Google's IT support Certificate

 

It's understood that to be an IT professional you will never stop learning. Technology and processes change on what seems like a daily basis and the only way to keep up is to...well...keep up!

I've always been a proponent of lifelong learning no matter what you spend your days on.  What I'm not a proponent of is wasting time not to mention hard earned money especially when the only beneficiary is somebody else's bank account.

Which brings me to the newly announced Google IT Support Certificate.

I'll cut to the chase, I don't like it.  For reasons even more egregious than my general disdain for the entire certification industry money mill, my premise is simple.

While most professional IT certifications are of dubious value these days existing primarily for the ancillary revenue stream they provide to their brand at least they aren't treading the same path as so many of those now defunct diploma mills.

Google claims its new certification is literally the magic bullet.  They make outlandish claims about job placement, salaries and the supposed prestige of the Google name on the certification.

It's the 90's all over again where the business of education was more about "business" than "education."  Admission reps sold overpriced degrees that nobody respected ultimately leaving bewildered students holding the bag for 5, sometimes 6 figure debt.

And it's happening again.  Certifications are a tool not a measure of value and a new generation seems poised to fall for it.

Which is why I produced the video below where I detail every lie, misdirection and utter absurdity of this new certification program.

Training is important, where you get that training even more so.  

The Geek Closet - Netfinity Project

I was rummaging around my geek closet....

You know you have one.  That dark little room crammed with discarded tech that you haven't touched in years but you "may have a use for someday."

In there I have a tapestry of my career in IT.  From bins of cables, cards and their associated connecting tissue to stacks of hardware long since retired to "someday" status.

Someday has come for you....

About 10 years ago while working for one of my clients during an upgrade project I purchased their soon to be unused and obsolete server hardware. 

I knew what I was getting into having actually installed these servers years before.  I had some vague ideas about what I'd do with them but nothing definitive.  

For all I knew they'd never be more than impromptu jack stands but I saw an opportunity even if I didn't know what fruit that would bear.

Within a few months I did manage to find a purpose for a few of them when I went into business with a friend of mine.  But after a year the business passed away into obscurity like so many others and they returned to the geek closet.

Until the other day.

I opened the geek closet and gazed upon these once mighty hunks of iron sadly sitting idle under stacks of similarly situated techno-cruft.

No, I needed, wanted, to do something with these servers and as luck would have it I was desperately searching for new content for my IT channel on YouTube.

Thus the Netfinity Project was born.  

It's a new video series that covers my attempt to re-purpose a couple of these old servers and gives you some insight into what I consider to be the golden age of hardware and IT.  From the late 90's to the early 2000's IT was all about the hardware and the only talk of "clouds" and "as a service" had to do with rain and valet parking. 

Hardware got better because the software demanded it.  Hardware is unquestionably better now but it lives in bland, clinical warehouses far from view.  An abstraction out of sight and out of mind.  

There's something sad about that.  I remember the pride of IT Manager's throwing open the doors of the server room.  This was where the magic happened, a tangible representation of the greatness of his enterprise.  Whirring, beeping, lights flashing and disks spinning.  You could almost feel the heartbeat of business within those cold server cases.

It's worth documenting and to some extent resurrecting if I can.

Thus the video series where I go through the highs and lows of making some old IBM Netfinity 5000's relevant again.

Check out this blog for regular updates on the video series.  The first few are below.  Enjoy!

I lost a client: Trials and Tribulations of IT consulting

I lost my biggest (and for all intents and purposes last) IT consulting client this week.  

Now truth be told I wasn't making all that much there but it was better than nothing and to me it was an investment.  One made with the prospect of more hours as their business grew and more referrals.  I'll cut to the chase.

You roll the dice on any investment and this one didn't pan out.  Revenue went down instead of up, the client downsized and the one referral I got from them stiffed me for a grand in billable hours.

The writing was on the wall long before the sad email I received this week, however, and I'd been expecting a development like this for awhile.  

Slow payment, resistance to new projects and curt communication are all signs that you're on the way out and lately they were happening more often.

The relationships I build with clients are both blessing and curse.  A blessing because I get the benefit of the doubt and continue the relationship.  A curse because I'm expected to suffer the consequences of any malady that occurs along with them.  That means discounts, free work and in some cases a zero sum game. 

Even then sometimes it's just not enough.  In this latest case the client figured that a relative could do what I was doing for free.  I can't compete with free and won't try.

That said, this client was no different than any other long term engagement in that I had an intimate relationship with their business.  I knew more about where my money was coming from than most in my position would.  That's not by accident either.  The cornerstone of my business is knowing how my client does their business and doing whatever I can to support that.

It's simple, if they make money I make money.

After nearly two decades of IT consulting I've lost three clients.  Two including this most recent were due to budget issues and one was pure politics.  I've had other short term and what I call "hit and run" clients over the years but those never appealed to me.  If I can't build a relationship and instead get treated like an appliance repairman then I'm not interested in sticking around.  

Saying, "I lost the clients." is a bit harsh, however. As none of those exits were on bad terms and all of them were after at least a five year stint.  Even the so-called political exit was nothing more than getting caught up in the fallout from events that had nothing to do with me.  I worked for them for over ten years by the way so do with that what you will.

Personally I believe you have to be doing something right to stick around that long when your services are always at the top of the bean counters cost-cutting list.  That and the longer you can stay away from on-demand clients the better.

I've never been a big fan of "Hit and Run" IT mostly because it never pays well and you end up fighting for every penny.  All the while losing your shirt in the process.

Ultimately you end up hating the people you're trying to help which is an internal conflict I'd rather not have.  So I look for longer engagements. There's a price to pay for that when you're on your own, however.   I keep my active contracts limited to no more than 3 as any more means I can't provide the level of service a long term relationship demands.  

That also limits a fallback position which is where I'm at now.  You don't have much of an opportunity to scare up leads if your phone is constantly ringing.  Worse if those clients aren't generating any referrals you're trapped.  Which gets you to...here.
I'll be honest, I just finished an online application for Autozone right after filling out one for an IT manager with a fortune 500 company. 

At this point, whomever calls first wins!

Yeah, it's that bad....

There's both wisdom and foolishness in the way I operated my consulting business and I've been called on the carpet for it more than once by my consulting peers.  They say I get too involved and care too much when I should just be focusing on extracting as much money as I can.

They want me to be like them, appliance repairmen.  Sadly, they may be right as they're usually puling down 6 figure incomes while I'm living on 40 cent Burritos.  A tech martyr was not what I was going for....

I've mentioned before that I had a sense of activism when it came to IT.  It's what drove me to getting into the field as I didn't care for the bad (and deserved) rap it got for being full of ego maniacal jerks. 

 I wanted to change that perception through my own actions and for awhile it yielded positive results.  As time wore on, however, I found I really wasn't reaping all the benefits I'd hoped for.  While I truly loved all my clients I knew that at some point they were going to take advantage of my good nature.  

You sleep in the bed you make and if your client relationships are built on more good will on one side than the other then you're not leaving yourself much leverage to change them when the time comes.  

Let's face the reality.  There's a sense of organizational narcissism that pervades the corporate space that only respects a similar narcissism in their business relationships.  It doesn't matter how large or small, it's always there.

That's because nobody really has the time to think about the human condition when they're trying to run a business.  Rather, they want definitive answers that can easily fit into the bean counters spreadsheets populated by well defined metrics and "milestones."

Even if that isn't realistically possible or fair that's just how business is done.  It's Texas Hold'em and somebody's got to pay the blinds.  As a consultant, they'll try to make sure it's you.

Which is why instead of success I end up a martyr.  

I seem to keep making the same mistake in choosing my causes.  

IT is a cold calculating field by it's very nature and the most successful in it are similarly defined.  That's not going to change anytime soon.  In fact that's what's expected and any departure while initially welcomed ultimately turns out badly for the pseudo-activist.  

I do the same thing with video games.  On my other blog I constantly rail against the injustices of big video game publishers and the relative blindness of their consumers that pump billions of dollars into inferior products.  

Nobody cares about making the world right for patrons of computer support and video games.  

But don't get me wrong, I'm no sucker.  Well, at least not willingly.  I just have an overheated sense of fairness.  

So what do I do now?  Does Don Quixote stop poking at windmills?

Yes, yes he does...

Look, don't get me wrong.  I love tech, I love IT, I just can't stand most of the people that work in it.  Most of them are with very limited exception the very stereotype of the narcissistic, egotistical IT jerks.  As far as I'm concerned they're all in dire need of a fat lip which I'd dearly love to provide.

Over and over again...

But on to more productive thoughts...

My only hope is to either get out of this masochistic madness or do what I initially set out to do and get into higher levels of IT management leaving the hands on drudgery to the ego maniacs. 

It's the reason why I have sixty thousand in student loans and spent Twenty+ years in the field even when it was probably wiser to get out.  If I can't lead from the trenches maybe I can lead from the mountain.  I certainly couldn't do any worse than the inept morons I've met with who currently occupy those positions.

I don't hold out much hope of that, however.  The most likely outcome for my future is pushing alternators and car batteries for a living.

I say that because I've interviewed with many of those whose jobs I'd ultimately seek to occupy and found them to be largely unimaginative, unimpressive and inadequate.  Meaning nothing has really changed in the world of the IT professional if it this is what business is looking to for leadership.  

So I suppose I can't really blame the lower level IT guys for being such jerks when lead by such uninspiring folk.

As such, the landscape being what it is, that door will likely never open to me.

That's OK.   I've liked cars far longer than computers for most of my life.  So long as the bills are paid I can take those well honed customer service skills and apply them to a field where they can be put to better use.

Will I continue IT blogging?  Probably, if I find something interesting to share or if my IT fortunes improve.  

Right now, however, I'm feeling very jaded.  I look at IT like an Ex-spouse with whom the divorce was amicable and without drama.  I may like her but it's unlikely we'll get back together unless something extraordinary happens.

Know your place

I've been in the IT game for awhile but unlike most of my peers I haven't spent any great amount of time in any one place.  It's not that I don't believe in long-term relationships, on the contrary my average client has been with me at least 5 years.  I'd just rather be as productive as I can be instead of treading water with busywork.

To be successful in consulting you have to learn to be attentive to your client's needs.  That means doing what they need you to do in a timely fashion and then get out of their way.  Often times that means getting out your comfort zone when they throw something at you from left field. 

You have to be adaptable and keep up with current technology but that can be difficult if you're not working in large organizations with big IT budgets. 

Still, you have to realize that whether you're dealing with 15 or 5000 users, at its core IT is always the same.  Everything scales.  The only real difference is the people providing the IT services. 

At some point most IT organizations grow beyond the capabilities of one person.  Maybe it's a specialized application that needs a dedicated person or just plain old growth.  It doesn't matter so long as everyone understands the fundamentals.

I'm not talking about acing your IT exams or memorizing all the Active Directory FSMO roles either.  No, the fundamentals I'm talking about have very little to do with technical buzzwords and everything to do with IT's role in any organization.

In short, know your place. 

That's actually a brick wall I've been running into lately especially in a profession with declining wages and a bad job market.  It seems that IT managers are more concerned about the skill of the day or how many letters follow your name than whether or not you understand IT's role.

Hot skills come and go and to be an expert in anything in IT ultimately has about as much importance as winning first place in a snowman building contest.  Nobody's going to care after tomorrow. 

It's not about the skills, it's about your ability to use them to serve your users.   So long as you have the capabilities to adapt and a point of reference it's not a big deal if you don't match up to someone's skill punch list. 

That's what I attribute whatever success I've enjoyed in my own career to.  My role has been one of service; no more, no less.  Anyone who thinks that IT is anything more than that is quite simply an egomaniac.    

Yes, IT provides the medium that powers a connected world but in the grand scheme of things it's not important for its own sake.  

We in IT simply provide the means for other people to accomplish their goals.  

I'm perfectly ok with that but many in IT aren't and they refuse to hear anything that doesn't glorify the profession.  They inflate their technical accomplishments, create needless workflows (busywork) and body block anything that threatens their fragile egos. 

I've been in the field for quite some time now and while the phrase is tired I literally have forgotten more than most IT managers know at this point.  Familiarity with a specific IT platform is only valuable so long as it remains viable to the organization.  Once it's outlived its usefulness you need to move on but the lessons learned continue to have value.  They are the true definition of skill.  

Whether you're an admin or a CIO you have to realize the value of IT has nothing to do with buzzwords or brands.  It's got everything to do with ability and attitude, however, and they aren't defined by fads.

I actually find it amusing that anyone in IT attributes the word "skill" to anything that has a brand name attached to it.  It's probably the only profession that discriminates based on marketing jargon.  When you consider that the non-IT equivalent to a tech job is an auto mechanic you start to realize how ridiculous it is to be passed over because of familiarity with one brand name over another. 

I mean, does anyone actually believe that a Chevy mechanic is incapable of working on Fords?  

Generally we don't label auto mechanics by their brand affiliation, they're just mechanics.  The skill is in being able to understand automotive systems no matter who made them.  That's because at their core they're designed the same way regardless of whose label is on that grill.

Yet as an IT worker you're led to believe that managing Cisco branded switches has taught you nothing about managing one from HP or Dell.

It's a poor interviewer that doesn't realize that I've spent my career going the extra mile and continually learning new skills to fit my client's needs.  I tend to be more practical and don't spend my nights pouring over the latest database or scripting languages. I'm too practical for that.  I'm only interested in what makes my users happy because I know my value to them depends on it.

I had an opportunity to speak with just such a misinformed IT manager recently concerning an IT support position.  When he asked  the, "Tell me about yourself" question I obliged by giving him a short synopsis of my career and my commitment to serving my users.  In fact I actually told him my view of the value of IT in an organization. 

His response? " Where do you see yourself in five years" 

In other words, he wasn't listening in fact I knew he hadn't even looked at the resume that was forwarded to him from the pleasant HR guy I'd talked to a week before.  

I could excuse the fact that he was 20 minutes late in calling me ( a time he chose by the way) or that he was interviewing me while obviously doing something else. 

What I couldn't excuse was the attitude.

 I knew I'd encountered yet another IT egomaniac who felt threatened by the truth.  At the end he asked if I had any questions and of course I asked him what his ideal candidate looked like. 

By the way hiring managers, it's a great question and people like me only ask it to see if you've been listening to us.  If I don't ask it, I don't care.

He responded with a parade of meaningless buzzwords and brand names (most of which I was familiar with by the way) and nothing about serving the customer.  That told me he was just looking for a mindless automaton and in retrospect I should have ended the call right there.  Unlike him, however, I try not to make snap judgments.

Considering this position was customer facing the number one priority should have been my attitude toward service.  That goes double when you consider how heavily customer facing my career has been to date.  Instead, he chose to focus on buzzwords.  When asked if I had any other questions I gave him the opportunity to come clean. 

I asked, "So what how do you feel about me as a candidate so far?"  His response, " Not too good"

I ended the phone call. 

I've dealt with hundreds just like him and knew we were never going to be on the same page.  Being in the field as long as I have been I've had the opportunity to be on the other side of the desk.  That means I have my own criteria in mind whenever I'm in the interview process.

 For example; If I'd feel comfortable hiring my potential boss in my own organization then I know it's going to be a good fit.  If, however, I know I'd be kicking them out the door faster than they came in...

Look IT Managers, If you're passing over dedicated, motivated and experienced candidates because their qualifications don't stroke your ego you really need to get out of the field.  Somehow, somewhere along the line you've forgotten your place and now...

You're just in the way.

Is technology really getting more affordable? That depends on who's saying it...

Article originally published on Technorati as "Is Technology Really Getting more Affordable?"

This is a time of year when everyone has a list.  Best of, Worst of, Predictions for and the like.  Seems we have a preoccupation with looking where we've been while trying to guess where we're going.  At the beginning of 2011 most technically inclined folks were preoccupied with the next Iphone and Net Neutrality.  Now we're debating SOPA/PIPA and whether 2012 will finally bring an Android tablet to rival the IPAD. 

Oh yeah, and maybe we'll get a new version of Windows that will realize Microsoft's hopes to rival Apple's omnipresence on a myriad of devices...

That's all fine and good but one thing that hasn't changed is the push to make our data portable via "The Cloud"  and the costs associated to get it there.  With maturity and broader acceptance (read that volume) we usually enjoy better service at reduce costs.  That doesn't seem to be the case, however.

I'm a frequent viewer of Leo Laporte's Twit.TV video podcasts.  In fact I watch them more frequently than regular television.  I'm sure I'm not alone in my viewing habits.  It's an excellent source for tracking technology trends and news where you prefer a more relaxed but still professional presentation.

Still, as I watch I sometimes feel a sense of incredulity at what the hosts consider an acceptable price  when discussing products and services.  For example, Ford is a sponsor of a number of Twit.Tv podcasts with Twit produced commercial spots interwoven in their shows.  On one the 2012 Ford Focus is featured.  Economy, styling, and of course technology are featured in the spots with Ford's Sync technology being the centerpiece.  Sync can apparently integrate with the features and services on your Smartphone and make them available via voice control without distracting you from driving.

I have no issue with Ford or Twit's celebration of a technology.  What I take some issue with is what is considered affordable.  In one commercial Leo claims the Focus with Sync is affordable.  I went on Ford's website and built a similar vehicle with features equivalent to the example in the commercial.  When I was done I was looking at a $24,000 subcompact with a 4 cylinder engine. 

I personally don't find $24,000 for an entry level car line to be affordable regardless of whether it integrates with Pandora .  If you want the all electric version be prepared to shell out #39,500 for a base model.  That's not affordable either.

I'm not picking on Twit, however.  They're just  part of a larger community with a passion for new technology to the exclusion of all else.  It seems that technology companies are trying to redefine what affordable is whether or not it has any basis in reality.  Can the latest Smartphone make you more productive?  Perhaps, but is it worth the $200 price and 2 year commitment at a ridiculous monthly rate? 

Is it worth $300 for an operating system for your computer whose only purpose is to provide an environment for even more expensive software suites?   Probably not but we've been conditioned to accept the ridiculous as necessary.  Our personal fortunes may be waning but Apple, AT&T and Microsoft are doing just fine thank you.

I'm not against technology or progress but I'm stalwartly opposed to their marketing being promoted as the basis for my personal economy.  Market forces can dictate what a fair price is but they seem to be getting ignored with the latest technology trends.  Just as a box of fruit loops at $50 with a one year contract isn't justifiable or even sane;  Costs of $120 or more for  monthly cell phone bills aren't either for what you get. 

Technology features prominently in our future and promises to change the very concepts of work and play.  I applaud the liberation it's already brought to those who couldn't flourish without it.  But the price we pay needs to be dictated by those who use it, not someone's marketing department. 

I'd just like to see tech journalism push for real affordability instead of the perception of it. 

Shiny Objects, Dull Minds....

I hold two beliefs,  one is that technology  will never stop advancing and the second is that human beings will always gravitate toward shiny objects. 

Crows like shiny objects too.  It's been suggested that they take them to attract a mate.  Hmm, maybe that's why all the geeks feel the need to get a new Smartphone every 6 months. 

I watch a lot of technology podcasts where all the Uber geeks and tech pundits get all misty eyed over the latest bit of techno kitsch.  I t never fails.  They anxiously await the latest whatever and when they get it in their hands they fawn over for about 15 minutes;  playing with every button, adjusting every setting and trying out every new feature.   

Then the facade starts to crack.  It could be a change in how a feature works or even the removal of it entirely.  It doesn't really matter, you can always tell by the look on their face.  It goes from a happy kid on Christmas morning to a blank stare.

The end is always the same.  Unless the thing catches fire in their hands there'll be allowances made.  Phrases like, "They'll fix that in an update" or "This is an early production model" 

We're supposed to dismiss the deficiency and focus instead on the promise of this great new thing even if it's to our own detriment.  

Smartphones are a perfect example.  It's not enough for your phone to make calls anymore.  It has to be able to surf the net, update Facebook and entertain you with a game or a movie.  It's almost as if there's some grand plan to cause the world to develop Attention Deficit Disorder.

 I still find it amazing that people went so nuts over the Iphone when it had so many issues like being chained for two years to a horrible data network, high cost, call quality and usability problems.  Still , even if you had a bad experience with the phone it still managed to check off all the items on our shiny object list.

Like the MP3 that's largely replaced the CD ,we tend tolerate a lesser experience  for greater convenience or just the chance to look cool.   There may be a more insidious penalty than that, however.

Technology can be the catalyst for inspiration but it can also be a debilitating crutch .  In his book "The Shallows: What the internet is doing to our brains" Nick Carr suggests that we may in fact be gradually becoming dumber because of our addiction to connectivity.

It's not so far-fetched an idea.  We don't even care if a phone can be relied on to make a call anymore so long as our Netflix download doesn't buffer too much.   Oh yes and we must be sure that Foursquare knows where we had lunch.  I'm sorry but nobody has the right to know that much about my habits even if I didn't notice your 30 page irrevocable EULA. 

I guess it's too bad if your favorite sushi restaurant is next door to an S&M shop.  If Google maps can't pinpoint my house accurately I suppose I should forget about any hopes of public office.  There are people who believe the president of the United States  has a fake birth certificate.  What hope do I have if my favorite  sushi restaurant is suspiciously located?

It seems we'd rather not use our long term memory either.  It's simpler to just Google whatever it was that we're too lazy to remember.  Google's a godsend then; protecting us from having to spend more than 30 seconds on any stray thought.

Any forum discussion on the topic invariably degenerates into a shouting match ending in a flurry of hyperlinks supporting their point of view.  That's sad.  We're so addicted to the internet that we can't even have a debate without using it.  Are we so enamored with our connectivity that we're becoming incapable of independent thought? 

If a Pulitzer prize finalist believes it's possible then I have to believe that there has to be some truth to it.   But then, I found out about it on the Internet.

The IT Job Posting Code...(updated)

When times get a little rough in consulting I look for "regular" work to tide me over for a while.

You know my penchant for project and consulting work so when that fails me I end up resorting to the 9 to 5 grind.

The popular 80's phrase of "work smarter not harder" is important to keep in mind when reviewing job posts.

Now I know in this economy one should be willing to take any job just to get by but I'm a long-term thinker. It does no good for my reputation or my resume to land a job that ultimately makes me miserable, doesn't improve my skills and in general just wastes everyone's time. It runs contrary to my own little personal crusade of ridding IT of the "Frauds" who make life miserable for the rest of us striving to be more "Fundamentalist" in the field. If you're not engaged you're not really contributing anything so when looking at job postings keep these tips in mind:

1. If a posting doesn't fit at least 80% of your skills or experience don't bother with it. (Or Know Thyself...)

Recruiters (company or agency) have little punch lists given to them by the hiring manager. Hey, they're HR people not tech geeks and they won't understand any of your technobabble explanations about equivalent skills. If most of the posting looks like greek to you don't bother with it. Even if you landed the job I can guarantee you'll end up miserable and likely be out the door in less than 6 months. Of course that would let you list those new buzz-words on your updated resume but then you'd just be heading down the road of a "Fraud" which is ultimately unfullfilling.

2. Buzz Words ( Or fitting what you DO know into their little punch lists)

This may seem contrary to the previous guideline but it's not. Since these little punch-down lists are so important to HR recruiters it's important to give them what they want if you're actually qualified for the job they're advertising. Remember they're not tech people they can only go off what's in front of them on their list. So, if the posting says something like "Day to day administration of Windows Server 2003 and 2008 servers" Don't put "Windows Servers" on your resume. You're going to have to match their little punch-lists if you want a shot. If you have Server 2003 and 2008, list that skill.  

Otherwise you could be sending the impression that you're not confident in the platform they use. Often resumes are scanned for content and those without matching buzz-words are eliminated. Don't end up in the round file because you got lazy with your listed skills. Conversely, don't overload your resume with skills either. Nobody has the time to read all of that crap. Think newspaper articles. Get the important stuff they're interested in right up in their face and don't waste space on skills they don't care about unless they have some relevance. For Example, if you're a system admin with real experience in VMWare make sure to put it down if the posting happens to mention virtualization of any type.

3. Scan the posting carefully. (Or watch for the ambiguous)

I hate these types of posts. They remind me of classified ads for used cars (you know "Clean, runs good".) but nothing substantial about the job itself. It usually starts off with something like, "We need a Windows System Administrator with SQL Server and some Web development skills for our busy office in North Wonderfulville." Which is usually followed by 2 paragraphs about what a wonderful company they are and how great the benefits package is. You get a commercial for the company and almost nothing about the job. In this economy why are they selling themselves so hard? It's an immediate red flag that the hiring manager doesn't have a clue about the job or what they're looking for. I've responded to ads like this only to find out the job wasn't a System Admin but a web developer. I've actually had to explain that to the interviewer too. At the end I felt like I should have billed them for my time. Approach this type of posting at your own risk.

4. Dealing with employment agency and head hunter posts

You're more likely to deal with an employment agency or head hunter when getting a job these days. The previous guidelines apply with a few caveats. First, know that you're dealing with a middleman. It's not unlike the car salesman on a dealer's lot. Promises will be made that won't always be kept and when you discover the truth expect to be left holding the bag. It's not that I hate agencies, I just have a low tolerance for BS. It's actually worse to deal with an agency that it is to deal directly with an employer's HR department. Agencies get the same punch list and try to match it to their own skills database which may or may not be relevant to the employer's needs.

Turnover tends to be high in employment agencies and I've actually had my recruiter leave in the middle of an assignment and been dumped on another recruiter who has no clue about the employer you're assigned to. In that case they fall back on the basics of whatever the agreement is and you have virtually no representation from them if a problem develops. If something goes amiss they'll drop you like a hot potato and you'll never hear from them again. You've become a "difficult placement" which makes you a pariah even if you've done nothing wrong. Agencies are in it to make as much money on your labor as they can. Anything that gives the impression of threatening that throws the kill switch. Unless you love the job and expect to stay there after the contract is done, don't expect any long-term love from an agency.

Also watch out for long-term temp to hire contracts. If you're involved in a contract for more than a year know that you probably won't get paid vacation, medical benefits or any of the normal trappings. After a year it can be kind of rough to not have any benefits but all the responsibilities. On the upside you usually get a better hourly rate. Of course you have to question an employer that takes more than 6 months to commit to hiring someone. That's why I like contracts with a definitive end. I like to do my thing and get out before I go postal :)

5. The liars

Wow, that's a strong statement here's what I mean by it.

Caveat Emptor applies here. If you go through all the stuff I've already mentioned above you still have to be wary especially with an agency posting. Into this group I firmly place the resume stackers who operate on the shoot first, ask later principle.  If you've put a resume on monster.com in the past decade you've likely already heard from these types.  You know them, they're the ones who demanded your life history, mother's maiden name and social security number for a mid-level job that promised a CEO's salary.  Perhaps not that bad but it's a lie all the same.

Examples are usually more descriptive than paragraphs of babble so here's a good one....

I apparently applied for a position recently and the agency recruiter decided to get back to me on it. It took so long that I didn't even remember applying for the job so I was already at a disadvantage and the recruiter didn't help. There was no indication of when I applied, how I applied or who the job was for just a bunch of ambiguities..

Here's a piece of the posting and the email from the recruiter..

"I just left you a message regarding this opportunity. You had applied to my dice posting.
I'm going to include the job description for ease of communication.
I can be reached at xxx-xxx-xxxx.

Job Description
This position is not a laid back network/server monitoring position. This person must be able to handle the workload, corporate environment and interaction with executive level employees and global vendors. Candidate will be expected to be a leader guiding the network/server environment throughout the America's once they champion the PHX office. Previous corporate/enterprise experience on a team environment is important.

Any skills listed as required must be from hands-on work experience and not solely based on certifications or testing/home experience. This person will be a leader guiding the network/server environment throughout the America's once they champion the XXX office."

I looked over the job description and saw a couple of red flags right at the outset...
"This position is not a laid back network/server environment" Ok, That tells me one of two things. 

Either the management team is a bunch of insufferable jerks or they've been burned in the past. Either way

I can expect to be monitored like bacteria in a pitre dish. Great way to start a new job!

"Any skills listed ...must be from hands on work experience and not solely based on certifications or testing/home experience."


Ok, now I know they've been burned and have an attitude problem to boot. At this point I'm definitely NOT interested but wait there's more..

"The scope of the position also requires managing implementation projects falling under the scope of the Region for Liner and Logistics. Limited after normal business hours support responsibilities. Travel will be minimum."

Read that as "We own you" We all know there's no such thing as "limited after hours" when it comes to a global logistics company or any other company for that matter.  No thanks, that flies in the face of my "It's a job not a lifestyle" credo. The promise from the agency recruiter didn't even match up to her own job description as evidenced below...

The posting says "travel will be minimum" When I asked the recruiter about that she responded, "There isn't any travel------The company is global---it's a logistics company"

What?!

OK, Now I know I'm being lied to. How is travel NOT a requirement when it says it in the posting and requires you to be,"a leader guiding the network/server environment throughout the America's once they champion the PHX office. "?! 

That much use of the adjective, "limited" is always suspect.

This is a CYA move so the agency and the employer have an out when they start flying you all over the place and you start asking what "minimum" means. Sorry but that's a lie in my book.

The lie and the attitude turned me off. I wouldn't last a month in that kind of environment. I'd love to do some contract work for them but when offered, the agency turned me down. I guess I wasn't "humble enough".

Know thyself and you'll stay out of a lot of trouble. For me this wasn't an opportunity it was a noose...

6. You've landed the job, congratulations!  Don't get too comfortable...

Here's a little bit of advice that will make you life a whole lot easier.  Warning, this goes contrary to what most recruiters will tell you which is how you know it's true.  Remember, they're experts at placing candidates not doing the jobs they're trying to fill.

Here we go...

Treat every job like its a contract position even if its a regular full time gig.  It's rare to have one job for the rest of your life anyway unless you're self employed.  Most people move on to other positions every 3 to 5 years which doesn't exactly allow a lot of time to grow roots.  Be task oriented, take advantage of any new skills you can pick up and be ready to move on when the time is right.  Remember that loyalty comes from dogs not employers, don't be a dog.

Many people make the mistake of thinking their job is somehow a reflection of themselves. That's completely wrong, a "job" is one specific task to be completed and dismissed.  A career is compromised of a series of "jobs."  So don't be afraid to mix it up a bit.

There's an old adage that goes something like expecting to get a different result from doing the same thing repeatedly is madness and it is.

Life's too short to deal with other people's hangups for too long so keep your options open and save your loyalty for your own well being.