Less Is More: How I Cut My Resume To One Page

I (very) recently wrote about Eight Reasons Why You Need a One Page Resume.  As an example of how you can cut down your resume, I wanted to provide an illustration of how you can, in fact, fit a lot of content on one page - without making your margins tiny. Here’s what I manage to fit on one page of my resume (view here):

1. Three internships at Microsoft
2. One internship at Apple
3. Three years at Google
4. One year at a start-up
5. Founder / CEO of CareerCup
6. Founder / Co-CEO of Seattle Anti-Freeze
7. Author of Cracking the Coding Interview
8. Author of The Google Resume
9. Masters in CS from UPenn
10. BSE in CS from UPenn
11. Minor in Mathematics
12. MBA from Wharton
13. Former instructor for 1 CS course as an undergrad at UPenn
14. Former instructor for 2 CS courses at the University of Washington
15. Various activities: Principal at Wharton Ventures (VC Group), Yearbook Chair, Social chair of cohort, Finalist in venture capital competition

How did I fit all this on my resume?  By being very, very selective:

• CUT: College projects.  They’re coding projects.  I’ve demonstrated that I’m highly technical by having other software engineering positions.  It just doesn’t matter any more – particularly as I’m not applying for coding jobs.
• CUT: TA / Head TA at Penn for 4 years.  While being a TA / Head TA does show some valuable communication and other skills, I have already demonstrated that through other activities (such as being an instructor at UPenn / UW).
• CUT: Hobbies.  It’s not that no one would care that, say, I enjoy playing squash, but a lot more people will care about almost anything else still on my resume.  Any that goes for most people - don’t waste time with your hobbies.
• CUT: Advisor to various start-ups.  Again, it’s not that it doesn’t matter at all, but it doesn’t matter as much as other stuff.
• REDUCED: Microsoft and Apple jobs.  Although I’ve already demonstrated technical skills through my position with Google, there is something compelling about the fact that I’ve worked at Microsoft, Apple and Google.  I don’t need to spend a ton of time discussing these jobs.  Just listing them is enough.  I put one bullet under each company, covering four internships total, and that’s enough.

See my “one pager” resume: Technical College Resume (2005); Non-Technical Professional Resume (2011)

Sure, it hurt a bit to cut that stuff.  But by removing or reducing those less impressive accomplishments / roles, I ensure that everyone who glances at my resume will see the most impressive things.

Again, if you need more convincing if you aren't convinced of why you can and should have a one page resume, read this post Eight Reasons Why You Need a One Page Resume.

Why the US can only have two parties (OR: why democrats should support tea party candidates)

Every election day, people love to proclaim their frustration with this dirty-awful-horrible two party system, and insist that what we really need is a multi-party system.   And every election day, they're dead wrong.

Let's take the following hypothetical election with candidates A, B and C.  30% of the population votes for A, 30% for B, and the remaining 40% of the population of the C.

C is our victor.  The As and Bs will be upset, of course, but there are always winners and losers in every election.  We've done the best possible job at abiding by the will the people, and we've made as many people as possible happy.  Right?

Wrong.

It turns out that while A and B are individually less popular than B, they're very similar candidates.  Everyone who voted for B would have much rather had A over C.  The anything-but-C voters got split between A and B, and C ended up winning.  Put another way, if you only had two parties, only A or B would have run and people would have been happier.

The more parties the worse this problem becomes.

Potential 8 Party  Scenario:

W1 wins with 18% of the vote.   However, if we group people by similar values / goals / populations / whatever, we'd see that the L's have 42% preference, C's have 32% and W's are trailing with 26%.

But is this realistic? Yes.  Not only is it realistic, but it's already happened.  Remember 2000?

And if tea party candidates run separately, it'll happen again:

So next time someone is advocating for a multi-party system, remember this.  With its current election structure, the US can not support more than 2 parties. If we want more parties, then advocate for the necessary changes to the voting structure: rank order candidates, run off elections, etc..  But don't advocate for a multi-party system without those changes.

Quitting your job? Here’s what you should do next.

If you’re like many people out there, you’re unhappy at your job and just want out. You know you’ll be able to focus more on your job search if you weren’t constantly distracted with work – and you wouldn’t have to make up so many fake doctor’s appointments that your boss thinks you’re deathly ill.

But should you do it? Should you leave your job before you find a new one?

If you can afford it – that is, if you can afford being unemployed for several months – then it might be work it to just take the leap.

But here’s the trick: find something “real” to do with your time. Start a business. Chip in at a friend’s startup. Re-code your college senior design project in more modern technologies. Just do something!

You’ll have a much better answer what you are doing with your time, you’ll keep your busy, you’ll make your resume a bit more interesting, and, hey, maybe you’ll learn something.

Blame Men - And Women: A response to TechCrunch's article on women in tech

Michale Arrington unleashed a fury of attacks - pro-women, anti-women, pro-Arrington, anti-Arrington - this week with his post "Too few women in tech? Stop blaming the men. Or at least stop blaming me."  The assumption, of course, is that you should blame the women. The gist of Arrington's post is this: Stop blaming us for the lack of women as speakers / subjects of articles.  We try, but there's just not as many women.  And don't blame the men either.  Silicon Valley is a true meritocracy, and women have a ton of advantages in tech / entrepreneurship.  Women are not pursuing this field, and it's probably something innate.

He's partially right, and I can understand his frustration.  TechCrunch probably tries to attract female speakers, and it must be frustrating that, despite all that effort, people are criticizing them for not having enough women.  I get that.

The rest of the article is where Arrington goes wrong.

1. Silicon Valley is a not a full meritocracy.

Your network is incredibly important in getting press, attracting employees, getting funding, etc. Can people assume you're less technical, less credible because you're female? If you're female, do you have to do more to prove your credibility? Absolutely.

2. Women have many disadvantages as entrepreneurs.

He states that "statistically speaking women have a huge advantage as entrepreneurs". He makes a common mistake here. Yes, women have some advantages. Are there disadvantages to being female? Of course. I've had so many people comment on my desire to start a company and ask, "what will you do when you have children?" If people are directly asking me that, I can only assume that VCs, potential partners, etc, will be wondering the same thing. And somehow I don't think my fiancé John would get the same questions. I can tell you countless stories from business school, tech environments, etc about people making assumptions. I do get some advantages from being female, but I also have to work harder in some respects. And I, unlike Arrington, would not be so presumptuous to assume that it falls so heavily on one side or the other.

3. When you say "women have it easier," you're also usually saying "I assume women are worse."

Here's a conversation I've had many times with different people:

Person: "Oh no, I'm not sexist, but come on, women have a lot of advantages getting a tech job or doing other stuff. There's so much pro-women stuff."

Me: "So you're saying that it's easier to get into, say, Google if you're female?"

Person: "Of course. Look at what they do to recruit women."

Me: "I see. So then if it's easier getting into Google as a woman, then you must believe that the average woman is less qualified?"

Person: "Well, right, that's true."

Me: "So when you see a woman in tech, you assume she's worse than the average man? Even though you know that she's at Google, she would probably have to more to prove her credibility?

This is the point where the person usually stutters.   (The "person" can be either male or female. Men are not necessarily any more sexist than women.)  Arrington introduces this conversation with a comment about how he assumes that the acceptance rate for women-founded businesses in Y-Combinator is higher than that of men-founded businesses.  Does the rest of this conversation follow?  Most likely.

4. Early sexism is relevant.

There's everything that happens before people become entrepreneurs. All the implicit sexism. The high school teachers who think maybe you want to be careful before taking that college level calculus class over the summer - it's really hard, you know. The people who aren't surprised when you struggle in math and science - who don't expect as much of you. Young girls looking around and seeing the people like them working "normal jobs" rather than having super-successful careers. Arrington suggests that women are just inherently less inclined to be entrepreneurs, and completely ignores that maybe someone's childhood affects their goals and values.

5. Women are genetically less and more inclined to be entrepreneurs.

Ok, Arrington doesn't directly say this, but he certainly suggests it as a theory.  People have been asserting things like "oh women are just inherently less inclined to do X," only to have it equalize later on in life. I also know that there are just as many female math majors as male in the US, suggesting that it's maybe not that women are inherently less quantitative.

Virtually every time people introduce some study to show why things are just as they should naturally be, the reasoning is flawed.  It usually goes something like: "A study showed that men are better than women at X.  X is a component of Y.  Therefore, men are just inherently better at Y than women."  That only follows if X is the only component of Y.  Let's find some reasons why women should be naturally more inclined to be entrepreneurs, shall we?

• Women are better multitaskers.  [study]
• Women make better managers. [study]
• Women, more often than men, have a secondary source of income (yes, their spouses).  Thus, a women pursuing entrepreneurship is less likely to be gambling their child's education, family well-being, etc.

Now, those top two are according to just one study / article.  There may be studies that contradict it.  That's part of the problem, after all.  People bring one study to suggest that women are inherently less inclined in one aspect of entrepreneurship, and use it as a comprehensive explanation of a very complex problem.  It doesn't work like that.

I don't know why there aren't more women in tech or more women entrepreneurs.  But I do know that it's a really, really complex problem, and there's a lot men and women can do to help solve it.

Joining Google (or any great tech company)? Don't believe management's lies - 3 tips to really succeed.

Piaw Na, an ex-Googler, wrote an excellent post titled Tips for Noogler Engineers.  Piaw correctly points out that what's great for Google isn't necessarily what's great for you or your career.  For instance:

"Interviewing. It absolutely does not help your career one bit, even though it's absolutely critical for Google in the long term. It's not rewarded, considered during the promotion process, and it burns a lot of time. Put it off as long as possible. And don't even bother with hiring committees. That's even more of a time sink. ... 20% time. Depending on your manager, it could absolutely hurt your career. triple check to make sure your manager does not take a negative view on this. I liked my 20% time, but I was well aware of the trade-off for my career I was making."

I completely agree.  I enjoyed interviewing (well, until I did too much of it), and I loved my 20% project, but he's right - it doesn't help your career.  If you want to do this, you need to accept that this will be an unrewarded "vacation."  (And, even more frustrating, once you start interviewing it can be difficult to stop.  I spent 4 hours on interviewing every week, plus another 1 - 2 on hiring committee.  Google needed female engineering interviews, so I always got assigned two interviews.)

So what can you do to succeed?

1. Get a really good manager or tech lead: One thing that's nice about Google is that you can easily switch projects.  Before switching projects, ask around about the career history of your TL/manager's underlings.  Have they been successful?
2. Pick high profile projects: Again, what's good for a company isn't necessarily what's going to be rewarded.  The meaty maintenance issues are important, but they won't be rewarded.  You want to pick the project that people know and understand.  You want as many people as possible to recognize your impact.
3. Tackle the meaty problems: You not only want to be on the coolest projects, but you also want to tackle the biggest problems.  Seek out the problems that are widely understandable and have tangible, or ideally measurable, impacts.

Following these three tips will not only offer you a more successful career within the company, but they will also help you build a stronger resume when you leave the company.

Read More: Great Resumes for Software Engineers (and others)

Ask Gayle: I left my job because I didn't like my coworkers. What do I tell future employers?

Hi Gayle, I have a question. Basically I was moved to a group that was really bad in terms of people, nature of work and my career began to stagnate. I had a vacation planned and wanted to take up a new job immediately after that. So I quit, immediately left for a vacation and back and right away applying for new positions. Before I quit, I was one of the very few people in the company who got a bonus and a letter of appreciation from the CEO.

When looking for a new job, I am confused what to tell my prospective employees. Is it fine to tell them that I quit as I did not like my new group? I am not sure if this would reflect negatively on my personality. Or is it better I tell them that I was planning a career change, so quit and took a vacation and looking for a new job now?

Could you please advise me on the best approach to take?

Thanks, Gary

Depending on how you word it, it can unfortunately reflect negatively on your personality.  Teams want to work with more positive, upbeat people - not someone who complains all the time.  Additionally, if you're complaining about your last job, a new team will fear that you'll complain about their company too.  And no one wants to take that risk.

It's better to spin it in a more positive way: what were you looking for that your old company couldn't offer (and that conveniently this new company can offer)?  I don't know the specifics of your team and why you didn't like it, but consider an answer more like this:

• Interviewer: Why did you leave your last job?
• Gary: I really wanted to take on a role that's more focused on the client and on feature design.  I really enjoyed at the opportunities I got to interact with clients at my last job, and I even got a bonus and a letter of appreciation from the CEO for this.  Unfortunately, they didn't have a role that would match my new focus, so I wanted to move to a faster paced firm that could offer me more of these opportunities.

A response like this shows a positive attitude while simultaneously mentioning what you're interested, and what your relevant experience is.

The Interview Factory: Where Do Questions Come From and Who Picks Them?

Every day, I hear one candidate ask another, "Have you interviewed with Company X?  What were you asked?"  This would be a perfectly reasonable question, if it weren't for the fact that they were doing so on a website with thousands of interview questions.  Why get 5 questions when you can get hundreds? The truth is that, at most companies, there's no grand system.  There's no structure.  No one saying, "ok, now, every candidate will get one networking question and it will cover TCP/IP."

There's just... people.  Interviewers take a bit of interviewing training, that usually covers oh-so-helpful legalese like "asking candidates about their marital status is illegal", and then off they go!  Interviews ask whatever they want to ask.  No system, no structure.  Just a bunch of people making up their own minds.

Next time you're about to ask someone else what they were asked, stop and think: will this person tell me anything new?  Relying on one person's experience for your preparation is much, much worse than relying on the experiences of many.

Instead, do the following:

1. Check CareerCup.com for programming interview questions, but don't limit yourself to just your company's questions.  If you're interviewing for Amazon, be sure to check out the Microsoft Interview Questions and Google Interview Questions.  Companies are far more similar than they are different.
2. Review the questions to get a general feel for what the company likes to ask.  If you're doing an Amazon interview, for example, you may notice that Amazon loves object oriented design questions.  That'll give you a good idea of where to focus.
3. Practice!  Don't worry about getting the answer to each and every question.  Answers won't help you.  You need to solve the problems yourself, so you learn the general techniques.

While your questions may vary based on your background, your interviewer, the team, or the prospective company, interview questions are actually more consistent than not.  Interviewers don't like coming up with new interview questions for every candidates; it's hard, and results in poorly calibrated feedback.

As far who "invents" the questions, the answer is that it's rarely the interviewer.  Employees talk, and questions are shared across a company.  When people switch companies, they bring their favored interview questions with them.

I'm still asking my five favorite questions in my mock programming interviews.  I don't change them frequently because calibration is more important than creativity.  I know how to ask the question, how to lead a candidate to the solution, and exactly how well you did relative to other people.  Why change?

Ask Gayle: I am a low-level programmer. Can I get a job at Google?

Hi Gayle, I am desperate about getting a software engineer job in only Google. My dilemma is that I have worked only in RTOS (e.g. WinCE) System Software Domain in all of my 6+ yrs of overall work experience in big semiconductor companies e.g. Qualcomm, Marvell, and I have no experience in web companies.   Do you think there might be any chance for me to get a job in Google?

Thanks Avi

Google does occasionally look specifically for low-level programmers.  Scour the job openings and see if you can find something that fits your background.  However, most job openings at Google are just general "software engineering" positions, which leads to two questions:

1. Can you get an interview?

2. If you get an interview, can you get an offer?

As far as the first one, quite possibly.  You have some big name companies on your resume, and that gives you a lot of credibility.  The only drawback is that you may not have much object oriented experience.  You could try your luck applying as-is (it'll help if you can find an employee to refer you), or you could do something to boost this experience.  Is there an open source project (preferably one with Java) that interests you - one that would give you the much needed object oriented design experience?

With respect to the second question, it's really about how much you prepare for your interviews.  Read up on design patterns - the formal names aren't important, but it might be useful for you to see different ways of designing things.  Practice interview questions using object oriented design, and preferably Java.  Be aggressive about writing very clean code and designing classes and structs to hold the necessary data.

Google is desperate to hire great people, so with a bit of preparation, you can get a job there.  Good luck!

Ask Gayle: What can a student now do to prep for a programming position?

Hi Gayle, I am an international student from India and I just finished my BS in EE with minor in computer science and will be moving to CMU for my MS in computer science this coming fall.

Being an EE student, I am not so proficient at programming. Since I will be starting my MS this fall , I would like to obtain good internships during my MS which I can convert to a relevant full time positions.

My problem is that I am not sure what minimum background and knowledge is needed before I go to these interviews or be selected for them. Secondly, I am not sure which language am I expected to be really good at?  Do I have to know C inside out?  What else should my resume have to ensure that I land up an interview?

Thanks

PY

I would focus on three things:

1. Learn data structures and algorithms

Your coursework should hopefully be sufficient for this, but I'm not super familiar with your program.  Sometimes schools offer two MS programs - one for CS-undergrads, and one for non-CS undergrads.  If this is the case for you, and you're in the MS program for people without a lot of coding experience, make sure that your algorithms course is truly rigorous.  This should mean covering most of the CLRS algorithm textbook.

2. Learn object oriented programming (with Java or C++)

Formal design patterns aren't especially important for interviews, but it can be useful to see a lot of different ways of representing data.  The important thing, really, is to get out of the mindset of "throw down any code that works."  Your coursework might not cover design patterns, so here are two books: Head First Design Patterns and Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software.

Practice these in either Java or C++.  C is generally less important.

3. Complete at least 3 "meaty" projects

Seek out the courses where you'll be doing some large programming projects.  You can also work with professors on their research, but make sure that (1) you'll be doing coding and (2) you'll really "own" a chunk of it.  You'll not only learn a lot from doing coding projects, but this will also give you material that you'll put on your resume.

As you go through school, keep in mind these resume tips for software engineers.  It's never too early to prep for your interviews!

Free Drinks, Free Lunch, Free Everything: How much do company perks really matter?

Microsoft was famous for its free all-you-can-drink sodas, until Google stepped up the game and offered free lunches (and dinners and breakfasts too). But, as a reader recently noted, do these perks really matter? My personal opinion: yes and no.

No, most perks don't really matter.  A free lunch does not fix a bad boss, and bringing your dog to work does not make up for a lack of career growth.  Don't be too fooled by these sorts of perks.  Instead, ask yourself, what is the dollar amount that this is worth to me? Free lunch, for example, is probably worth just about $2000.  Rather than being swayed by some company offering you free lunch, just pretend you are making an additional $2000 in salary.

However, some perks - the less flashy ones - can make a real, substantial difference in your life.  Microsoft's "We Pay For Everything" healthcare plan is incredibly important to some people.  Or, flexible work hours might be very important to other people.  These are the perks that you should really evaluate.

With all that said, while perks may be a flashy recruiting tool, perks are also often a reflection of the culture or history of a company.  In Amazon's case, its lack of perks are likely a reflection of its truly being a retail company - not a software company (and of its less profitable history).  Is it really fair to judge them by the same standard as Microsoft and Google?  However, in other cases, a company's lack of perks might suggest that it doesn't value its employees the way that its competitors do (or that the company isn't as desperate to recruit people).

In the end, no, it generally doesn't matter that much which perks a company offers.  You can assign a financial value to each perk by asking yourself, how much would you pay for this perk?  Remember that each person values each perk differently, and the dollars you assign might not match the actual price tag.  And that's ok.

Assign the financial value of a perk, and then look beyond all that.  Ask yourself, why is the company offering these perks - or not?  In the end, the culture of a company will make a bigger difference in your happiness than a few thousand* dollars.

* A few thousand dollars can obviously make a difference to some people.  I'm assuming here that we're comparing jobs at major tech companies, where the difference between $75k and $77k probably doesn't change your lifestyle.  If you're making considerably less or have a unique financial situation, then it can absolutely matter.

Ask Gayle: My interviewer misled me. Can I argue?

Dear Gayle, I interviewed with a major tech company and I was asked a tough question. I started to think of a brute force solution and the interviewer said that brute force is fine.  I began to write the code and before I was even finished, the interviewer began to bombard me with questions.  His questions then led me to a better solution.  I also noticed later that I had some bugs and other mistakes in my code, but these seemed fairly minor.

I feel that he misled me in telling me that my initial solution was fine, and I ended up getting a reject as a result.  Do I have any chance to put up an argument?

~ Frustrated, WA

There's a lot going on in this question, so let me break this down.

Did your interviewer mislead you in telling you that brute force is fine (when it really wasn't)?

It is possible you got a bad interviewer who didn't direct you properly.  Bad interviewers do exist, even at the best companies.  I suspect that your interviewer was probably looking for whether or not you would notice and look for a more optimal solution, or if you would be satisfied with a "good enough" solution.  Depending on how far along you were in your interview, the interviewer may also have been thinking "ok, we don't have much time, and I want to make sure I see this candidate's code.  Let me encourage him to just get on with it."

Did this cause you to be rejected?

Again, very hard to say that this really caused the reject.  First, typically about 3/4rds of candidates are rejected at each stage, so it's almost like you have to do things really, really right to not get rejected.  Second, it's unlikely to be any one issue that caused a reject.  As you noted, you had some bugs and other mistakes.  I'd guess that your interviewer's thought was more like "hmm, I liked this guy, but his solution wasn't very good, and he had some bugs in his code, and a few other mistakes."

Can you put an argument?

No.  In high school, did you ever try to argue a case to your principal that a teacher did something wrong? Did they ever side with you? Unless your teacher's actions were egregious, your principal almost certainly sided with your teacher.  This is much the same way. Whatever you say to your recruiter, he/she will almost certainly side with your interviewer.  You're more likely to spoil your decent reputation at the company, and it's just not worth it.

That said, there are times when you should not stay silent about an interviewer's behavior.  If they say anything or do anything offensive, speak up!  Or, if your recruiter asks for your feedback, then you are welcome to share it.

I'm sorry things didn't work out for you, but you're not alone.  Interviews are hard and, unfortunately, very random.  Most of my coworkers at Google admitted that they didn't think they'd pass the interviews the second time around.  Luckily, companies understand this and let you apply again in six months to a year.

Best of luck!

Debunking the Google Interview Myth

Years ago, rumors used to circulate about Microsoft interviews.  They were the hot, new company that everyone wanted to work.  With envy came the urban myths.  These rumors have since been transfered to Google, and will surely be transfered to some new company in due time. Bloggers - always desperate for links and traffic - have capitalized on this, with scary articles about their "nightmare interview" and "crazy questions".  Let's just stop this right now, shall we?

Google's interview process is really no different from its competitors. An engineer does a phone interview or two, where they're asked standard coding and algorithms questions.  Sometimes they're asked to code via Google Docs, because evaluating phone coding isn't easy.  Then, if all goes well (it usually doesn't - that's just how it is at any company), the candidate is brought in for a full day of interviews.  Candidates are asked a mix of standard coding and algorithms, and are asked to code on the whiteboard.  Coding on the spot might seem surprising to those outside of the software industry, but it's standard practice.  After the interview, Google's process is a bit different from Microsoft and Amazon's: a candidate's feedback is submitted to a hiring committee of engineers who makes a hire / no hire recommendation.

(FYI: I served on Google's hiring committee for 3 years, and interviewed 120+ candidates.)

IQ Tests? I've never seen these. Ever.

Brain teasers? Banned.  (Of course, everyone has a different definition of a brain teasers.)  If an interviewer were to ask a candidate a brain teaser, despite the policy, the hiring committee would likely disregard this interviewer's feedback and send a note back telling the interviewer not to ask such silly questions.

That whole "Google cares about GPA even for people years out of college" thing?  I supposed I can't speak for every hiring committee, but I never remember my hiring committee discussing the GPA of a professional candidate.  For that matter, we were never even given a candidate's GPA unless he/she elected to put it on their resume.

Now, let's look at the very widely circulated "15 Google Interview Questions that will make you feel stupid" list.  You want to believe these are real questions, given that Business Insider feels like such a reputable source.  Except that they didn't get this list from a direct source.  They borrowed their questions from some blogger (I won't link back here) who was posting fake questions.  Now, I don't know that said blogger was intentionally lying - he probably borrowed them from someone else.  Whatever the original source is, these questions are fake. Fake fake fake.

How can you tell that they're fake?  Because one of them is "Why are manhole covers round?"  This is an infamous Microsoft interview question that has since been so very, very banned at both companies .  I find it very hard to believe that a Google interviewer asked such a question.

As for some of the others - "Explain the significance of 'dead beef'", "A man pushed his car to a hotel and lost his fortune. What happened?", etc - I'm also highly skeptical.  If one's a lie, why on earth would we believe the rest?  Especially if they are clearly in the banned category.

So while I know that "oh my god - Google asks candidates to reverse a linked list?" doesn't make for quite as good SEO-link baiting material, let's stop scaring the candidates with silly stories. And that includes you too, Business Insider. Any Google interviewer could tell you that at least some, if not all, of these questions are fake.

Want to see real Google interview questions, Microsoft interview questions, and more?  Check CareerCup.

Ask Gayle: What do delays mean?

Gayle: I interviewed with a company two weeks ago, and they haven't notified me of a decision.  I even tried emailing the recruiter - no response.  Does this mean I'm rejected?

~ Sanjiv, New York

In one word: no.  After you interview with a company, they will always tell you if you're rejected or not.

Delays can happen for many reasons, good, bad and neutral:

• They are going to give you an offer, but would like to have all their paperwork together.
• They prefer another candidate, but are waiting for her to make a decision.  You are their second choice.
• The team is being "reorg'd" and the current headcount is unclear.
• Your recruiter went on vacation.
• The recruiting team is being reorg.
• You have a bad / lazy recruiter.
• One of the many people you interviewed with is slow about entering feedback.

Hang tight - they'll tell you, eventually.  In the meantime, feel free to politely email or phone your recruiter every several days to check in.

Good luck!

Should entrepreneurs get an MBA? Reflections after 1 year at Wharton

Having just finished up my first year in Wharton's MBA program, I often hear the question, "is an MBA worth it?" It's a tough choice: $100k or so in tuition and other expenses, plus the lost salary, plus the loss in possible promotions.

With TechCrunch having just posted an article on this matter, I thought I'd add my take on it.

An MBA offers a variety of benefits, and many people, in discussing this question, just focus on the education. The problem with that is that formal education is an incredible inefficient way to learn. Think back to the 40 or so classes you took as an undergrad. How many of those really made a difference in your life? Couldn't you have learned just the most valuable stuff in a much shorter amount of time? Of course! Yet people would rarely conclude that undergraduate degrees are a waste of time. Note: this applies also to computer science degrees. You don't need a full degree to make you a great programmer. Why then do so many people argue that entrepreneurs should have CS degrees over MBAs?

Like undergraduate degrees, MBAs offer a lot of value beyond the learning. You meet people who mentor you, and you mentor them. You gain lifelong credibility. You gain a lifelong alumni network, offering many many thousands of people who will answer your phone call just because you went to the same school. You can't get these things from a textbook or from reading some "MBA 101 blog."

Is an MBA right for you? I have no idea. There are no credible studies on this, since you can't exactly do a controlled scientific experiment. And the vast majority of people will just tell you to follow in their footsteps.

Here's the advice I will give to prospective MBA students:

• Name Matters: The amount of credibility and the quality / reach of the alumni network varies with the name / rank of the school. There are a lot of people for whom a Tier 2 MBA program will add substantially to their life, but there are also a lot of people for whom it won't. In short: don't just go to "any" MBA program. Go to one that is a "step up" from where you are now.
• Know What You Want: MBA programs are only two years, and you give up a lot in the short term - personally and professionally - to attend. If you enter knowing what you want, you'll be able to seek out the right people and opportunities much more quickly.
• Field Expertise Matters Too: An MBA will probably help you run a better business, but so will many things. Considering padding your MBA with a bit of field expertise, whether that's a tech skills, retail experience, medical background or whatever. The ultimate for a tech start-up is a business skills + tech background + industry / market experience.

And, of course, remember: if you're considering an MBA, you'll probably be just fine whatever you do. Don't stress it too much.

How Cell Phones Fail the Elderly

My elderly (childhood) nanny just bought a pre-paid cell phone and, naturally, I needed to help her set it up and teach her how to use it.  The phone was a great deal, she told me - just $99 for a year of free US and international calling! Cheapest phone plan ever, right?  This is what the plan really looks like:

• She pre-pays an amount, and the money expires after a length of time.  The length of time depends on how much you pre-pay.
• On the days she uses her cell phone, she's charged $0.99.
• If she calls another Verizon user (how does she know?), it's free.  It's also free on nights and weekends.
• Other US calls cost $0.05 / minute.
• International calling costs $1.49 / minute.

Confused?  Here's a convenient map (yeah, you're going to need to zoom in):

Note how there are multiple plans, and she probably didn't select the one that's best for her (Basic).  I'm not sure where she went wrong.  Maybe she couldn't properly evaluate her average talk time, the timing and the density of her calls to evaluate whether the "per day" is offset by the cheaper minute plan and free night time calls?  Crazy!

I declined to get into the complexities of pre-pay expiration, as I'm not sure I understand it myself.  What happens if I buy $20 (which expires after 30 days) and then a week later I buy $50 (which expires in 90 days)?  What expires when?

Lest she might actually wrap her head too soon around all that, her cell phone offers a new source of confusion.  Navigation requires a careful mapping (on very small buttons, despite having purchased the largest phone they had) of on-screen buttons to keypad buttons, while trying to avoid the calendar (who uses calendar on a basic flip phone?), voice daily (oh no the phone is talking to me!), picture messaging, web browser, camera and text messaging (conveniently called "Messages" so as not to be confused with, say, voice messages.)  You try explaining to her that she merely has to map the location of the on-screen buttons to the funny looking dashes and the weird circular button on the phone.

You know what she needs?  A phone.  Preferably one with a dial tone, so that she knows it's on.  Can someone make a flip phone with a dial tone please?  Or maybe a phone with a nice wizard interface?

Email is actually easier for her - at least I can write down instructions for her.

3 Business Ideas: Experiment Often, Carefully, and Singly

What have you learned in the past year?  Jill Foster of WomenGrowBusiness.com asked me this question and posted my response here: 3 Business Ideas: Experiment Often, Carefully, and Singly.  You can read it there or below where I've re-posted it. ------

I started CareerCup to solve one part of software engineering interviews: preparation. Candidates who are interviewing with Microsoft, Google, Amazon, or other companies are historically under-prepared and consequently struggle to get hired. This hurts not only the candidates, but companies as well who can’t distinguish between bad candidates and poorly prepared candidates.

After launching CareerCup’s first (revenue generating) product in 2008, I spent the past year improving its products and services. In doing so, I’ve learned the following insights:

1. Be careful about your time is spent. We all want to believe that we’re the best at anything, but sometimes we’re not. And, even if we are, not all jobs are worth our time. I recognize more and more that the old saying “if you want to do something right, you have to do it yourself” just isn’t true.

I now have some fantastic people working for me in the Philippines, India and in the US to write, manage customer support, and do development. With their help, I’ve managed to finish a technical interviewing book, software engineering interview video, and a technical recruiting service. I couldn’t do it without them!

2. Experiment often, carefully, and singly.

While I fully encourage people to research ideas thoroughly, research is only going to sell you so much. Sometimes, you just have to make the leap and experiment with an idea. Experiment often.

That said, look closely at how you’re judging the results of an experiment. Are you looking at revenue, or conversions? Depending on your approach to sales, this could be a big difference. Experiment carefully.

When experimenting, only run one experiment at a time. Yes, yes, I know you have a million ideas and you want to dive into all at once, but patience here will pay off. If you run three experiments at once, how will you ever know which one made the difference, and how much? Experiment singly.

And, if you want to be super advanced, look into standard error. A little bit of a statistics can help you understand what’s random and what’s real.

3. Be organized.

I feel like entrepreneurs are inherently disorganized – we’re always in such a rush to jump into things that we can get overwhelmed.

A bit of organization can reduce your stress by clearly outlining what you have to do. It gets rid of the nagging “Oh my god I have so much to do” feeling and lets you react properly. Maybe you’ll realize that you don’t have quite as much work as you thought, or maybe you’ll realize that you simply have to reassign some of the work.

Either way, you’ll feel better.

I maintain a to-do list with what I have to do (I use Remember The Milk, or whatever works for you). For paperwork, little details, filing expenses and such, I let the “forward” button handle that (that is, I forward things to my assistants to handle). And, I try to respond to emails instantly – you’ll have to do it eventually anyway, so the sooner you get it out of the way, the less time for which it’ll be hanging over your head.

How to Prevent Users from Circumventing Your Service

Many services are structured as follows: Person A pays Person B for a task or item, and the “finder” or “connector” service takes a cut. It’s a wonderful business model – someone else is doing all the “real” work, and you get a bit off the top. The problem is that users are wise to this in recurring interactions. Once trust is established through a successful interaction, B will come back to A and cut a deal. Is the service taking a 10% cut when A pays B? Perfect. A will pay B 5% less, but will pay B directly. It’s a win-win for the users, and a big fat “lose” for the service.

Services must, therefore, offer an incentive to continue to use the service for repeated interactions. Consider the case of two very similar websites:

RentACoder

RentACoder, an outsourcing service, suffers from this problem and has been unsuccessful thus far at tackling it. For the first job between a provider and me, the provider has a strong incentive to work through RentACoder. The person doesn’t know me, and has no idea if I’ll pay them; RentACoder offers protection from that. However, once mutual trust has been established, they will, almost without fail, ask me to pay them directly.

Ironically, RentACoder’s attempts at attacking this problem probably worsen it. The service offers conflict resolution / protection — but only if you’ve been using their service for all communications. Their hope is, I believe, that you’ll be less likely to leave the service if you communicate via RentACoder.

However, conflict resolution – eg, will-they-pay-me-or-won’t-they – is primarily a benefit in the early stages of a resolution, not in longer term transactions. Additionally, this feature is only offered if all communication is through their platform. Users much prefer to use their existing mail and messaging tools, especially since RentACoder’s interface looks like craigslist got in a fight with linux – and lost. So, even if a user wanted conflict resolution, it likely wouldn’t be available to them.

And so, RentACoder loses the exact transactions it wants to maintain: the long-term ones.

oDesk

Surprisingly, oDesk does not suffer from this circumventing issue. In the 20 or so oDesk providers I’ve worked with over the last year, not one has asked me to pay them directly. Why? Because oDesk offers an incentive to both me and the provider to continue using them.

Employers prefer to pay through oDesk because they can track the worker’s hours. Even if one trusts a worker, concerns still arise when a task takes unusually long. oDesk providers install software which takes a random screenshot every couple of minutes. If an employer is unsure why a task took so long, the screenshots can relieve their concerns.

Employees prefer to work with oDesk because employers see long and continuous work assignments as implicit reference. Sure, employers could look at the worker’s reviews, but “grade inflation” renders reviews almost useless. However, 100+ hours of work for the same employer says something very strong about the candidate. By continuing to work through oDesk, employees boost their resume and their attractiveness to employers.

Thus, both employers and employees continue to work through oDesk, and oDesk reaps the benefits.

What This Means for Your Company If you’re offering a service where people have an incentive to “cut you out,” think long and hard about how you can add value in repeated interactions. What are their problems? What can you solve?

In the case of outsourcing websites, employees face the problem of finding new jobs, and employers worry that employees are exaggerating time limits. oDesk has solved these pain points, and so we continue to work with them. RentACoder, however, is cut out of the picture.

Which service do you want to be?

PeopleOfWalmart launches with EmptySpaceAds!

If you haven't checked out PeopleOfWalmart yet, you're in for a treat. Pages of entertainment from America's classiest individuals (yes, mother of mullet-baby, I'm speaking to you).

One of my favorite websites just got a little bit better: it just launched EmptySpaceAds! Move your mouse to the margins of the page and you'll see the new ads come up.

EmptySpaceAds is the same start-up I was working for before I left to go back to school, so it's really exciting for me to see this development.

Now, I know ads aren't exactly exciting for most people - who likes 'em? They replace regular content and get in your way as a result. That's why EmptySpaceAds is so great - it's in the margins, so it won't replace any "real" content, and it doesn't get in your way like many pop-up ads.

For publishers, it offers similar benefits. You can increase the number ads you show on a page (and therefore your revenue), or you can replace your ad units with EmptySpaceAds. Either way, you'll see a boost in your revenue. And, best of all - you don't have to sacrifice content that brings customers to your page.

Check them out at: PeopleOfWalmart.com and EmptySpaceAds.com.

Outsourcing Your Life in 8 Easy Steps

Since discovering the wonder of outsourcing nine months ago, in October 2008, I've outsourced approximately 300 hours. That's 300 hours that I got to spend reading or playing (or working...) while various assistants re-formatted an e-book, researched traffic stats for competing sites, scheduled apartment visits, got price quotes for vacation rentals, designed posters for an upcoming party, performed bookkeeping work, handled support requests, and wrote software. All for a mere $3.50 / hour. (Slave wages? Hardly.)

Life post-outsourcing is much less stressful. Here's how you can get in on the action:

1. Understand what tasks you need help with: Spend three days figuring what you want. Each time you spend more than 15 minutes on a task, write it down on a list. At the end of the three days, go through your list. Which of these could you hire someone else to do?

2. Categorize the most important skills: What are the core skills that your tasks require? Photo editing, excel, etc? Is there particular software that your assistant needs? How good does the candidate's English need to be?

3. Post a job opening: I use odesk.com for finding outsourced assistants, because I love its transparency. I can see how many other jobs a candidate has (will they be too busy for me?), how much they've been paid (are they trying to overcharge me?), and their scores on a number of odesk-supplied tests. I post a suggested rate, and candidates respond with their own bid. Job applicants usually apply within minutes of posting a job opening.

• Note: You might expect that if you post an expected wage of $7 / hour, no one will bid less than that. I haven't found that to be the case. Because you can see a candidate's prior wages, a person who's previously been paid $2 / hour has a hard time requesting $7. Furthermore, andidates are competing with each other to get each position, so they need to post competitive wages.

4. Interview via Instant Message (or Skype): I conduct my interviews over instant messenger. For an assistant, I'll usually ask the following questions:

• What times of day are you available to work?
• Are you available on the weekends as well?
• Can you make phone calls, if needed, through Skype?
• How much experience do you have with excel and photoshop?
• [After providing a link to a recent news article] To better assess your English skills, could you please read the following article and provide a short (4 - 5) sentence summary?

You'll notice that my questions are very simple. Why? Because I don't think you can truly assess someone's capability without hiring them. So, I look for their English capability, confirm that they have the requisite software and skills, and then I hire them to test them out.

5. Hire Several, and Look for Quality not Price: You won't know how good a candidate is until they actually attempt a task and most, frankly, aren't very good. Hire several people, try them out, and then narrow it down to the best.

• Don't automatically go for the cheapest. Suppose you have a $2 / hour and a $5 / hour candidate applying. If you have to spend even 20 minutes more time correcting the cheaper employee, it may be not worth it. Hire for quality, not price.

6. Clarify Expectations: Do you want an employee to make their own decisions? Or would you prefer that check with you first to see what to do?

7. Let Go of the Bad, Hold on to the Good: Some candidates won't be very good, but that's why you hired more than one. Let go of someone if they just aren't cutting it, but fight to hold on to the best. A good assistant is well worth it.

8. Go For It! Your new assistant will report his or her time to odesk.com, usually automatically using odesk's software (this software takes screenshots of their computer randomly while they're working, to ensure that their time reports are honest). Odesk will then charge you each week, giving you a short window of time to contest any charges. You can either IM or email tasks to your assistants. Note that both you and your assistants will be reviewed when you close the assignment, so it's in both people's interest to treat each other fairly.

Questions? Post them in the comments or email me.

Supreme Court Ruling on School Strip Searches - And What It Means

The Supreme Court ruled 8-1 that schools cannot strip search students, with Clarence Thomas as the lone dissenter. In the case, a 13 year old was accused of having ibuprofen by an ex-friend. Though the school never searched her locker or desk, they strip searched the girl. For ibuprofen.

Redding says she was then asked to strip down to her underwear and stood there while the nurse and secretary inspected her clothes and shoes.

"Then, you know, I thought they were going to let me put my clothes back on, but instead they asked me to pull out my bra and shake it, and the crotch on my underwear, too," Redding says.

Redding says her whole body was visible to the school administrators. She kept her head down so the nurse and the secretary couldn't see her fighting back tears.

I've already discussed why I feel that this was assault, so I won't go into that again. The ruling, however, was interesting.

Clarence Thomas was the lone dissenter, asserting "that the majority’s finding second-guesses the measures that educators take to maintain discipline 'and ensure the health and safety of the students in their charge.'" What's troubling here is two points:

• He seems to feel that there's something inherently wrong with second-guessing educators' decisions. Why? Isn't a wise to have someone double checking to make sure that people are doing the right thing?
• He believes that a strip search helps "ensure the health and safety" of students, when quite the opposite is true. This strip search was extremely detrimental to the health and safety of the girl. She felt abused - which is exactly what she was. In the rare cases when a strip search is necessary, call trained professionals: the police.

The other interesting aspect of the ruling was that only two justices felt that the school administrators should not be shielded from liability. It is no shock at all that Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the only woman, was one of those two.

Justice Ginsburg singled out the assistant principal, noting that he had made Savana sit on a chair outside his office for more than two hours in what Justice Ginsburg called a “humiliating situation” when the case was argued.

“At no point did he attempt to call her parent,” Justice Ginsburg wrote on Thursday. “Abuse of authority of that order should not be shielded by official immunity.”

Indeed. You don't need to know the law to know that the following is completely inappropriate: searching a child's panties for painkillers - but never, say, searching her locker or her desk - and never calling her parents. And then making the child sit outside the office even though they never found anything!

Unfortunately, only two of the seven judges could understand that the school administrators abused this girl.

This is why we need more women on the Supreme Court. Women will not only be more likely to understand issues like this, but through sharing their experiences, they can help men understand.