tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890681612299697716.post2951735992039477981..comments2023-12-04T19:22:58.457+02:00Comments on How do I test?: Are you part of the faceless masses?Pekka Marjamäkihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00747421405487990206noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890681612299697716.post-19295693774651100712012-11-07T16:36:49.980+02:002012-11-07T16:36:49.980+02:00I fell in love with this post, Peksi! <3 It pro...I fell in love with this post, Peksi! <3 It provoked a ton of thoughts in my head and here's few of them...<br /><br />It's a noble cause to fight against this brainlessness in recruitment. However it's quite an overwhelming task. In all professions, including testing and HR, there are people who are really good at it and there are those who aren't. There's only so much Jamie Olivers and an overabundance of McDonald's chefs. And the latter are often those who interview us. Testing is nothing but a hobby to them.<br /><br />That being said, I prefer stealth mechanics; I have my McCertificate of Testing (ISTQB Foundation) which gets me past this first barrier, and eventually to meet someone with whom I can speak professionally. Actually I shouldn't speak about stealth mechanics; It's more like trojan horse mechanics... ;)<br /><br />Going to ISTQB exam is just a matter of swallowing pride. The exam itself can be passed even by those who have no idea how to test; A fact well known by professional HR people. I consider it to be just some dirty work every job has. Perhaps even some of the good recruiters measure our ability to withstand this dirty work, to be humble. It can also be a trap; I've indeed been labeled a part of this faceless mass just because I have the ISTQB Foundation certificate.<br /><br />Honestly, I don't know. These are just thoughts, swimming in my head.Sami Söderblomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06690577772285551526noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890681612299697716.post-76335802172859404742012-10-31T11:33:17.394+02:002012-10-31T11:33:17.394+02:00I like your post. I think you touch upon a very in...I like your post. I think you touch upon a very interesting core problem: recruiters get tons of applications and want a quick, generic, "pass or fail" kind of test to filter out the "junk". I guess some in the context driven community would say "just reverse the process and remove anyone highlighting a certificate", which might be valid for some recruiting contexts but far from all. For instance, just because you have a certificate and brag about it doesn't mean you with the right guidance couldn't evolve into a professional skilled tester... This is going in a never ending direction, I'll try to write a comment-style blog post a day when I have time (not during my coffee break). But I still think the question is really interesting.<br /><br />What I really wanted to say (at last .) is I once talked smoke diving with a guy I did military service with. Their certification process, if I remember/understood it correctly, was something like:<br /><br />- Theory exam<br /><br />- An as close to reality as possible scenario where professionals judged your performance. I don't know how controlled this judgement was by regulation and standards but at least they had to be professionals (no idea about the criteria for that) themselves.<br /><br />- The certification process was repeated with a constant interval (think it was once a year). As I understood it, the theory exam was quite a lot more extensive the first year and after that it was a much shorter version based more on changes since last year, but the demands on the practical part was the same.<br /><br />- The examination board was "owned" by the firefighters in some way so factors like passing people just to get money/reputation was probably not much of an issue, the guy/girl you passed could well be your partner one day...<br /><br />First I don't know if this was his fantasy or reality and even if it was true I've probably changed it over the years but all that is irrelevant for my point... I think that kind of certification would at least prove SOMETHING rather than NOTHING and might be, to some extent, useful.<br /><br />... but in the end you also got to question (as I interpreted you did): Shouldn't there be some skill involved in the initial filtering of applications as well? (factory recruiters vs context driven recruiters? .) Do they really need a generic pass or fail kind of tool? Also, maybe you as a company have written a too general ad if you get 500 applications? Maybe you need to sit down and rephrase what you're really looking for?<br /><br />Thanks for a great post, it obviously put a lot of interesting thoughts in my head.Erik Brickarphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14683331276140830508noreply@blogger.com