Ever have someone list they are a higher position than they are?

Just wondering have any of you ever had someone list themselves on their resume or LinkedIn as a higher position than they are? I have a coworker that lists he is the Lead Network Engineer but he isn't. His title is Network Engineer and my boss doesn't see him as the lead either.

It doesn't bother me as it is just a title and he is looking to quit anyway but I was wondering if any of you have coworkers that do this?

Find more posts tagged with

Free for TechExams community: Cybersecurity salary guide

Compare cert salaries and plan your next career move

Button

Comments

professionale

I seee this kind of thing everwhere and all the time
I see a lot of people who have a title called Network Engineer and they list that they are a SENIOR network engineer
or developer and they list them selfs SENIOR developer
they are a technican and they list themselfs as systems administrator

this shows insecurity and an ego and I think it is quiet illegal and very unprofessional and unethnical to do that not too sure but they can call themselfs cio or ceo or whatever they want
its about the duties that they do
ofcourse just like lieing about their title they can lie about their responsibilities as well
but its about you showing that you are that title and did those responsibilities in the interview that matters and how they buy it,
its all up to the interviewer to buy it,
you can sell whatever you want but can you make the employer buy it

thats the 20 dollar question.

yzT

I have always used the title which better adapts to my duties, independently of what my contract says. Never had a problem, even my employer recognizes and recommends me by my custom title rather than by his own title.

For example, at my last position I was hired by two different companies. My title were "Bachelor's Degree" (yes, this was a title LOL!) and systems technician. My real duties? Sole responsible of security. My custom title? Security Engineer. They recognized me as the security engineer, they speak of me as the security engineer, they recommend me as the security engineer...

Title are just a mean to have some structure within the company, specially to have a salary base.

Jon_Cisco

It is my experience that everyone tries to make themselves look best on resumes. For this reason I don't think it should come as a surprise that people stretch the truth about titles.

I work at a small places and when I make business cards for new employees I usually suggest they consider their title and come up with something resume friendly. As long as it reflects what they are doing it works out for both of us.

bhcs2014

Titles don't mean anything. Why does it matter? Employers don't care about former titles.

Danielm7

bhcs2014 wrote: »

Titles don't mean anything. Why does it matter? Employers don't care about former titles.

I'm not sure about that. Try to go from Jr. Helpdesk Associate to a Sr Network Engineer and see if they care. I know that one is extreme but right now the company I work for is looking for a Sr Architect and specifies someone who has been at the Sr Architect level for 5+ years. If you come in with some past title like "computer operator" your resume will probably not even get past the HR screen.

kohr-ah

I agree with adjust your titles for your duties.

@yzT OK you win. Never worked with a bachelor's degree titled coworker before.

@Jon_Cisco that is a very cool idea. Get any interesting ones?

@bhcs2014 It doesn't. Just inquiring to see peoples opinions on it. If it has caused any problems when hiring people who have done this. Etc

N2IT

I'm a purist with the title piece. I keep what title was given to me, just to avoid any potential miscommunications from HR to my future employer. If what I do is totally different then I capture that in the resume summary usually or in a cover letter.

I'm not saying you shouldn't change your title I just don't feel comfortable doing it.

Now what I have done before is take the more accurate title out of the two when working as a consultant. It never fails, the company you are being contracted to calls you one thing and your agency calls you another. I usually pick the more accurate of the two.

philz1982

Who cares about titles other than ego and hr. I will call myself whatever will get me past the hr screen when i apply for a job. They are hiring me for my knowledge and work effort not my title. There are just as many a$$ clown directors and vp's as there are technicians.

If a guy/gal can perform then so be it. Our human nature is to try to classify ourselves. I think the title and experience thing is stupid.

For example look at my title on LinkedIn "Manager of Alliances and Integrations" I have 4 different jobs I do and my title does a piss poor job of reperesenting what I do.

N2IT

Title does mean something in different fields. Physicians, attorneys, accountant (CPA), certain engineers. It's critical for certain position. My uncle is an aerospace engineer, they don't call him some weird one off title they call him what he does.

IT is really bad about getting titles right but to say titles don't matter is not 100% correct.

jamesleecoleman

Alright....

Anyone who changes the title that they were given is misrepresenting them self. People should use the title that is given to them and if they do other things that are outside of their duties or it doesn't fit the title then it doesn't hurt to state that they do those other things.

I don't call myself a Network Technician nor a Junior System Administrator even though I do some of these tasks that would normally be found under the the previous titles that I wrote. I'm in a Desktop Support role at work.

cyberguypr

I see a few problems for both scenarios. First, if you embellish your title and a new employer wants to contact the old one and verify the position, conflict will arise. You claim to be a "systems Engineer" but the old job had you as a "Server Administrator". That raises red flags for the new employer. Of course you could pull the "well, I don't want my new employer contacting my old one" but that's another story.

Now say you are in the situation jamesleecoleman describes. If you go to an extremely cheap new employer they may choose to ignore your actual duties and just use your old Desktop Support title as leverage to low-ball you. I've seen this happen way too many times. You could be deploying all kinds of enterprise grade solutions but again, if the employee is cheap and wants to minimize cost. I've been in this situation twice: when transitioning form Desktop Support to Server Admin as well as during my transition from Systems Engineer to Infosec Engineer. It wasn't much of an issue because my new employer understood my title had nothing to do and my expertise did the talking for me.

Long story short, I don't embellish, change (or whatever you wan tot call it) my title as it may cost me at some point. If you believe your title doesn't reflect your duties, you must engage your manager and correct the issue.

philz1982

Alot of the big companies allow a self assigned title. For example my "official" title is manager of commerical programs. Wtf does that even mean?

I code integrations, manage a full technology channel of it partners, architect large scale enterprises from layer 1 to layer 7, do audits / PT's / VA's, and I design and implement strategy. How would someone get that from my "official title"....

So I have to disagree with the title funfest. Most people I know (about 42 out of 50 in my immediate sphere of influence) don't do anything related to their title and they work across multiple industries not just IT.

N2IT

Philz to your point, it really depends on the culture (environment). I currently work in a highly regulated industry I would never risk self assigning myself a title. While I was a consultant working for a large MSP I had more latitude with my title, in fact one promotion they asked me what title I wanted, lol.

So it really depends on your environment truth be told.

If I was to stay in the same group and get promoted my new title would be procurement sourcing manager. Not exactly painting a technical picture.

Heero

Converting a stupid HR job title to a normal job title is one thing, like converting "Systems Analyst, Network" to "Network engineer" if you are actually a network engineer and HR just uses stupid job classifications.

Adding Lead, Senior, etc... to a job title when those are not actual and agreed upon with your employer is wrong.

philz1982

Why? What if you've been there the longest or you do the most work? What if all the other folks sit on their butts while you "lead". It's not black and white. Senior and lead mean different things.

Sorry but when I hire people I could care less what their previous title was. If they can pass the hands on interview process and they have a mentality that clicks with my team then I will add them to the talent pool. Titles seem to premadonaish to me.

philz1982

N2IT wrote: »

Philz to your point, it really depends on the culture (environment). I currently work in a highly regulated industry I would never risk self assigning myself a title. While I was a consultant working for a large MSP I had more latitude with my title, in fact one promotion they asked me what title I wanted, lol.

So it really depends on your environment truth be told.

If I was to stay in the same group and get promoted my new title would be procurement sourcing manager. Not exactly painting a technical picture.

I know how that is I work in the construction sector and when my title was project development engineer I would have these 60 year old Professional Engineers (PE) go on these trirades about how I was not an engineer. It got so bad that one day I literally said to a guy do you have anything better to do because I stopped listening to you 10 minutes ago. I'm not normally that blunt but this guy was ridiculous about how it was illegal for me to have engineer in my title.

I get all the SoX compliance around role titles and levels of access for audig purposes.

njfaisal

I went to an ABET-accredited engineering school, and I was told by some older coworkers that a Computer Engineer is not a "real" engineer. Oh well, all the other "real" engineering jobs evaporated in the last two decades, and there are not enough mainframes for these mainframe "engineers" . what?

VAHokie56

I have seen some engineers change their titles in my work place, like making them selves "senior network engineer" when that's not even a title we give to that level of engineer...I think it makes them look silly because we all know what your REAL title is by looking at your company profile page. I stick with what they give me, hah I think its kinda like cheating at golf...your only fooling your self...

instant000

I just simply list the HR title, and the title of what I actually did in parenthesis, if it differs.
My Army titles were something like Information Systems Operator/Analyst .. which means what?

For example: Systems Integrator (Microsoft Exchange Engineer)
In this case, the job title was systems integrator. What I actually did was work on Microsoft Exchange.

I'm not denying the original description, but only clarifying it where it seems it may aid in understanding. I think that's within the "spirit" of what' we're discussing, right?

Now, if I claimed to be the Lead Exchange Engineer, or Senior Exchange Engineer, that would probably be more along the lines of what the OP is talking about, and I haven't done that.

1. I thought this was about saying you were something that you were not. I attempt to clarify what the actual role is (without removing the original title). Is there any issue with clarifying the Systems Integrator and Information Systems Operator-Analyst roles?

2. At the time I went through a school, it was called Primary Leadership Development Course (PLDC). Years later, it is now called Warrior Leader Course. I may stick (Warrior Leader Course) in parenthesis next to that one, as only old heads will know what PLDC is. Do you see any problem with this?

3. Look at this scenario: I literally have two titles right now. I have the title that I signed on my offer letter: Senior Network Architect, which appears at some points in the HR system, and I have the title that I go by: Senior Network Engineer, which appears at other points in the HR system. I'm currently using the Senior Network Engineer title, as it is most descriptive of what I currently do. In this case, I feel that it would be inflationary to use the title with "Architect" in it. Which title is correct in this case?

Cheers.

professionale

I seen so many clowns put SENIOR infront of their titles to try to get a boost.

a word of advice the only person your making a fool out of is you not none else and those idiots list responsibilities ibntheir cv they didnt do whish makes me sick but the real idiot is the idiot that buys the crap that the lier is making in the cv

nachodba

I tend to put the contract title and then what my actual duties are. For example - On my LinkedIn I have Systems Engineer - DBA / VMware. I was hired as a generic Systems Engineer through the contract's eyes, however the tasks I perform are DBA / VMware administration. For my past position, which was a Senior Systems Administrator, I actually performed systems administration tasks, so I just left that title on there.

yeah yeah

I agree with Philz. Have your title match what you actually do. Once you get your foot in the door and make it to the interview, that's when all of it matters anyway.

Many of the big defense companies have generic HR titles, such as, Sr Comp Sys Analyst Stf, Mult-Funct Analyst Comp Sr. Why would you put that on your resume? It's an HR title, I'm pretty sure when you're in a staff meeting, nobody is calling you as, "Mr. So-and-So, the Mult-Functional Analyst Computer Senior." They'll be calling you, whatever title that reflects whatever you're doing. If it's an ego thing, it'll be exposed quick when it comes time to back it up.

In the Government, ALL IT positions are called, IT Specialists. Regardless of what it is. You can be a GS-5 help desk or a SES level CIO. Still, IT Specialist.

TLeTourneau

Where I work it is grounds for discipline, up to termination for doing something like adding senior to your title in company communications if you aren't one. You get the title you get and work to get promoted to a senior or lead position.

darkerz

Post the title that matches what your contract / employment file says.

I love the word Senior but no one cares. I know plenty of "Senior" engineers who really, really shouldn't be above Tier 2 - and are only titled as much due to 10-15 years of bonuses, pay raises and "Title Increases".

emerald_octane

I have an external one that is the HR job classification, then i Have the real one given to me by my mgr but I don't use it often. I came from an organization where title inflation was rife amongst the ranks , people with no reports given VP, director titles in lieu of compensation, while the folks who were actually managing things were given suppressed titles (i.e. not given a manager title when in fact managing people and a particular LOB). Now i'm at an organization where VP means you've been around for about twenty years and you get to park near the entrance of any company location. No one here inflates because that would escalate very quickly.

Verities

My job title is Information Technology Operations Service Delivery Consultant. Talk about a convoluted job title...I'm just a sysadmin (which is what I put in my job title on LinkedIn) for Unix, Linux, Windows, and VMware. I think the whole job title #! can be overrated at times, when what really matters is what your responsibilities are.

Zartanasaurus

It's a tough call sometimes. I mentioned before that I was a Sr. Network Engineer by duties at a previous job, but my title was some generic "we got this off of some website that described IT duties" title that made me sound like I was barely above a front line help desk tech.

I kept my title the same, but I noticed when recruiters were sending my resume out, they changed my title to something more appropriate. It's all about intent. If you're a help desk guy trying to call yourself a Sr. Engineer, that's clearly wrong. I wouldn't think twice if someone in my situation had modified their title to be something more appropriate. I think "I wasn't 100% sure what my official HR title was, but I chose one that accurately described my job duties" fits plausible deniability.

yeah yeah

Zartanasaurus wrote: »

I think "I wasn't 100% sure what my official HR title was, but I chose one that accurately described my job duties" fits plausible deniability.

Also sounds like you don't know what you're doing...don't need HR to tell me what my title is. Especially if I'm trying to move on.

VAHokie56

I think changing it for a resume to something more recognizable ( and comparable to what you do ) to catch the eye of recruiters and head hunters is one thing and I kind of understand that. Changing it internally in your company on your email signature or other is just plain silly and dumb.

professionale

everyone is a senior now a days,
and a cio
guys in my last role i was a consultant

**** should i say i am a cio and get a cio job

lmao