How I Became An Agency Contractor (Part 1/2)

Further to landing a job at this startup back in 2016, it was not to last. Within half a year, the money ran out and the company was forced to let all its staff go. The boss, the dude who had hired me in the first place, was considerate enough to let us know three months in advance so that we could make preparations. Sure, he was the second employer to let me go in the past year or so, but his conduct was exemplary. There was none of that cost-cutting bullshit, at least. He projected the runway and paid us what we were due, right up to the final month.

The job search begins anew...

On my part, I began my job search anew. This was becoming routine by now. I elected to keep coming into the office to work on the company project even though technically, I wasn't an employee anymore. The boss was still at it, since he was the only one left in the company. In the meantime, I hammered out my website using Semantic UI, which I'd picked up during my time in the startup, and continued blogging.

The job search took a couple months. Apparently, plenty of companies in the immediate vicinity were hiring. On the not-so-bright side, some of these were your typical douchebags trying to smoke me with The Probationary Pay Gambit and not even having the class to be subtle about it. In some of these cases, you could practically smell the desperation. But by then, I was numb to it all and took everything in stride.

It was about this time I interviewed for that job at the IT Training center, and encountered my ex-lecturer. As mentioned, it was an interesting interview, but until I got my ACTA, their hands were tied. It was also around this period I got that ill-fated but educational experience in Mozat. And so the search continued.

An obsession with meaningless things

Among some of the interview offers I got, there was a remarkable phenomenon among Government-affiliated positions, such as Singapore Press Holdings and Singapore Polytechnic. I applied, received replies indicating interest, and then they pulled this stunt whereby they asked for my GCE "O" Level Certification. For those not in the know, the "O" Level Cert is the piece of paper that tells employers that you have graduated from secondary school, i.e., you have a basic education. The "O" stands for "Ordinary".

When I queried if this was an absolute necessity to proceed with the interview, they replied to the affirmative - yes, I absolutely must have that cert. Which was when I politely declined the interview. The HR for SPH, in particular, seemed really shocked in her email. It was like no one had ever had the temerity to turn down an interview for Singapore Press Holdings before. Imagine that! Poor girl.

Some may be wondering why I turned them down over such a trifling matter. It was a chance to work for a big company, wasn't it? To understand this, you'd have to see things from the perspective of a tech person. I wasn't some desperate schmuck with no qualifications looking for just any job. The size of the firm didn't matter. I wanted a tech job for career longevity. And any company that was going to obsess over trivialities such as an "O" Level Cert, certainly wasn't worth my time. Seriously, I had a Bachelor's Degree and multiple Diplomas in related fields and a resume that suggested I'd been through the mill... and these clowns wanted to be absolutely certain I had a basic education?!

This may sound arrogant, but I assure you, hubris has nothing to do with it. In tech, what we value is people who can do the work. Certification is secondary. How many Computer Science grads out there can't solve FizzBuzz, for example?

Do not go there.

The insistence on producing such a trivial piece of documentation told me they were companies that didn't have their priorities right - and if that was the case, no matter how big they were, they were a no-go area. I would work for another startup before joining these big boys, any day of the week.

Also, I think I've paid my dues and have earned the right to say no to bullshit... even if said bullshit is coming from some big-fuck Government-affiliated company like SPH.

Being contacted by an Agency

About the time I was wading through a lot of options, I got contacted by a Recruitment Agency. It was in the form of a message sent to my LinkedIn account. They were hiring for a big tech company, and if I was open to a contract position (one year, renewable), we should talk further.

This got me thinking...

Contract Positions

Now all of my life up to now, I've actively avoid Contract positions due to the perceived lack of job stability. Who wants to be in the position where they're constantly looking for a job? Then I thought further. Constantly looking for a job... like now, you mean? I'd been taking only Permanent roles for the last fifteen years. Fat lot of good it did for career stability! The last two companies I'd had a Permanent role in, tanked. And I was in a position that wasn't too far different from if I had taken on Contract positions to begin with.

No more illusions.

All that "career stability" was an illusion. And I was done with the charade.

Also, in a rapidly evolving field like computer technology, staying too long at any one place was a bad career move unless I was planning to climb some corporate ladder or something. It would be hell on my employability in the long run.

Lastly, I was tired of having to explain why I left my last job. Sure, the fact that the last two companies tanked wasn't my fault. But some companies have this habit of trying to parlay it into something that could be construed as my fault, so as to gain a negotiating advantage. (They didn't know that Your Teochewness doesn't negotiate, and despises the practice.) You know the type - you say your company folded and you can practically see the Fire Sale sign blinking over their heads.

Next

The interview process... and beyond!

Where To Find Work (Part 2/3)

When we talk about tech companies, names like Google, Microsoft and IBM come to mind. But tech companies cover a wide range - from infrastructure to software. They also come in a large variety of sizes and service models. It's best to examine your planned career path and make your decisions based on those.

Tech Start-up

Companies that have yet to turn a profit or arrive at any kind of critical mass.

Company Size. These are typically really small, numbering less than ten employees, though large startups (such as Uber) aren't unheard of. We're, at this moment, speaking of the really tiny operations.

Service Model. B2B or B2C.

Pros

Experience. If you're starting out in your career, this is an excellent way to get your feet wet. The ungodly working hours and the tendency of the employer to throw everything your way will ensure that - as long as your attitude remains positive. Also, mentioning that you've survived "startup culture" is almost always a positive with potential employers. If nothing else, you've proven you can weather storms.

Importance. Companies like to say "everyone is important in our organization". This is bullshit. There's always dead weight in corporations above a certain size. But in a tiny startup, this is true because there's no way for it to be false. Every person actually matters. It's a minimal headcount. This is a huge chance to make a difference.

Sauntering to
work like this!

Informal. There's little to no red tape because it's more trouble than it's worth at this point. Sure, there are rules... but also a great amount of flexibility. If you need to take urgent leave or even just a couple hours off, there's generally little to no paperwork and the approving party is more amenable to it. And the lack of a dress code basically means you can waltz in rocking your shorts and slippers every damn day.

Cons

Pay and benefits. Typically not great. It's a startup and they're surviving on raised funds. This means belt are always tightened.

Environment. Along with belts being tightened, being in a startup also typically means that your office is going to look like somebody's storeroom.

Workload. If you're a fan of coming in on time and leaving on time, don't count on it with a startup. Here, due to lack of manpower, everyone gives way more than the prescribed eight working hours a day, bosses included. Working in a startup is hell for your work-life-balance.

Stability. Or lack thereof. A company that is in danger of going under anytime due to lack of funding, isn't the safest bet in the world. You've been warned.

Verdict. Try this at least once in your career. Especially early in your career. If the start-up fails, you'd have gained valuable experience. If it succeeds (and that's a tremendous if) you can take a healthy chunk of credit for bringing it past startup stage. Either way - much to gain, fuck-all to lose.

Software Vendor

These are small companies that make software or websites for other companies. They may have gotten past the startup phase, but survival is a constant struggle.

Company Size. Small or medium.

Service Model. B2B

Pros

Responsibility. Everyone manages clients and builds software at the same time. This is really good for leveling up different aspects of your game simultaneously.

Informal. There are rules. Those rules are also negotiable, because at this point, the company hasn't grown large enough that making occasional exceptions on a case-by-case basis would pose any sizeable problem. That said, it really depends on who's in charge. Some SMEs have a serious case of Chinese Towkay Syndrome and like to act like they have a few thousand employees under them.

Domain Knowledge. Doing work for several different clients, all from different industries and backgrounds, can make the developer well-versed in a large variety of industries. This is always useful, particularly in the event that you want to consider being a software developer in that particular industry.

Direct contribution to profits. Since the profits come off doing lots of low-margin work, your value is determined by how many clients you manage to bill on your watch regularly.

Cons

Repetitive work. Doing different versions of the same thing day in, day out, can make you feel like you're stuck in a Hamster Wheel of Doom.

Standard of work. By that same token, doing work for so many clients invariably means that the projects are small. And simple. Things you'll eventually outgrow.

Pay. The pay is not that much better than that of a startup. The company can pay more, but you have to constantly prove yourself because your performance is directly linked to profits. This can prove exhausting in the long run.

Like a very leaky boat at sea.

Stability. They're more stable than the average startup, which doesn't mean much. A bit of upheaval in the tides of the economy will see them scramble to cut the dead weight.

Verdict

A decent (but entirely optional) training choice early or in the middle of your career. Don't stay beyond a few years. Get the experience you need and move on.

Tech Multinational Company

These are typically the big players whose head office is often not in Singapore.

Company Size. Large. Sometimes huge.

Service Model. B2B or B2C.

Pros

A great environment.

Environment. Big spaces, janitorial services, posh business locations.

Pay and benefits. Your remuneration is likely to be competitive. You may even get dental.

Professional visibility. Google. Facebook. Microsoft. These ring a bell? They should, because they're B2C and just about everyone has heard of them. If they're purely B2B, like Cloudflare or Atlassian, then maybe not. But those in the tech industry would have heard of them, and that's no small thing. Working in a tech MNC opens new doors.

Stability. Big tech companies tend to be big for a reason. They've weathered storms, and in all likelihood, will probably be around long after you're gone.

Cons

Politics. At any large corporation, you get people jostling for position and all that juvenile shit.

Your expendibility. Again, in a large company, your contribution doesn't have as much impact. Their attitude is more along the lines of "you're lucky to be working for us" rather than "we're lucky to have you on board". There are small companies with the same attitude; then again, we aren't talking about those wannabes, are we?

Red tape. A company of that size doesn't have the luxury of making exceptions for extenuating circumstances. Everything will be strictly by the book, unless you're personally very important to the organization.

Verdict

Move on when the time is right, but this makes a great addition to any resume. If you do decide to stay for the long haul, there's always the chance of a promotion and increased benefits.

Next

Now for the non-tech companies...

Ten Job Ad Descriptions to run away from, really fast

Every six months, I make it a point to survey the market and read job advertisements. Not because I want to leave my job, but because I want to keep my finger on the pulse of the web industry. However, due to being hellishly occupied with work and school, I shelved this for pretty much the whole of 2015.

When I finally got back to it recently, I was in for a rude shock. Appalled does not even begin to cover it. Was it me, or had the standards of job advertisements in the web industry fallen shockingly low since I last checked? That was when I started compiling this list of job ad sins. It was a bit of a struggle deciding on a title for this. "Ten ways to look like a complete amateur on a job ad"? "Ten ways to ensure no self-respecting web developer applies for your company, ever"?

No, I will, for the most part, not be including live examples. Because if I did, let me assure you that this list would not be stopping at ten. I will, however, do some paraphrasing.

1. Horrible grammar

This one's a bit of a no-brainer. The odd spelling error here and there is forgivable - actually, hell no it isn't. Not in light of the fact that there's spellcheck and all sorts of nifty tools available these days, and the fact that you're generally supposed to proofread your shit before making it live. That said, I'm prepared to overlook the odd spelling error or two. But when you add bad punctuation and inconsistent capitalization into the mix, I am not going to be regarding your job ad with anything other than derision.

Learn to spell, will ya?

I am a professional, and good golly, I expect - no, demand - a reasonable standard of English from my prospective employers. On the other hand, web developers whose first language isn't English should not mind too much - they probably won't even notice.

Come on. I know us web developers don't earn big money, but calling us "developoors" is a gross exaggeration.

MNC seeks an experienced web developoor.

More examples...

- applicants are expected to have proificiency in Java and Ruby.
- You will be working on our propreitory database management system.

The cruelest irony

- Should conversed well in English and Bahasa.

2. Glaring technical errors

The forward slash is meant to be used when certain things belong together, or are interchangeable.

An example would be

- HTML5/CSS3
- LESS/SASS
- MySQL/Sql Server/Oracle
- XML/JSON

But not this. I'm not sure any web developer wants to work for people who don't understand that Java and JavaScript don't belong together.

- Java/JavaScript
- SDLC/MVC

Odd one out.

And then you have this beauty...

- you should be well-versed in programming languages such as AJAX, ASP.NET, jQuery, MySQL, HTML, Python

Of the above, only one could be classified as a programming language. Don't laugh. It's on so many job ads, in varying permutations, that it stopped being funny a while back. Developers generally want to work for, or alongside people who know what they're doing.

Sure, perhaps a non-technical person such as HR wrote the job ad. Pray tell, what kind of company has so little common sense that it would allow a non-technical person to draft a technical job description?

3. Meaningless requirements

You get this in a huge number of job ads, and they all mean the same thing - absolute squat.

You should be:
- self-motivated
- self-starter
- creative, out-of-the-box thinker
- enthusiastic
- detail-oriented
- a great team player

These things are nigh impossible to prove. Everyone and his dog thinks he's creative and a self-starter. No web developer is going to tell you "I'm boring and unimaginative, and I need the occasional pep talk to keep me motivated".

An out-of-the-box developer?

How is a web developer supposed to prove enthusiasm? Have a GitHub account and contribute to the open source community? Well, then perhaps your job ad should have said this...

You should have a GitHub account which showcases your contributions to the open source community.

See? Say what you actually mean. Wasn't that easy? And way more meaningful than copying some clever-sounding buzzwords from everyone else's job ad?

4. Requirement creep

And sometimes, you get a job description like this. The requirements are so numerous, it makes one wonder how it is humanly possible for any one individual to have them all.

- Well-versed in CMSs such as WordPress and Drupal.
- Expertise in e-Commerce technologies.
- Comfortable with both Windows and Linux environment.
- Have previously participated in projects through at least two successful SDLCs.
- Extensive experience in database systems, preferably SQL Server.
- Mastery of Photoshop and other image-editing tools.
- Expertise in HTML and CSS, and CSS preprocessors like LESS and SASS.
- Must be well-versed in design and UI.
- Mastery of SEO and internet marketing.
- Proficiency in JavaScript and JavaScript libraries like jQuery and MooTools, as well as AngularJS, React and Meteor.
- Deep knowledge of C# is a must.
- Experience in other programming languages such as Java and Ruby.
- Have written apps for both iOS and Android.
- Should be able to deliver twice as fast as the average developer.
- Typing speed of at least 80 wpm.

We call this "requirement creep" because it probably started out as a small and reasonable list of technologies the new hire is supposed to be proficient in, and somewhere along the way, some bright spark remarked "it would be better for him to have deep knowledge as opposed to merely proficiency in C#" or "knowing AngularJS isn't enough - we do a bit of React too, and some Meteor", or even "it would be nice if he was a fast typer as well".

What else did you miss out? Should he fart unit tests and burp functioning code, too?

Santa's in town,
and he'll grant all
your wishes.

I get it - you want the best possible value for your money. So does everyone else. But bear in mind that such a talented individual will probably not be applying for a job - you'll have to poach him from somewhere else and extract him from his current employer's cold dead fingers. And that's if you could afford him.

5. Stupid descriptions

This one really makes me cringe.

Groovy, exciting startup looking for PHP Jedi whose Force is strong in the code.

Looking for a ninja?

Seriously, don't be an idiot. This goes double for job ads with descriptions like "Database Guru", "Digital Samurai", "Code Ninja", "Software Wizard", "Rockstar Programmer", "Superstar Developer" and so on. The web development industry already seems to have problems being taken seriously - people seem to think all we do is make websites. And buddy, you're not helping.

If this is an attempt to appear witty, stop trying so hard. Because it's producing the opposite effect.

6. Too many words

Being grammatically and technically correct won't save you if you don't know when to stop writing your description. Some descriptions are so convoluted with overly long words that by the time the developer's finished reading it all, he's lost the sense of what the ad was trying to say.

Wall of Text effect.

Take this for example

You will be expected to gather clients' requirements through regular meetings and collate them into system specifications for your fellow developers and document these requirements using accepted conventions to illustrate data flow and entity relationships. Upon which you will implement these requirements in proper object-oriented design following industry-accepted best practices and...

Oh snap, where was I? I probably nodded off after the second sentence. Couldn't all that have been adequately condensed into this?

Must be familiar with the Software Development Life Cycle.

Everybody wants to sound like they know stuff, and that unfortunately tends to translate to using ten sentences when you only need ten words. Well, here's something else for you to know - keep it short, and cut the crap.

7. Obsession with years of experience

I understand that in many industries, years of experience is a relevant metric. But where web development - indeed, any kind of software development - is concerned, all bets are off. Web development is such a wide and varied field that no two web developers are likely to have the exact same skillset or progression. Unlike, say, bricklaying. It would be a safe bet to say that a bricklayer with 10 years' experience would have developed muscles pertinent to mixing cement and laying bricks.

EDITOR'S NOTE: If you are a bricklayer and feel that your job scope is way more complex than just mixing cement and laying bricks, please accept my humble apologies.

But for something like this...

- must have 5+ years' experience in software development, at least 2 in mobile environment

It takes someone of average intelligence to learn the basics of software development anywhere between 6 months to a year, perhaps less for those among us who are more gifted. Beyond that, a developer could spend the next few years just reusing those basics and getting better at them, or branching out into other aspects of software development - different technologies, different methodologies, and so on. Just what is having "5+ years' experience in software development" supposed to prove?

Think this guy has
enough experience?

This next one takes that obsession to a new extreme.

- 7 years experience in Java.
- 4 years of experience in Windows server environment.
- 5 years or more in Social Media technologies.
- At least 3 years using C++
- 2 years or more in HTML/CSS/JavaScript
- 2 years or more in...

Or for the utterly ridiculous

- 5 years or more in HTML5.

HTML5's specification was stable in 2014. It first became a thing back in 2008. It is now 2016. In order for the applicant to have 5 years' experience in HTML5, he would have to be one of the founding members of the HTML5 specification. Let's say I cut the job ad some slack and assume the poster meant HTML instead of HTML5. This is HTML, dude. A school kid could learn HTML in a few weeks. Exactly what is an individual with 5 years' experience in HTML supposed to do for you? Do nothing but write EDMs? Write a book on the history of Netscape, maybe?

HR needs to stop trying to apply general rule-of-thumb to web development. It doesn't work.

8. Needing that degree

Many job ads seem more interested in the web developer's academic qualifications rather than his ability.

- Candidate should possess a Bachelor's degree in Computer Science, Information Technology or any other related discipline.

Having one degree and three diplomas, I probably should be the last to complain about this. But the fact is that this betrays a lack of understanding as to how web development works. A vast percentage of the web is created by self-taught developers with little to no formal computer science education. Why's that? Because you don't need a goddamn Computer Science degree to do web development. There's plenty of learning material on (gasp!) the web.

Degrees FTW!

A formal Computer Science degree simply gives a better idea of what the developer should have learned in school, but even that is a poor gauge for what skills he has kept current. I remember learning data structures and memory management and Boolean Algebra when I was a teenager, mugging for exams. How much of it have I actively used in web development? Pitifully little. Academic qualifications mean very little, especially if said qualifications were earned ten years ago and you're in a field that evolves every couple years.

9. Laundry list

I wrote about this back in February in response to something the managing director of Fixx Digital said, but it bears repeating.

Some job ads have a very specific list of skills they want their web developer to have. Way too specific.

- proficient in PHP 5.5 and above.
- knowledge of CodeIgniter.
- familiar with MySQL version 6.0 onwards.

I get it. I do! You want someone to fit into that pigeonhole, someone you don't have to spend time training, who may just up and leave anyway. I've said it before and I'll say it again - this is terribly shortsighted. You're missing out on potentially great hires as opposed to people who simply happen to have that specific skillset.

Check those boxes!

Try this instead.

- proficient in PHP, preferably version 5.5 and above.
- knowledge of MVC frameworks such as CodeIgniter.
- familiar with SQL databases such as MySQL.

See what I did there? The general skill was listed there, followed by a preference or example. This means that candidates applying for the job will at least have the foundation rather than the specific skillset. And if they don't know the specific technology, they can always learn. They have the foundation, don't they?

If you're not willing to invest in people, why should people invest the best years of their youth in your company?

10. Outright douchebaggery

I don't actually want to flog that dead horse and bring to life the specter of Sugar Technologies' disastrous job ad back in 2014, but this serves as a great example of what to write if you want to piss developers off.

Watch the attitude.

Who We Want:

• You are ambitious, intense and entrepreneurial, and you dream of doing truly epic shit with your life. You recoil at the thought of having 1.15 kids, balloting for a flat, saving up for a Toyota and waiting to withdraw your CPF savings at 65 (or 70, or 80, or 120).

Who We Don't Want:

• You are a shallow social climber whose dream is to work for Goldman Sachs because it "looks good on your CV". You went to an Ivy League university because it would "look good on your CV". But you couldn't get into Goldman Sachs (or Citibank, or HSBC) because you actually have no passion for finance, just like how you want to buy that Louis Vuitton bag (because it will "look good on your social CV") despite having no passion for design and craftsmanship. Guess what? If you were rejected by Goldman Sachs, you will be rejected by us too. For exactly the same reasons. Advice: try applying for a government job.
• You are a social misfit. You like technology only because you can't relate to real people. You spend your weekends playing DOTA and in your sleep you dream about your hero reaching Level 38. At school, you were always the last to get picked on any project or sports team. Having a conversation with you is about as interesting as watching paint dry. Advice: go seek help from a mental health professional.

A certain amount of arrogance is healthy. But if you're going to act like people should be grateful to be working for you, you'd better be more than just another start-up out of millions in sunny Singapore. And yes, almost all start-ups will claim they are that special. Let's just see who's left standing after the next few years, shall we?

At the end of the day...

Your company's job ad affects the kind of applicants you get, which in turn affects the kind of employees you eventually get. Many job ads I see could be worded a little more carefully and some of them just need to be killed with fire.

Web developer looking for a halfway decent job ad,
T___T

YOLO

Happy April Fool's!

It was with a certain amount of wry amusement when I read this article recently from Fortune.

In it, the author takes us through his year at tech startup HubSpot, run by New Age-y Millennials. My amusement faded somewhat when I considered the implications. True, this was a somewhat ramped-up depiction of events (I hope), but undeniably this is how Millennials tend to be perceived - seeking change for the sake of change, being different for the sake of being different and trying too damn hard to be special.

I cop to a fair bit of sympathy on that score. While I am currently pushing 40 and therefore out of the defined range of the term "Millennial", I've often fallen foul of the abovementioned perception by association. While my younger friends, the true Millennials, consider me an old-fashioned stick-in-the-mud with old-school ideals; my older pals from the Generation X tend to see me as a feckless and impulsive punk. I've been on the receiving end of the "I'm older (by a few years, go figure) therefore I know better" horsecrap, and put up with many a diatribe about "these youngsters nowadays", or "in our day...".

Still, all was well until I read this piece from the New York Times. And man, did I cringe at the depiction of Millennials in it - self-centered, irresponsible and shallow. The earlier article didn't seem quite so funny any more.

Any traces of amusement that remained were thoroughly wiped out when UOB launched its newest card late last month, a couple days ago.

YOLO, yo.

The YOLO card. Shiver me timbers. Which idiot came up with that, and what was he or she smoking at the time?

YOLO, if you've been living under a rock for the past decade, is an acronym for the term "You Only Live Once", a philosophy that encourages one to throw caution to the wind and embark on outrageous adventures. UOB was using this buzzword to target Millennials.

Not that I fault them for targeting Millennials - it's a sound business decision and I like the direction they've taken the design. But boy, did the term "YOLO" smack of condescension. Well done, UOB. In one sweeping gesture, you've lumped all individuals of that age group under the negative stereotype of reckless thrillseeking hedonists. What's arguably more insulting is that UOB seems to believe throwing some hip-sounding, douchebaggy marketing catchphrase at the card is going to draw these Millennials like flies to honey. Just how stupid do they think Millennials are, anyway?

Let me be clear here that I think Millennials have been given a bad rap, rather unfairly so. I've worked with, and for, Millennials who struck me as sensible people with good ideas. True, I've had my problems with some of them, but those problems were a product of personality, rather than age. I've had similar problems with older employers and colleagues. And true, their thinking isn't always in line with old-school tradition, but why the hell should it be? This is an evolving world, and when you live in an evolving world, you evolve or perish. Tradition, like most things, has its place. More importantly, tradition must know its place.

I'm also getting a wee bit tired of the smug, self-congratulatory assumption that young people today have it too easy and aren't built with the same resilience as the older generation. Sure, many of the twenty-somethings out there are aimless and prone to instant gratification. And I suppose those in the Generation X had life figured out by the time they turned 25? Cut me a fucking break. If you can claim that you have life figured out, the only thing certain is that you haven't got jackshit figured out. Most of us, regardless of generation, figured life out step by step, mistake by mistake, all the while chafing under our know-it-all elders.

The entire exercise of putting Millennials down, reeks of desperation - desperation of my fellow Gen X alumni to feel good about themselves at the expense of an entire younger generation. Come on, Gen X. You're better than this. This stereotype needs to die. Pronto.

Give the Millennials some credit, won't you?
T___T