April 18, 2012 at 12:10 pm
I'm currently looking for a job and a tech recruiter refused to consider my application for a job, because they were looking for SQL 2008 experience and my experience is mostly with SQL 2005. How do you get the recruiter to understand that the differences between SQL 2005 and SQL 2008 are inconsequential?
Drew
J. Drew Allen
Business Intelligence Analyst
Philadelphia, PA
April 18, 2012 at 12:18 pm
First question, although your experience is with SQL Server 2005, what have you done recently to ensure your skills will work with SQL Server 2008? Let me also ask another question, do you have SQL Server 2008 or SQL Server 2008 R2 installed at home and if so have you been learning the differences?
What these two questions are getting at is that if you get a chance to talk to the recruiter, demonstrate that you are competent in the newer version(s) of SQL Server. If you can show that you know the changes made and can work with them, I would hope that would help the recruiter understand that even without direct, paid experience with SQL Server 2008, you are keeping yourself current with the newer technologies.
If that still doesn't work, you may need to find another recruiter. One thing I have found in the past few months is that many companies contact multiple recruiting firms for the same position. I had three recruiters all approach me in a couple of days for the same position. Just do some shopping around.
April 18, 2012 at 12:49 pm
drew.allen (4/18/2012)
How do you get the recruiter to understand that the differences between SQL 2005 and SQL 2008 are inconsequential?
How do you know they're inconsequential for the particular job? The job may require heavy spatial experience for example, which is not in SQL 2005.
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
April 18, 2012 at 1:10 pm
GilaMonster (4/18/2012)
drew.allen (4/18/2012)
How do you get the recruiter to understand that the differences between SQL 2005 and SQL 2008 are inconsequential?How do you know they're inconsequential for the particular job? The job may require heavy spatial experience for example, which is not in SQL 2005.
I don't, but when I asked about specific features that he felt I wasn't qualified for, he just sent me the original announcement saying they were looking for SQL 2008. I also think that it's likely they would have mentioned geospatial experience in their requirements if they were specifically looking for that. Even people who have extensive experience in SQL 2008 might not have any experience in geospatial data.
Drew
J. Drew Allen
Business Intelligence Analyst
Philadelphia, PA
April 18, 2012 at 1:24 pm
That was just an example. Sub any 2008-specific feature.
Thing is, if the job spec states SQL 2008 skills required, the recruiter may not want to risk his relationship with that company by sending them someone who doesn't match the job spec. Maybe the company will be fine with that, maybe they'll be so pissed off they refuse to deal with the recruiter ever again. Unless you can prove/convince him that while your experience is 2005, you are very up-to-date on the 2008 features and changes, it could well be too much risk for him.
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
April 18, 2012 at 3:03 pm
GilaMonster (4/18/2012)
That was just an example. Sub any 2008-specific feature.
I realize it was just an example, but if there were a 2008-specific feature that was required for the job, why didn't they answer my question about 2008-specific features that they didn't feel I was qualified for?
Thing is, if the job spec states SQL 2008 skills required, the recruiter may not want to risk his relationship with that company by sending them someone who doesn't match the job spec. Maybe the company will be fine with that, maybe they'll be so pissed off they refuse to deal with the recruiter ever again. Unless you can prove/convince him that while your experience is 2005, you are very up-to-date on the 2008 features and changes, it could well be too much risk for him.
I don't see how it would hurt the relationship for the recruiter to at least ask the client if they would consider someone with a strong 2005 background.
Part of the problem, too, is that I don't have direct access to the person that I need to convince. I'm working with a recruiter who is working with the person I need to convince. I was able to convince my recruiter, but have no idea how she broached it with this other person.
Drew
J. Drew Allen
Business Intelligence Analyst
Philadelphia, PA
April 18, 2012 at 3:25 pm
drew.allen (4/18/2012)
GilaMonster (4/18/2012)
That was just an example. Sub any 2008-specific feature.I realize it was just an example, but if there were a 2008-specific feature that was required for the job, why didn't they answer my question about 2008-specific features that they didn't feel I was qualified for?
Probably because the recruiter didn't have a clue and if he spoke to the company the HR person he spoke to didn't have a clue either.
I've been on both sides of that. Got sent to a job interview that I wasn't a fit for because the recruiter thought that ASP = ASP.Net. Shortest interview ever, company very much not happy with me or recruiter. Seen recruiters send CVs of people that barely match the job requirements or don't have a specific skill that was listed as an absolute must. Waste of time reading through them usually and unless there was something stellar about the CV it went in the dustbin.
Personally I'm not a big fan of recruiters in general
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
April 19, 2012 at 4:20 am
This is just because recruiters and HR departments only have a list of requirements, not actual knowledge. If you don't meet the list, you don't meet the list. The only way I know around this is to not use recruiters and to bypass HR. Both of which make looking for jobs more difficult.
"The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood"
- Theodore Roosevelt
Author of:
SQL Server Execution Plans
SQL Server Query Performance Tuning
Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply