Candidates I am Interviewing

RobertKaucher

it_consultant wrote: »

Denver does get paid better than many but not by a huge margin. There is a clear cutoff with pay and skill. If you are asking for someone who knows something about SQL server, that cuts the applicant pool down significantly thus the pay must go up.

I see this a lot in job postings and it seems to me people are trying to take advantage of the poor economy, I am not sure if this position falls into this category. It probably should be marketed as a "Junior Admin Intern" with a focus on people who have 1-2 years of experience.

I really can't get around the C#, SQL, and WSS requirements; the pay is not on par with those technologies.

Let me ask the original poster, what are you REALLY looking for in this candidate?

I have nothing to do with the pay so I cannot really tell you anything except that I considered myself underpaid in this position and was here because of the experience I was getting with SQL Server and ShaePoint. This experience is what translated into my new role and I will be making nearly double what I am now.

I think the ideal candidate would have a few years experience on a halpdesk or doing some sort of support. I would feel OK if they had studied hard to get their MCSA but had very little experience with AD.

Required skills
· Fundamental understanding of Networking
· PC and Server Hardware
· Familiarity with WSS v3.0
· Windows Active Directory administration
· Exchange Server 2003/2007
· Basic Linux
· Good troubleshooting skills and the ability to learn on your feet

The person will be alone. Sole support for the company. It's a small firm, there is time to learn a lot of stuff, but some stuff cannot be learned from on the job training. If you cannot tell me what a default gateway is, how GPOs are processed or properly explain DNS I will not sleep well if I hire you.

Desired
· SQL Server querying
· Windows PowerShell scripting
· Basic familiarity with ASP.NET/C#
Certifications a Plus
MCSA/MCSE, MCITP, Linux+

There will be plenty of time for the person to learn about SQL Server. But the ideal candidate would understand what a SELECT statement does and would have some basic DBMS concepts, like what a table is, what datatypes are. These are just desired skills. If the person has the complete package, I would suggest they be hired on the spot.

Right now people are having a hard time explaining what DNS is and the role it plays in AD, not one of them has been able to explain ARP at all (not even what it stands for) and the explanation of an IP address is relatively poor. The best one so far was "a number that uniquely identifies a computer on a network." Can't argue with that! But when pressed further the person had a pretty basic understanding of the concept.

thenjduke

phantasm wrote: »

You lost me man.... real frickin' quick like I might add. lol.

Actually I enjoy this that he posted.

it_consultant

Based on your last reply, I don't think you can find a qualified candidate who will be independent on that pay scale. You are getting resumes from people who deserve to be paid $37K but what you really need is a $46K candidate.

Claymoore

You may find that you need to raise the salary in order to attract more capable talent. I had a recruiter call me a couple of years ago about a senior system engineer position at a small local firm. I was a great match skill-wise, but my asking price was about $20k above what they wanted to spend. The recruiter realized that any further pursuit would be a waste of time and we moved on.

A few weeks later the recruiter called back. The company was unhappy with the quality of the candidates they were interviewing, so they decided to expand the salary range. That put me back in their range - but at the top end - so we set up an interview. Everything went great and I met with several of the execs during an interview that lasted all afternoon. They kept dragging their feet and were barely responsive to me and the recruiter for a couple of weeks. I figured they were still holding out for a candidate with a lower salary requirement. They found someone else, but it was not in their original request range.

Any candidate should know what they are worth before applying and interviewing for a job. The candidates you would like to have know they are worth more and aren't applying. I am sure you will get flooded with resumes from out of work techs desperate for any payday, but after interviewing a few of them you will find that some of them were unemployed for a reason. Then again you may find a candidate who wants the position for reasons other than just money, such as great benefits, location or learning opportunities.

[Deleted User]

Claymoore wrote: »

I disagree - listing the salary is very important.

You can't interview a candidate unless they apply for the postion. I would not consider applying for the position because the salary is so laughably low. That means you won't get a chance to review my resume or interview me and compare me to the other candidates.

While most of you may be interested in what the applicant does right or wrong, I am interested in what types of applicants you get with a vague job posting and lowball salary. That way I can adjust my personnel requests with better salary and job information in order to get better quality candidates. Everybody gets to learn something.

I could definitely see it from that perspective. I was speaking from what I wanted to see in this thread more so than anything. I never really thought of it from your perspective but that is a really interesting take on it. I guess you tend to think more from where your career is at currently .

RobertKaucher

it_consultant wrote: »

Based on your last reply, I don't think you can find a qualified candidate who will be independent on that pay scale. You are getting resumes from people who deserve to be paid $37K but what you really need is a $46K candidate.

I totally agree! I made $18/hr in this position for nearly 2 years. I had to take on a second job to ensure the bills were all paid and I had a little spending money.

Since some people are complaining about how vague the listing is here is the full description as I sent it to the recruiters. I discussed it with 2 guys at different agencies for over 15 minutes. I cannot be any more specific because it encompasses EVERYTHING. There were days when someone called off in the shipping department and parts needed to be shipped, so I was packing parts. If I could get a solid candidate with 60% of the required skills, I can get them up to speed in things like WSS and SQL and even Linux.

Company X is searching for a Network Administrator who will be responsible for maintaining all aspects of the company’s IT infrastructure. This will include, but is not limited to: the creation of new user accounts in Active Directory; managing GPOs; keeping server operating systems (Windows Server 2003/2000/MS SQL Server/Exchange 2003) up-to-date; managing backups; maintaining server, computer, and network hardware; running cable, configuring routers and VPN access, compiling reports in Excel, assisting in other departments as required. This is an IT generalist role and this person is expected to wear many hats.

Required skills
· Fundamental understanding of Networking
· PC and Server Hardware
· Familiarity with WSS v3.0
· Windows Active Directory administration
· Exchange Server 2003/2007
· Basic Linux
· Good troubleshooting skills and the ability to learn on your feet

Desired
· SQL Server querying
· Windows PowerShell scripting
· Basic familiarity with ASP.NET/C#

Certifications a Plus
MCSA/MCSE, MCITP, Linux+

it_consultant

You are looking for what you were two years ago, eager and ready to learn and willing to take an abusively low salary to learn and grow. I admire your dedication. At the same time this irks me in a general sense because I dont like to see good IT guys (like yourself) undercutting average pay. It causes employers to expect that out of all candidates and I think it hurts us in the long run.

RobertKaucher

it_consultant wrote: »

You are looking for what you were two years ago, eager and ready to learn and willing to take an abusively low salary to learn and grow. I admire your dedication. At the same time this irks me in a general sense because I dont like to see good IT guys (like yourself) undercutting average pay. It causes employers to expect that out of all candidates and I think it hurts us in the long run.

Are you suggesting that I should not have taken the job because you considered my pay too low? In "negotiation" we reached a wall quickly because they were not willing to pay any higher than $18 and I needed the job right away. Before I even mentioned a number the CFO told me flat out $18 was the max. So if you are suggesting I was "undercutting" by accepting a salary that was too low, you are right. But I needed to eat and since you were not available to pay my bills, I had to take the best offer at the time. If you are suggesting that I am undercutting because I am setting the salary, you are wrong. I have told HR I believe the salary is too low, but this company has had two layoff in 2010 alone. I cannot hope to get my replacement much more than what I made.

Zartanasaurus

RobertKaucher wrote: »

Right now people are having a hard time explaining what DNS is and the role it plays in AD, not one of them has been able to explain ARP at all (not even what it stands for) and the explanation of an IP address is relatively poor. The best one so far was "a number that uniquely identifies a computer on a network." Can't argue with that! But when pressed further the person had a pretty basic understanding of the concept.

Oof!

Pretty basic stuff here.

Devilsbane

it_consultant wrote: »

Based on your last reply, I don't think you can find a qualified candidate who will be independent on that pay scale. You are getting resumes from people who deserve to be paid $37K but what you really need is a $46K candidate.

I might be a little underqualified for this position, but if it was in my area I would take it in a heartbeat. It would be a slight raise over my current service desk position (although I'm expecting a massive raise in the near future) but I would love to put my MCSA skills to use. I know close to nothing on sql, but after a position like this I could likely walk away with a much expanded skill set which would also equate to a much larger salary.

Zartanasaurus

RobertKaucher wrote: »

Usually 2 pages. I think that is fine. More than that and I would find it hard to see how they would remain relevent to the poisition.

To some people this might seem like I am being picky, but one person listed the following skill...

Make sure you have a friend go over your resume who knows something about the subject as well.

Either this guy is full of crap or really lacks attention to detail.

You must not be in the super secret IT club that had VIP access to Server 2005.

Claymoore

it_consultant wrote: »

You are looking for what you were two years ago, eager and ready to learn and willing to take an abusively low salary to learn and grow.

I notice you do not mention the need for a degree nor do you mention how much experience is required. You may get someone recently out of ITT Tech/Devry/WGU who has done some contracting or internships and is looking for their first full-time gig. The pay would be acceptable to them, but they will likely move on in a year or two.

I would rather take the new guy who is light on experience but will listen and is excited to learn than some helpdesk burnout with 10 years of experience and a couple of stale certs.

sambuca69

Aren't you on shakey ground in posting this? I mean, your company is OK with you going over interviews on a public forum?

Just seems odd to me to be doing this... especially since you stated that is your real name and such.

Zartanasaurus

cablegod wrote: »

The morale is, if you think about pushing hard for a large raise or salary "adjustment", make SURE you have the goods to elsewhere at the drop of a hat. Don't go into a gunfight with a mouse gun or knife.

I agree with this 100,000%. Going in and demanding a raise or promotion and not having the balls or ability to go elsewhere if you don't get what you want just makes you look weak.

RobertKaucher

Devilsbane wrote: »

I might be a little underqualified for this position, but if it was in my area I would take it in a heartbeat. It would be a slight raise over my current service desk position (although I'm expecting a massive raise in the near future) but I would love to put my MCSA skills to use. I know close to nothing on sql, but after a position like this I could likely walk away with a much expanded skill set which would also equate to a much larger salary.

And I would provide you with lots of study material and two days of training on the basics of SQL Server and how our ERP software uses it. Plus you would have my email and phone number.

it_consultant

RobertKaucher wrote: »

Are you suggesting that I should not have taken the job because you considered my pay too low? In "negotiation" we reached a wall quickly because they were not willing to pay any higher than $18 and I needed the job right away. Before I even mentioned a number the CFO told me flat out $18 was the max. So if you are suggesting I was "undercutting" by accepting a salary that was too low, you are right. But I needed to eat and since you were not available to pay my bills, I had to take the best offer at the time. If you are suggesting that I am undercutting because I am setting the salary, you are wrong. I have told HR I believe the salary is too low, but this company has had two layoff in 2010 alone. I cannot hope to get my replacement much more than what I made.

This is a situation we have all faced. I have taken jobs that paid WAY to low with bad benefits because the car note needs to get paid. Its only been in the past couple of years (basically since the recession started, oddly enough) that I started telling potential employers that they have to be willing to pay for my competencies.

There is a lot of history here, a lot of employers have been burned by bad IT guys they overpaid. This is just the environment we are in.

Devilsbane

sambuca69 wrote: »

Aren't you on shakey ground in posting this? I mean, your company is OK with you going over interviews on a public forum?

Just seems odd to me to be doing this... especially since you stated that is your real name and such.

It isn't like he is recording the interviews for playback. He is just going to use the interviews to post good things to do, and not so good things to do.

People on this forum refer to things that have happened at work all the time.

phantasm

it_consultant wrote: »

This is a situation we have all faced. I have taken jobs that paid WAY to low with bad benefits because the car note needs to get paid. Its only been in the past couple of years (basically since the recession started, oddly enough) that I started telling potential employers that they have to be willing to pay for my competencies.

There is a lot of history here, a lot of employers have been burned by bad IT guys they overpaid. This is just the environment we are in.

Yup. That's the problem as well. Take me for example, I have a CCNA and nothing else as of yet. Am I qualified to perform a sysadmin position? A junior one yes. I understand AD basics and Windows server environments plus I have a lot of Linux/AIX experience. However with my B.S. and a CCNA and heavy networking background, finding a sysadmin position is almost impossible.

RobertKaucher

sambuca69 wrote: »

Aren't you on shakey ground in posting this? I mean, your company is OK with you going over interviews on a public forum?

Just seems odd to me to be doing this... especially since you stated that is your real name and such.

I'm not concerned. I am not going to discuss any of the candidates directly, as far as how an individual was dressed, etc. I decided on that last night. Once I have a couple more under my belt I will post some specifics, but careful about what I am saying.

it_consultant

phantasm wrote: »

Yup. That's the problem as well. Take me for example, I have a CCNA and nothing else as of yet. Am I qualified to perform a sysadmin position? A junior one yes. I understand AD basics and Windows server environments plus I have a lot of Linux/AIX experience. However with my B.S. and a CCNA and heavy networking background, finding a sysadmin position is almost impossible.

My company is looking for someone like you. The linchpin here is AIX/Linux experience. We support neither of those OS' but if you have patience to learn those two OS' you would do well here.

Do you live anywhere near Denver? I could set you up with an interview.

nicklauscombs

RobertKaucher wrote: »

I'm not concerned. I am not going to discuss any of the candidates directly, as far as how an individual was dressed, etc. I decided on that last night. Once I have a couple more under my belt I will post some specifics, but careful about what I am saying.

i applaud you for this and for possibly taking a potential risk. i think the information you will be able to provide will be priceless for myself and a lot of others on this board.

loxleynew

it_consultant wrote: »

My company is looking for someone like you. The linchpin here is AIX/Linux experience. We support neither of those OS' but if you have patience to learn those two OS' you would do well here.

Do you live anywhere near Denver? I could set you up with an interview.

I live in Denver and am looking for a new job

I'm like the guy above except 180 degrees. I know ad / sys admin stuff like the back of my hand but only know basic networking stuff (working on ccna). I just went for some interviews and as soon as I mention i'm looking to get into more networking in the future as opposed to sys admin they cut me short and are basically like cya. I don't get why people hate it when you say you like networking unless you are applying for a NOC job or something.....

Anyways as far as the candidates yea you are getting the people for the salary range you are asking. I get paid exactly that and do the same stuff you listed plus a bit more but when I started I only knew about half of that stuff and could not tell you what DNS was. If you want someone that actually knows ad and dns then up the pay scale to about 45k OR be prepared to rather hire someone wanting to learn and is bright who doesn't know it and you can teach them basics in a few weeks. I doubt you get many people for that salary who qualify for more than 2 of those items you listed.

undomiel

RobertKaucher wrote: »

Right now people are having a hard time explaining what DNS is and the role it plays in AD, not one of them has been able to explain ARP at all (not even what it stands for) and the explanation of an IP address is relatively poor. The best one so far was "a number that uniquely identifies a computer on a network." Can't argue with that! But when pressed further the person had a pretty basic understanding of the concept.

Good luck on finding someone that can explain DNS and AD. Which is a really good test I think for getting someone to stand out from the crowd. At the government job I was at absolutely none of the other admins and managers there knew how DNS was used to find a DC for authentication. They might not have even known that DNS was used in the process at all. Then after that job there was a consulting firm I interviewed with that had their socks blown off by my explanation of how AD depended upon DNS. One of the interviewers had flat out said that not a single candidate before me had been able to explain any of that, and this was for a senior administrator position too. It rather blew my mind how little people out there understand about how networks work. If you find one that knows how DNS works with AD you should probably hire him on the spot.

I think your general description before the required skills tells more about the position, but it is still overall too vague. Throw in some of the real problems faced previously and what you see coming up for the potential hiree. Pose the candidates several questions in the description that they had better be prepared to answer if interviewed. The AD & DNS dependencies would be a good start and a run through of how DHCP works as well. Or maybe just keep it basic at how a switch works, judging from some of the candidate examples you've mentioned here.

Devilsbane

undomiel wrote: »

Then after that job there was a consulting firm I interviewed with that had their socks blown off by my explanation of how AD depended upon DNS. One of the interviewers had flat out said that not a single candidate before me had been able to explain any of that, and this was for a senior administrator position too.

Care to provide that definition so that I can memorize it? Sort of kidding, I'm confident that I could explain it, but not so confident that I could do it in a way to blow someones socks off.

Oh and mythbusters tested that. They determined it is impossible to blow only the socks off, but quite easy to blow the legs (with the socks still on them) off.

Plantwiz

Claymoore wrote: »

I disagree - listing the salary is very important.

I don't find it important for this thread, but I do understand your reasons.

....
While most of you may be interested in what the applicant does right or wrong, I am interested in what types of applicants you get with a vague job posting and lowball salary.

Goes again to the market. $30-40K is common range for many organization around here, but some can afford to offer more...they are the few. Northern Mid-West doesn't tend to pull the wages as East Coast or West Coast (and even the West Coast has slowed).

There is a larger candidate pool, so the wages seem to match the larger pool.

So, it varies by the market (and hence why I don't see why the wage should be a factor)

That way I can adjust my personnel requests with better salary and job information in order to get better quality candidates. Everybody gets to learn something.

Very good potential here for all, so long as it is used as an objective learning tool (and one of Robert's applicants doesn't stumble on the thread ).

it_consultant

undomiel wrote: »

Good luck on finding someone that can explain DNS and AD. Which is a really good test I think for getting someone to stand out from the crowd. At the government job I was at absolutely none of the other admins and managers there knew how DNS was used to find a DC for authentication. They might not have even known that DNS was used in the process at all. Then after that job there was a consulting firm I interviewed with that had their socks blown off by my explanation of how AD depended upon DNS. One of the interviewers had flat out said that not a single candidate before me had been able to explain any of that, and this was for a senior administrator position too. It rather blew my mind how little people out there understand about how networks work. If you find one that knows how DNS works with AD you should probably hire him on the spot.

I think your general description before the required skills tells more about the position, but it is still overall too vague. Throw in some of the real problems faced previously and what you see coming up for the potential hiree. Pose the candidates several questions in the description that they had better be prepared to answer if interviewed. The AD & DNS dependencies would be a good start and a run through of how DHCP works as well. Or maybe just keep it basic at how a switch works, judging from some of the candidate examples you've mentioned here.

DNS and AD, a match made in heaven!

I use common ports to knock out candidates:

Q: What port does DNS typically flow over. (Dont I dont care whether is a TCP or UDP connection)

Or a question designed to make sure someone is aware of firewall rules AND common ports:

Q: You have a static public IP addy assigned to your firewall and your are not allowed to buy more IP addresses. How do you make sure that your exchange server which is protected by your firewall can get email and people can access OWA from any browser.

A: If they say "Depends on if there is already an HTTPS rule set up" then they need not go further. I am confident they have seen the inside of a firewall.

If I really want to see someone under pressure I would ask:

Q: I want to use kerberos authentication WITHOUT joining the computer to the domain...maybe its linux or something, how would you go about handling that? (Yes this is possible)

A: Look it up on google, technet, experts exchange etc.

I want to make sure people are willing to go to their references before trying something they are not sure of in a prod environment.

RobertKaucher

Well, I am finally getting some place with the resumes I'm getting, but of course, they are all expecting $20+/hr. But that does not matter to me, that's up to my boss. One thing I will be sure to discuss with him is that I think the person should be making about that.

What is helping with these resumes is that they are going into detail about how they have used the technology a little more. It is nice to see that someone has done things like:

* Implemented Server 2003 on a Domain Controller using Active Directory in a multi-domain forest.
* Implemented DHCP to centralize IP address management, and implemented DNS allowing in-house name resolution.

phantasm

RobertKaucher wrote: »

Well, I am finally getting some place with the resumes I'm getting, but of course, they are all expecting $20+/hr. But that does not matter to me, that's up to my boss. One thing I will be sure to discuss with him is that I think the person should be making about that.

What is helping with these resumes is that they are going into detail about how they have used the technology a little more. It is nice to see that someone has done things like:

Hmmm... this has me rethinking my resume. Perhaps it is time I chopped mine up and revamped it. Great thread... I'm learning from it.

Zartanasaurus

phantasm wrote: »

Hmmm... this has me rethinking my resume. Perhaps it is time I chopped mine up and revamped it. Great thread... I'm learning from it.

This is almost exactly how I have my resume set up. Think of the resume process as a game of bingo. You want to put all the possible words on the various mental HR bingo sheets in your resume in a way that shows that you worked with those technologies. When you hit on all the words, the HR person goes BINGO! and puts your resume in the keep pile. LAN, WAN, GPO, Active Directory, Clustering, DNS, DHCP, Server 2003, etc all show up on my resume somewhere.

Claymoore

phantasm wrote: »

Hmmm... this has me rethinking my resume. Perhaps it is time I chopped mine up and revamped it. Great thread... I'm learning from it.

Different people will read your resume and how you phrase your experience may impress one person but not another. Here are a couple of paraphrased examples from recent candidates I had to tech interview:

Candidate 1 had a line stating he 'implemented redundancy in a client's Active Directory network'. Sounds cool to the recruiter, but I interpretted that to mean he installed another domain controller. It turns out his AD implementation experience was limited to running dcpromo on a server, and the interview just went downhill from there.

Candidate 2 had a line stating he 'deployed a multi-forest, multi-domain AD design'. Again, that sounds cool to the recruiter but I am suspect of his AD knowledge. There are only a few good reasons why you should use multiple forests and domains, so I called him on it. We had a great discussion about why that design was required and some of the challenges he faced, including Exchange GAL syncronization. Much better interview.