

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is that tech is currently filled with socialists at the top level, and socialists only value "social connections" and ideology because they never studied or felt the need of having technical skills. They also despise anything that stands out, hence why the phrase "The stake that sticks up gets hammered down." got coined in the first place; when promoting leaders, they will always pick a loyal moron over a competent person, as the latter could rob them of their rank.

Obviously, that's also why as soon as any society/sector/system reaches the critical mass of socialists, it quickly crash down spectacularly. Tech is currently on a giant bubble, even larger than the dotcom one, so it's a thriving sector despite the horrible incompetence of the upper management, however, their "Ivory Tower" syndrome and their hiring practices dettached from reality make it obvious that they won't survive for long. When all you care about your employees is their chromosomes, sexual preferences, social "skills", or what laws they vote, it's time for a painful crash against the wall of reality.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

"brogrammer" culture is largely a myth; a bogeyman by those who are either getting paid for clicks or who have a social agenda axe to grind or both. Anyone who who says otherwise either doesn't live in San Francisco(like me; 10 years) or is seeking out those environments.

Not perfect. But closer than any alternatives.

[Anonymous Coward]

No industry is perfect, at the end of the day they are all composed of imperfect people and the resulting unanticipated emergent behaviors, but there is no other industry which gets closer to a true meritocracy. Most of the bellyaching about inequalities in tech is unfounded and, in my opinion, comes mostly from people refusing to want to put in the time and effort to get the respect they think they deserve.

Take your own advice, Mr Headline

[wonkey_monkey]

Want To Work For a Cool Tech Company? Hone Your Social Skills

I think you meant "hone your social skills please."

This is a common misunderstanding

[Anonymous Coward]

Social skills and teamwork ability are great things to have, but when these words are used in relation to a job, they invariably mean submitting to existing hierarchies. If I refuse to be a paid slave that doesn't make me an antisocial egotist.

Re:This is a common misunderstanding

[buddyglass]

If you get paid and can quit then you're not a slave. Quit with the histrionics. As to what "social skills and teamwork" mean, yes, the ability to accept someone else's authority is a necessary part of working on any team that has the notion of a leader. I will agree, though, that having an extreme aversion to others' authority doesn't necessarily mean you're "antisocial".

Re:This is a common misunderstanding

[pscottdv]

Social skills and teamwork ability are great things to have, but when these words are used in relation to a job, they invariably mean submitting to existing hierarchies. If I refuse to be a paid slave that doesn't make me an antisocial egotist.

No, but your demeaning description of how 95% of the world earns their living kinda does.

Re:This is a common misunderstanding

[Anonymous Coward]

> Social skills and teamwork ability are great things to have, but when these words are used in relation
> to a job, they invariably mean submitting to existing hierarchies

No, they mean that you are a grown up and you and your team can get along without degrading when the kindergardener does not constantly have an eye on you.

Re:This is a common misunderstanding

[TheRaven64]

No, they mean being able to effectively collaborate. There's a limit to how much someone can achieve on their own and it's far more valuable to have someone who improves everyone's productivity than someone that drains a little bit from everyone who has to work with them by not communicating what they're doing, or even what they've done, causing duplicated work and wasted effort.

Wrong. It's the companies that need to do that.

[Qbertino]

It's exactly the other way around.

Want experienced pros who can rescue your projects from total disaster?

Treat them like humans.

It's the companies that need to hone their social skills. End of Story.

Point in case: I am - once again - in a gig with an agency. They took some effort to convince me to give them a try. We did 2 months of contracting to try things out, then I came on.
"Change Management" "Corporate Publishing" ... any marketing buzzword you can think of - you're b-bingo cards would be filled many times over in one regular workday. We even have a whole department specialized in producing power-point presentations (No joke!). The naivety with which technical issues are approached here leaves me gasping for air every odd week. It takes effort to remain calm, explaining even the most basic concepts of web-development to people who do and sell web to our customers 24/7. Our headroom is a bunch of outlet multipliers from the hardware store and a bunch of off-the-shelf home-SAN-drives piled into one heap for company backup purposes, managed by a student on the side. A truly scary sight. The only host that come close to anything a pro would use I salvaged from a ancient Acer laptop lying around that I cleaned and installed Debian 7.6 on. Our production pipeline is a sight to make a grown man cry.

However, and here is where it gets interesting:

I've rarely worked with such kind, forthcoming and polite people. The respect that I'm treated with and the patience with which the team treats me when I can barely hold back my techie-frustration I've rarely seen. I've seen so many asshole agencies in my life that I'm still genuinely suprised how this shop completely breaks the mold in my book. It's a team that lacks the in-house experience and actually is aware of the fact. Aside from that, they are a refreshing experience after years of too much crap.

I've seen so many shops in which devs are treated like shit - that they themselves have lost their social skills or have no interest in using them, is of no surprise to me.

I've come to the conclusion, that I'd rather work with the sort of company I am in now that with some so-called dedicated web-development team that can't treat their members like normal people.

Bottom line:
That social skill thing works both ways. I've taken such amounts of crap from corps and companies in this industry that I find conclusions like those of the GP laughable at best. In most cases their just plain wrong.

Re:Wrong. It's the companies that need to do that.

[buddyglass]

I find conclusions like those of the GP laughable at best.

Do you at least agree there's a kernel of truth? Having social skills > not having social skills when it comes to successful interviewing. You don't have to look like "rich frat boy", but, like it or not, it helps if you don't come across as "neckbeard with bad hygiene". The fact that corporate American also has huge problems doesn't change that.

Re:Wrong. It's the companies that need to do that.

[david_thornley]

It's the companies that need to hone their social skills.

There's people whose job it is to make things or change them, and people whose job it is to interact with other people, to simplify outrageously. So, why is it that, when the doer and talker don't get along, it's the doer's fault? A manager should be willing to work with somebody with good technical and poor social skills, because part of a manager's job is to make their people productive.

a thought

[buddyglass]

One reason companies offer all the silly perks (pool table, excessive free food, etc.): it's a way to compensate employees tax-free. I can pay my guys $1000 more apiece but they'll only take home $700. Maybe $1000 worth of "free perks" and creating the perception of a "fun culture" offers better "bang for my buck" in terms of attracting and retaining employees than the extra $700 in take-home pay. Then again, maybe not. But I'm willing to entertain the argument that it does.

Re:a thought

[tommeke100]

> I can pay my guys $1000 more apiece but they'll only take home $700

You obviously don't work in Belgium. Here we see maybe $300 of that $1000 raise.

Re:a thought

[buddyglass]

Does Belgium tax the perks as well? If so then it's a wash. I know in California they're starting to clue in to the fact that companies are essentially allowing their employes to dodge the income tax by providing "free services" in place of cash. Free food, free transportation, free daycare, free gym membership, free dry-cleaning, etc.

Re:a thought

[david_thornley]

Instead of the stupid pool table, I'd like to be able to spend the $1K or $700 on things to make me more productive. A company with a pool table suggests to me that they aren't interested in getting stuff done.

Re:a thought

[tommeke100]

They tax the perks to a ridiculous extent.
The only thing you can do here as a tax benefit is give employees a company car. Which is still taxed, but less than getting the monthly lease money in cash.
Our company actually had to stop providing a 1-hour per week free gym visit (which nobody used) because after an audit they saw that as a taxable perk.
So we would have to pay taxes on something we never used in the first place.

Longs sleeve and shorts?

[Dareth]

The ability to wear longs sleeves with shorts is a social skill?

bullshit

[Gravis Zero]

fuck you, i have awesome social skills and i'll break the face of anyone who says otherwise!

Don't pretend to be something your are not

[houghi]

If you are not the social type they are looking for then they are not looking for you and you dio not want that job.
Perhaps you can lie and fake your social skills (or anything else), but at some moment they either notice you are a liar or you become extremely unhappy playing something you are not.

In the end you do not really know what they are looking for.

It could very well be that you have a serious lack of social skills. Working on that will help. Not to get a job, but to get a better life. (if you have problems with it)

But do not lie. The moment they know you lied, you are done. I have terminated interviews the moment I noticed they were lying. One I remember was a person who lied about a skill we did not ask about nor needed. My reasoning: if he lies about this, he will be dishonest about other things as well.

Also important at the "Big Boys"

[Anonymous Coward]

I've got a pretty cushy job at a big startup in the valley as an iOS Architect and I've interviewed with most of the "big boys" (FB, Google, LinkedIn, Apple, Twitter) (experienced engineer), and found they are actually harder to get into then the "cool" little startups, and can often require just as much social savvy during the interview process. A lot of the engineers working in the mobile development teams at these companies are young, "hip", and carry a pretty big (occasionally deserved) ego. If you are going to try and come in at a higher rung in the ladder then them or right on the lead level, then you have to be careful about who you are stepping over to get there. In all the cases I made it to the in person interviews but only on a few was I able to "blow their socks off" enough to justify coming in at the kind of pay grade that I would need to make a transition without a pay cut. This may not apply if you want to come in at just above or entry level and "earn" your stripes, but playing gently around the ego's of entrenched engineers is important if you are going to come in making the claim that you are better at it then they are :)

Re:Tech is over

[Anonymous Coward]

Full disclosure: you're a pussy whipped bitch beta buck. AMIRITE?