Real World experience vs Home Lab experience

Tin_Man

How do you guys handle the issue when asked if you have experience in an area (say exchange 2003), to which you only have home lab experience but no real world experience? I ask this because I had a phone interview today. A lot of the area's they were asking if I had experience in were only in my home lab. They seemed to be put a little bit put off by that. I tried to recover from by going on how I am fast learner blah blah bla. Alas to no avail. Sadly enough with my current job I will not get any hands on exp to move on/up in my career. So how do I handle this next time I'm asked for example if I have experience with "Exchange 2003"

Job hunting sucks...

networker050184

You did the right thing. All you can do is tell them you don't have any real world experience, but that you have studied and labbed the subject and try to show your knowledge.

WillTech105

Easy -- lie.

I'm not sure what your financialy situation is, but I'll tell an employer I can give them the moon and the stars and if you really feel confident about your Exchange skills you shouldnt have too much of an issue on the job. If you got a wife and kids I'd be little more careful about this tactic.

To me unfortuantly job interviews are more of how well can you sell yourself than what you know.

dynamik

Try volunteering. See if you can find churches, non-profits, etc. that need work done. Then you won't have to lie or fudge the truth, and you will actually have real-world experience.

unsupported

WillTech105 wrote: »

Easy -- lie.

I'm not sure what your financialy situation is, but I'll tell an employer I can give them the moon and the stars and if you really feel confident about your Exchange skills you shouldnt have too much of an issue on the job. If you got a wife and kids I'd be little more careful about this tactic.

To me unfortuantly job interviews are more of how well can you sell yourself than what you know.

Wow... I don't know where to start on this one. I mean, wow... lying may be the way to get a job, it is sure as heck won't let you keep it.

UnixGuy

Never lie, because you will lose credibility, and you might lose your confidence.

I know many people get away with lying, but you don't have to lie. As Dynamic said volunteering is one thing.


Keep doing lab work and keep studying for certifications. A lot of employers will test your knowledge in the subject, and would prefer you because they will use your lack of real world experience as an excuse to pay you less. This will be your chance to build experience. This is how many people started (including myself), and in two years time you will be able to get higher pay.

rossonieri#1

hi tin man,

well, as an addition to what the other poster said,
you must not lie, and you can always test your competency at any time, any place - the lab, the forum etc.

about this :

How do you guys handle the issue when asked if you have experience in an area (say exchange 2003), to which you only have home lab experience but no real world experience? I ask this because I had a phone interview today. A lot of the area's they were asking if I had experience in were only in my home lab.

if you feel that you're good - there will always be a chance to ask them to test you & your competency. and, dont be affraid - when it comes to a live job test, everyone will get nervous - even the experienced one

Tyrant1919

WillTech105 wrote: »

To me unfortuantly job interviews are more of how well can you sell yourself than what you know.

OR... You show them what you know, so you don't have to sell yourself.

Daniel333

"fast learner" I would drop that from your vocab. Sounds bad to the HR ear.

Just be honest. Nothing more you can do. If they are not looking for a entry level admin, you can't make them. It's a rough market, an employeer can demand and an experience admin and junior level prices right now.

If you don't mind being picked apart, how about posting your resume up for us to take a look at so we can gauge your skill level a little better.

dynamik

Daniel333 wrote: »

"fast learner" I would drop that from your vocab. Sounds bad to the HR ear.

How come? I've seen many others report positive feedback from demonstrating an eagerness to learn.

networker050184

dynamik wrote: »

How come? I've seen many others report positive feedback from demonstrating an eagerness to learn.

I was wondering the same thing? Whats wrong with being a fast learner?

Paul Boz

Give them the answer they want to hear.

"Do you have experience with Exchange 2003?"

"yes."

You DO have experience with exchange 2003, its just in your lab. You don't have to tell them that unless they ask.

Tyrant1919 wrote: »

OR... You show them what you know, so you don't have to sell yourself.

You still have to sell them on yourself in addition to what you know. My company gets EXTREMELY qualified people to apply on a regular basis and most of them are weeded out because they come off as pompous or arrogant and we don't need those kind of people. On the other hand, someone that is easy going and willing to learn is often picked over the other type.

WillTech105

Paul Boz wrote: »

You still have to sell them on yourself in addition to what you know. My company gets EXTREMELY qualified people to apply on a regular basis and most of them are weeded out because they come off as pompous or arrogant and we don't need those kind of people. On the other hand, someone that is easy going and willing to learn is often picked over the other type.

I'll double that. Maybe its just been my experience but sometimes for one reason or another people are not given the chance to show what they know or arent gauged properly during interviews because they cannot sell themselves. Yes you should know what your doing but if you cannot properly communicate that you can -- chances are you'll be turned down.

Also sometimes you may have to lie (stretch the truth) in order be to be able to show what you know. One of the reasons I do not like traditional IT dept is the only way you can move up is generally either the person above you gets fired/leaves or the company expands. Most of the time you'll have to look at a different company in order to promote yourself.

Me for example I know how to use MS's GPM console. I've used it many times at home and at work when the Admins let me play around with it but on my resume I say I use it at work even though its not one of my "job duties". Ultimately I CAN do it and I am confident enough in my skill that I can do it if has been assigned to me.

Paul Boz

WillTech105 wrote: »

Me for example I know how to use MS's GPM console. I've used it many times at home and at work when the Admins let me play around with it but on my resume I say I use it at work even though its not one of my "job duties". Ultimately I CAN do it and I am confident enough in my skill that I can do it if has been assigned to me.

As long as you understand the technology it doesn't matter how you got the experience, as far as I'm concerned. Like you said, if you can do it you can do it. If you can't you can't. It doesn't matter how you know how to do it as long as you can do it period.

loxleynew

Basically relating back to the OP lab experience = real world experience for the most part. Yes of course you will get those weird problems in the real world that you wont in a lab experience, however, in the lab you get the fundementals of it that make you feel like you know enough to handle it.

So if you have a good lab and feel like you know the stuff, just say yes I have experience with it. If they ask how much? Just say however long you used the lab for. 2 + 2 will always equal 4. This is the same in computers for labs and real world. Merging a mailbox in exchange is the exact same in lab as it is in the real world.

mikej412

WillTech105 wrote: »

Easy -- lie.

Wow. I guess cheating on your certifications is okay too.

And when you screw something up, walk away and blame it on someone else. Heck, if you're up for promotion against someone else in your company, break something and frame them for it.

Oh -- and steal all you can. If you ever get caught in your lies, you may need to sell company property on eBay until you charm some other company with your winning personality.

WillTech105 wrote: »

To me unfortuantly job interviews are more of how well can you sell yourself than what you know.

Yeah -- and unfortunately the best job some people ever do for a company is the job of selling them self to get hired.

networker050184

mikej412 wrote: »

Wow. I guess cheating on your certifications is okay too.

And when you screw something up, walk away and blame it on someone else. Heck, if you up for promotion against someone else in your company, break something and frame them for it.

Oh -- and steal all you can. If you ever get caught in your lies, you may need to sell company property on eBay until you charm some other company with your winning personality.

I couldn't agree more. If you don't have what an employer wants don't lie to them about it, just go find a job you do qualify for. In my experience if you are lacking knowledge in one or two areas, but can show you are competent in others and have the desire and ability to learn they will give you a shot. I definitely have never had all the experience that any of the positions I have held asked for. Instead of lying I was honest and highlighted the experience I did have. Seems to be working for me so far.

jediknight

Honesty is always the best policy when being interviewed as if you lie, it will definitely come back to bite you.

You would be surprised at how many employers actually higher people with none or far less experience in a particular specialty than they are requesting due to the fact that the candidate being interviewed was HONEST.

My case in point, I was being interviewed for a group that managed/supported Web servers. I was interviewed and asked a series of questions that I was to rate myself 1-10 in my skill/knowledge level. Now, I had absolutely no knowledge of IIS which is what was being used here and when they asked me what my knowledge of it was I rated myself as a 2 since I could install it and use the IIS manager and that was it. About a week later I get a call saying they wanted to offer me the job. I was shocked! When I met my boss I had to ask, how did I possibly get this position with such little experience? He said the following:

He respected the fact that I was honest. He was getting candidates that were saying they had years of experience who could not answer basic questions. Why lie?

He also said honesty can reflect on your work ethics/habits as well. He knew that even though I did not know the technology, he felt I would do whatever to needed to be done to ramp up on it, which I did as they are taking a chance with me I felt I had to exceed their expectations. Much of what we learn can be learned on the job even if you have no experience.

So, my bottom line is that being honest can payoff in ways that you would never think about where not being honest you have more to lose. Hope this helps you out.

shodown

I wouldn't say flat out lie, but I would say use "selective truth" like it was said above.

Do you know exchange

Yes

How many severs

XX

What other systems integrated with it

blah blah blah

If they never ask the environment don't' give up that information. Say as little as possible in the areas you are weak in and maximize your strong points when they get back to them. Everybody fuges on resume's and interviews. I once got a 62K a year job with only 3 months of Cisco experience, due to the interviews not asking enough direct questions. I got in there and kept my mouth shut and learned as much as possible real fast, but if I did you and anybody else on here can.

Daniel333

dynamik wrote: »

How come? I've seen many others report positive feedback from demonstrating an eagerness to learn.

I suppose it's sujective and situational. I feel it's a pre-canned excuse that every interviewee has ready to use the second they don't have the experience in a subject matter. Kinda reminds me of the movie Stripes with Bill Murray. The scene with the recruiter. Your goal in the interview is to stand out and quell their objections.

Anyhow, I have had bad experiences with self described fast learners all around. Don't tell me you are, demonstrate it.
"I haven’t done Exchange in production, just the labs I setup."

Sell them a related skill, bring out the skills they might not know about yet
"I supported Outlook, PST recovery, caching issues etc. "
"I did do SendMail/Lotus.. "

Then turn it around on them,
"I'd like to make sure I am good match here, tell me a bit about your Exchange infrastructure and the types of issues you run into?"

Get them to admit how simple their setup is... or, how hard it is. If it's over your head, then this wasn't the job for you anyway. Either way, this changes the interview into a conversation rather than a test.

WillTech105

mikej412 wrote: »

Wow. I guess cheating on your certifications is okay too.

And when you screw something up, walk away and blame it on someone else. Heck, if you're up for promotion against someone else in your company, break something and frame them for it.

Oh -- and steal all you can. If you ever get caught in your lies, you may need to sell company property on eBay until you charm some other company with your winning personality.




Yeah -- and unfortunately the best job some people ever do for a company is the job of selling them self to get hired.

Whoa Whoa Whoa I wasnt taking it THAT far.

I'm not vouching to bluntly lie about a technology that you have no idea about but like it was stated here use "selective truth". No need to tell the interviewer that you Exchange experience is only minimal work and mainly a home lab. Like I said, if your confident in your skills and if they do ask you technical questions at least you'll be able to answer some questions the employer throws at you but if you dont know I just tell them "i have never encountered that" or "that doesnt sound familiar to me". Its better than a blunt "I dont know".

blargoe

Paul Boz wrote: »

You still have to sell them on yourself in addition to what you know. My company gets EXTREMELY qualified people to apply on a regular basis and most of them are weeded out because they come off as pompous or arrogant and we don't need those kind of people. On the other hand, someone that is easy going and willing to learn is often picked over the other type.

I'll agree with that, of course if you find someone who has the personality AND skills/experience, they're going to trump all... every time. In today's climate, if you have neither... God help you.

As long as you understand the technology it doesn't matter how you got the experience, as far as I'm concerned. Like you said, if you can do it you can do it. If you can't you can't. It doesn't matter how you know how to do it as long as you can do it period.

Respectfully, I disagree. No amount of labbing is going to be a sufficient substitute for a experience dealing with a real production crisis, needing to restore from tape, troubleshooting real-time mail flow problems, or users or managers breathing down your neck. You can't simulate 1000s to 1000000s of messages per day. Unless you're taking a job where all you do is setup exchange, the lab is a small percentage of what experience you'll need to be hired as an exchange admin.

shodown

blargoe wrote: »

I'll agree with that, of course if you find someone who has the personality AND skills/experience, they're going to trump all... every time. In today's climate, if you have neither... God help you.



Respectfully, I disagree. No amount of labbing is going to be a sufficient substitute for a experience dealing with a real production crisis, needing to restore from tape, troubleshooting real-time mail flow problems, or users or managers breathing down your neck. You can't simulate 1000s to 1000000s of messages per day. Unless you're taking a job where all you do is setup exchange, the lab is a small percentage of what experience you'll need to be hired as an exchange admin.

No lab for that stress factor.

TXOgre

As others have said, you don't have to tell all. This isn't an honesty test. While you should never lie, you also shouldn't offer any information that might be construed as negative.

When asked if you have experience in X, tell them you have experience if you do. No need to quantify that experience if they don't ask. If they do ask, explain what you've done with X, and how long you've worked with it.

Also, telling an interviewer that you are a "fast learner" can be positive or negative, depending upon when you say it. Don't use it as an excuse for not having experience. Do make sure to mention it, but say something like "I'm quick to learn and apply new knowledge."

networker050184

TXOgre wrote: »

As others have said, you don't have to tell all. This isn't an honesty test. While you should never lie, you also shouldn't offer any information that might be construed as negative.

I think an interview is partly an honesty test. Its not the main purpose, but it is to get an all around feel for the person and their knowledge. Including whether they are a liar or not. And IMO misleading by not telling an employer that your experience is only in a home lab is lying.

Paul Boz

blargoe wrote: »

Respectfully, I disagree. No amount of labbing is going to be a sufficient substitute for a experience dealing with a real production crisis, needing to restore from tape, troubleshooting real-time mail flow problems, or users or managers breathing down your neck. You can't simulate 1000s to 1000000s of messages per day. Unless you're taking a job where all you do is setup exchange, the lab is a small percentage of what experience you'll need to be hired as an exchange admin.

I suspect that we run our labs in different ways. When I was studying QoS I was putting around a gig of traffic on my home network lab to simulate high load, for example. I have modeled my home lab on the topology of the service provider networks which I have worked on. I also simulate based on the production networks at the larger banks and credit unions I visit. I approach labbing technology much like the military approaches simulating battle tactics. Also, the stress is there in the lab if you put a clock on yourself. "I have five minutes to do this. If I do not accomplish this task I have failed and caused mass outages."

It is not the same as real world experience but then again, Shianne Mountain could nuke anything on earth with only the practice they get from sims.

blargoe

networker050184 wrote: »

I think an interview is partly an honesty test. Its not the main purpose, but it is to get an all around feel for the person and their knowledge. Including whether they are a liar or not. And IMO misleading by not telling an employer that your experience is only in a home lab is lying.

Depends on your definition of "is".

blargoe

Paul Boz wrote: »

I suspect that we run our labs in different ways. When I was studying QoS I was putting around a gig of traffic on my home network lab to simulate high load, for example. I have modeled my home lab on the topology of the service provider networks which I have worked on. I also simulate based on the production networks at the larger banks and credit unions I visit. I approach labbing technology much like the military approaches simulating battle tactics. Also, the stress is there in the lab if you put a clock on yourself. "I have five minutes to do this. If I do not accomplish this task I have failed and caused mass outages."

It is not the same as real world experience but then again, Shianne Mountain could nuke anything on earth with only the practice they get from sims.

Naw, actually my lab methods are similar to what you describe, I try to mirror either what I have in production today, or what I think production would look like given the size of my company if it's something yet to be implemented. But we have the experience to know what a lab need to be as close to "real" as possible, and our background experience is probably enough to fill in the holes when something that wasn't encountered in the lab arises. Even that isn't good enough, IMO, to count as 1-for-1 experience when asked how many years experience with x. Not that I wouldn't mention it in an interview though. Actually, I probably would.

For the newbies setting up a lab, how in the world would they know what a near-production lab simulation looks like? I think the home lab experience counts for "something" but it's really more in the "training" category and not "real experience".

I think if the OP had spun his Exchange lab as "I have trained on Exchange 2003 and have the certification as a result" that would have been better received.

Forsaken_GA

Paul Boz wrote: »

Give them the answer they want to hear.

"Do you have experience with Exchange 2003?"

"yes."

You DO have experience with exchange 2003, its just in your lab. You don't have to tell them that unless they ask.

This is the correct way to handle the situation. Answer the question they ask, not the one you think they're asking.

In this case if they ask if you have experience, you say yes. That's not a lie. If they ask if you have real world experience, you say no. If you've passed the Exchange exam, you say you have experience with Exchange and have had your skills certified by Microsoft. Never lie, but answer questions to your benefit, not your detriment

Paul Boz

Forsaken_GA wrote: »

have had your skills certified by Microsoft

You actually bring up a good point in how you worded that. I have used that type of wording with great success.

"My skills with networking technologies have been certified by Cisco"

Sounds much better than

"I have Cisco certifications."

The first statement sounds much more powerful, even if they mean the same thing. these types of word games factor in bigtime.

Forsaken_GA

Yeah, interviewers aren't stupid. How you answer a question is just as important as to what the answer is. If they're mainly concerned about real world experience, they will ask about it directly. If you show some mental agility to answering difficult questions, it will be noted.

We had one guy interview here for a network position. He knew our network engineer by reputation, and was fawning all over him, and mentioned that he only hoped he could one day be as good as him. He had a pretty impressive resume as far as certs and experience went.

We had another one interview. Not quite as qualified, but during the course of the interview, the attitude they displayed was one of calm confidence, and the willingness to work on their skills to be the best tech they could be.

The second one got the job offer. The neteng didn't want someone who wanted to be as good as him, he wanted someone that aspired to be better. You have to keep your emotions under control and pay mind to your word choice when it comes to an interview.