I am still pretty swamped (big release goes out Tuesday! Guess who's working this weekend?) but this week I have a "real" weekend links post for you, with a bunch of good articles and posts to make you think.
First up, Catherine Liu wrote a thorough takedown review of Amy Chua and Jed Rubenfeld's "Triple Package." I suspect it is well-deserved. I wasn't planning to read the book, and this review certainly didn't change my mind on that! I particularly like her point about how Chua and Rubenfeld's worldview completely devalues work that does not meet their limited definition of success:
"Their lists of successful people from the “Triple Package” groups reads
like dross written in capitalist propaganda cubicles — or SAT prep
companies trying to market their services: look at all the people we
have helped gain admittance to Ivy League schools! There are no firemen,
no public school teachers, no social workers, no psychologists, no
steelworkers, no plumbers, no horticulturalists, no veterinarians, no
nurses, no carpenters, no astronauts, no computer engineers, no farmers,
no soldiers, no tinkers, no tailors, no chefs, no ceramicists, no
artists, no non-classical musicians, and no poets in Chua’s and
Rubenfeld’s accounting of successful Americans."
I really liked this piece from Brittney Cooper about who gets overlooked when the pundits talk about public scholarship. Tressie McMillan Cottom also has a nice post about the making of pundits and the new crop of journalism start ups. I am happy to see the latest crop of media startups, but sad that they are missing the chance to really diversify the voices we read. I suspect they are doing the all too common hiring thing of preferring to hire people they know and trust... which almost always shrinks diversity. (I see this in my own industry, too, and it is a very, very hard thing to combat- but writing about that is for another time, when I've thought more carefully about what I can and cannot say.) I know there are other sites working to build their audience that perhaps have more diverse voices, and I need to seek them out. But seeking them out takes time- which is why we turn to pundits and "big" media sites, which is why it matters so much that those "big" sites try to find the diverse voices to share....
Salon has been doing a pretty good job of that, I think, and I am increasingly fond of that site despite its tendency for click-baity headlines and unabashed left-leaning bias. I don't go there for an unbiased take on the news- I go there to read thought-provoking things written by smart people. And I have another article from them to share this week: a really good look at how people who have never experienced true poverty can fail to see it and its effects. I remember the day in grad school when I was listening to a report on the news about a new recalculation of the poverty level and realized that the stipend I considered a bit stingy was actually at the poverty level- for a family of four. And I had job security, a great deal of autonomy, a fair amount of respect from society, and great health insurance (better than what I have now, actually). I realized that as much as I and my fellow students (all of whom were single) liked to complain about how broke we were, we had no idea what real poverty was like. That was a very sobering realization, and one that I think a fair number of people have never had.
Moving to an even more distressing topic.... You might have heard about the dying child who needed access to an experimental drug that had no active trials. The drug company, a small biotech startup, was refusing to supply the drug on the grounds that they did not have the resources to do so. Not surprisingly, there was a big internet stink about that. The company and FDA have since found a way to supply the drug with the possibility of including data from this patient in a phase III (I have no idea how that is going to work, but clinical trial design is not my area of expertise, so I'll just trust that they have figured something out). John Carroll has a good editorial on this situation, which I will actually urge you to go read if you have any interest at all in the topic. As someone who has worked at (and been laid off from) biotechs, I can say that the argument that supplying compassionate use doses of experimental drugs could in fact lead to a company going bankrupt before getting the drug on the market is entirely plausible.
I am extremely happy that the company and the FDA found a way to fix this one case, but I also hope that people will not forget the general problem. Manufacturing a drug for human use requires a lot of overhead, not to mention the people to actually do the work of creating the batch. Most venture-backed biotechs are under tight timelines and there is a real risk of running out of money before the definitive trials can be completed. I think we need a system to pay for compassionate use cases so that companies do not face this impossible decision of whether to try to save a patient now at the risk of stranding their potential future patients and so that patients can get access to the drugs without a social media campaign. I am deeply uncomfortable with the way we seem to be turning access to medical care into a social media popularity contest.
I will refer back to my Tungsten Hippo post of a few weeks ago and argue that it is not "they" who should do something about cases like this, but US. This is the sort of problem that government seems well-suited to solve, perhaps with a fund to compensate the companies asked to provide compassionate use doses. It could be "need-tested" so that profitable pharma companies would continue to pay their own way, but little biotechs without any revenues could draw on the fund. I might write to my congressfolk to suggest something like this, but that seems unlikely to have much impact. I'm not sure what else to do, though. I'll have to think about that.
For anyone who is not in the drug discovery industry and would like to know a little more about why drugs are so damn expensive, Derek Lowe had a post this week about the reasons new drug applications fail.
So, that was a lot of heavy stuff.
On a slight less life-or-death note, I really liked this post from Frank Chimero, which I'll say is about life in the internet age, but which might more accurately be described as just being about life and how to live it.
And Stochastic Planet had a couple of great pictures. That site is one of my favorite things in my RSS feed, not because the pictures are always great (sometimes they are, sometimes they aren't) but because I love the look at a random spot on the globe from a random photographer. It is somehow comforting that so many of the random photographers are clearly quite bad at photography (like I am). Also, I really want to know the backstory on that Finnish picture.
Finally, let's end with a testament to the human spirit. This is a video shot in Tacloban, where people are still cleaning up after Typhoon Haiyan, which hit last November.
Friday, March 14, 2014
Tuesday, March 11, 2014
Ask Cloud: Turning an Academic CV into an Industry Resume
I promised @jkgoya that I would write about how to turn an academic CV into a resume aimed at industry jobs. I was planning to post about it last week, but then last week went to hell.
I am still processing why, exactly, last week went to hell, since the proximate cause of the train wreck on Thursday would rightfully seem to most people to be a relatively small irritant, in the grand scheme of things.
I will probably write about this eventually, because it usually helps me to write about it. I have a lot of thoughts swirling around about last week, mixing with thoughts about disproportionate responses to seemingly minor incidents and the deeper reasons for them, the limits of my tolerance, the accidental gaslighting that you experience when you are different from your colleagues in some important way, the "ban bossy" campaign and why it matters that we call girls bossy but boys leaders, and an awesome short story I read in the latest issue of Crossed Genres magazine in which words are literally weapons. Only the last of those things can really be called pleasant. (Seriously, if you have any inclinations towards Sci-Fi at all, do yourself a favor and subscribe to Crossed Genres- I have yet to read a story I didn't like, and I've read severally that I outright love.)
But I can't quite get my thoughts to coalesce into something coherent, so I will let them percolate some more and write my promised "Ask Cloud" post instead.
To all those arriving at this post because someone sent them a link saying they should read about how to write a resume- apologies for the above. That's just how I roll on this blog, and since it is a hobby for which no one pays me... you get what you get. I will, however, happily answer questions on the resume subject, both in comments and in email.
-----------------------
The first thing I need to tell you about turning an academic CV into an industry resume is that while I strongly recommend you do this before applying to any industry jobs, having failed to do so is not a cause for despair. Early in your career, you probably don't have a super long CV, so most hiring managers will give you the benefit of the doubt and read through your full CV to see if you are a fit for their entry level position.
However, you can increase your chances of catching a hiring manager's attention and greatly help anyone who has offered to keep an eye out for relevant positions for you by making some tweaks to turn your CV into a resume.
Let's take it section by section.
The Profile or Objective
The absolute #1 thing you should do is add either an objective or a profile at the top of your resume. Seriously, if you take none of my other advice, at least do this. Which you choose is a matter of personal preference. I personally prefer a profile because I think the objective is fairly self-evident (my objective is to get the job to which I'm applying!) but I see a roughly equal mix of the two, and as long as the section is well-written, I don't think it matter which form you use. The profile is also sometimes called a summary. This distinction is utterly meaningless.
The objective or profile section is a written version of your elevator speech, tailored for the job to which you are applying. It should only be a couple of sentences long. In fact, my current profile is a single sentence. If you are sending the resume to a networking contact who has offered to help you, you should try to craft a version that can plausibly cover all of the types of jobs in which you might be interested. Yes, this is hard. I know, because I have struggled with it every single time I have run a job search. It is worth doing, though, because this is the first thing the person looking at your resume sees, and it gives them the reference frame into which they will fit the rest of your resume. It is worth sweating over this section.
Here is what a summary or profile might look like for someone who is just starting out:
Scientist with interdisciplinary experience in basket-weaving and snorkeling, strong technical skills in reed preparation, snorkel selection, and demonstrated ability to quickly master new weaving techniques.
Here is what an objective might look like for the same junior underwater basket weaver:
To obtain an entry-level position in underwater basket-weaving in which I can apply my interdisciplinary snorkeling and weaving experience, strong reed preparation and snorkel selection skills, and learn new weaving techniques.
You should tweak the order of the clauses and include/exclude specific skills and experiences based on the job to which you are applying. If you have one of the key skills that the job description calls out, try to get it in this section. If you could plausibly apply to two different types of jobs, have a different summary or profile for each type. For instance, I have bounced around among jobs that are more science-oriented, more computer-oriented, and more management oriented throughout my career. When I apply for a job now, I use my profile section to emphasize the part of my experience that is most relevant to the particular job to which I am applying.
Key Skills
There is some debate about whether this section should go right after your summary/objective or at the end of the resume. I think this is another case where there is no one right answer. My personal bias is to put it after the summary for more technical/hands-on positions, and move it to the end when you start applying for management positions. I've seen it in all sorts of locations, though, and I personally have never cared where I find it in an applicant's resume. I definitely want to see this section, though, particularly for more junior positions.
The key skills section is exactly what it sounds like: a listing of your key skills. The combination of this section and your profile is the "TL; DR" version of your resume. I read the profile and the key skills, and then decide how carefully to read the rest of the resume. This sounds harsh, I know, but remember that I review hundreds of resumes for any position I post. I have to use something to tell me where to focus my time, and using the profile and key skills is better than using the formatting and font choice.
Only list skills in which you have reasonably strong proficiency. Do not list things that you know about from reading a paper or two or have just dabbled in. If those things are truly relevant to the job, mention them in your cover letter, not here. Stretching the truth in this section is a disqualifier, in my opinion. If I interview someone who does not turn out to have the skills he or she listed, I will not hire, end of story.
It is best to divide this section into bullet points, arranged by type of skill. For instance, here is what our basket weaver might have:
This section is the meat of the resume, in which you summarize your work experience, in reverse chronological order. For someone just leaving academia, I would recommend listing post-doctoral positions, your graduate research assistant position, and any relevant experience from before graduate school. If you worked for awhile between college and grad school, list what you did, even if it is not directly relevant. If it isn't relevant, it is fine to make it a very short section, but don't leave it out, or the hiring manager might assume something bad was happening then. If you were traveling the world for two years, briefly mention that in your cover letter, but leave it out of your resume. Same thing for less desirable reasons for an interlude.
I include a job title, the date range, and a very brief summary of the job (e.g., "responsibility for all lab basket-weaving. Hired and managed two technicians.") before listing 3-6 specific accomplishments for the job. The more recent positions include more accomplishments, but this is also something I customize for different jobs and I include more detail about older experiences if they are relevant to the job requirements.
I would only include part-time positions you held during college if they are relevant- e.g., research work or a position in which you garnered some supervisory experience, but this is truly an area for which there are no right answers. You'll just have to do what you think is best.
Don't list jobs you held in high school unless you had some sort of super awesome internship or something like that. I scooped ice cream at a Baskin-Robbins and sold popcorn at a movie theater. No one cared about that, even when I was fresh out of graduate school (and I didn't do a postdoc, so my resume was light for that first job application).
The standard advice is to make the bullet points with your experience action and result oriented. Don't just list what you did: list how it benefited your employer, and try to quantify that benefit. I think this is difficult for most people without much industry experience, but you might find some bullet points that you can rework into this style. For instance, you could turn this:
Education
Some people put the education section right after the key skills. I put it after the experience section, but I am much further away from my educational experiences than someone just starting out is. I don't think it makes a huge difference for someone straight out of academia whether it is after key skills or experience. Actually, I don't think it makes a huge difference at any point, but I do think it was sort of weird when the first thing someone who has some post-graduate experience wants me to see on their resume is where they got their degree.
In this section, you should list all of the degrees that you have obtained, in reverse chronological order. When you are relatively junior, you can flesh out your resume by including the title and a summary for any undergraduate thesis you wrote. As you get more senior, you'll drop the undergraduate thesis but keep this information for your graduate thesis (although you'll keep trimming it, as you search for more room for your professional accomplishments). List your advisors. Don't bother listing your high school education. No one cares where you went to high school, even if it was an awesome school with an excellent reputation. In most cases, your college and graduate school GPAs are irrelevant, too. As a friend of mine used to say: there is no such thing as a PhD-minus.
If you have taken any additional formal training that is relevant, list it. When I was first starting out, I listed the database course I had taken via the extension school at a nearby university. I still list that. I now also list my various project management and some other training courses.
I am not sure what to recommend in terms of EdX courses and other MOOCs. Certainly only list them if they are relevant: if I am hiring a scientific programmer, I don't care that you completed a MOOC about Greek myths. I suspect that listing relevant MOOCs might be helpful for a scientist attempting a transition into a different field, such as programming. I do not have any direct experience with this, though.
Awards
List any awards you have received, reaching back to college but not before. This is another section that slowly dwindles over the course of your career. When I first started out, I listed my National Merit scholarship and my college honors scholarship. I later dropped those, but kept the research fellowships I won in college and my NSF award for graduate school. I have now dispensed with the section altogether and just mention the NSF award in with my PhD thesis title. Don't stress too much about this section. I've never seen it matter. In fact, I had to open up my resume to see what I do with this section. I discovered that I do not have this section anymore, probably because I wanted more space for my professional experience section.
Publications and Presentations
List these, much like you would for an academic CV. This can be a separate page (or pages!) and does not count against the usual 2-3 page length for a resume. It is nice to put your name in bold in the list, to make it easier for the person who is reviewing the resume to find you.
If you have patents, you should list those, too.
Other tips
Your resume should be 2-3 pages without publications. This probably won't be a problem for early career folks, but might be challenging for someone who is more senior. Do the work to trim your resume down to size, regardless. Most industry hiring managers that I know are annoyed by long CVs, not impressed. Keep what is relevant to the position to which your are applying, condense or drop what is not.
Yes, you really do need to customize your resume for each and every job to which you apply. Yes, this is a pain in the ass. Do it anyway.
If you have gaps in your employment or educational history or are making a career change beyond just moving into the industrial equivalent of your academic field, explain this in your cover letter. This is not optional. The hiring manager will notice, and if you haven't explained, he or she might skip your resume in favor of someone else.
Have someone proofread your resume, even if you are a native English speaker. I'll overlook a typo or two, but some hiring managers are really annoyed by them. Grammatical errors and sentences that don't make sense will probably always count against you. Remember, the person reading your resume is going to be reading many, many emails and reports from you if you are hired. No one is enthusiastic about struggling through incomprehensible written communication.
OK, that's all I have. Commenters- what did I miss? Add your tips or ask your questions in the comments! Also, please comment if you disagree with any of my tips. It will help people to see that none of these tips are truly rules, and that there is no one single right way in which to write a resume.
I am still processing why, exactly, last week went to hell, since the proximate cause of the train wreck on Thursday would rightfully seem to most people to be a relatively small irritant, in the grand scheme of things.
I will probably write about this eventually, because it usually helps me to write about it. I have a lot of thoughts swirling around about last week, mixing with thoughts about disproportionate responses to seemingly minor incidents and the deeper reasons for them, the limits of my tolerance, the accidental gaslighting that you experience when you are different from your colleagues in some important way, the "ban bossy" campaign and why it matters that we call girls bossy but boys leaders, and an awesome short story I read in the latest issue of Crossed Genres magazine in which words are literally weapons. Only the last of those things can really be called pleasant. (Seriously, if you have any inclinations towards Sci-Fi at all, do yourself a favor and subscribe to Crossed Genres- I have yet to read a story I didn't like, and I've read severally that I outright love.)
But I can't quite get my thoughts to coalesce into something coherent, so I will let them percolate some more and write my promised "Ask Cloud" post instead.
To all those arriving at this post because someone sent them a link saying they should read about how to write a resume- apologies for the above. That's just how I roll on this blog, and since it is a hobby for which no one pays me... you get what you get. I will, however, happily answer questions on the resume subject, both in comments and in email.
-----------------------
The first thing I need to tell you about turning an academic CV into an industry resume is that while I strongly recommend you do this before applying to any industry jobs, having failed to do so is not a cause for despair. Early in your career, you probably don't have a super long CV, so most hiring managers will give you the benefit of the doubt and read through your full CV to see if you are a fit for their entry level position.
However, you can increase your chances of catching a hiring manager's attention and greatly help anyone who has offered to keep an eye out for relevant positions for you by making some tweaks to turn your CV into a resume.
Let's take it section by section.
The Profile or Objective
The absolute #1 thing you should do is add either an objective or a profile at the top of your resume. Seriously, if you take none of my other advice, at least do this. Which you choose is a matter of personal preference. I personally prefer a profile because I think the objective is fairly self-evident (my objective is to get the job to which I'm applying!) but I see a roughly equal mix of the two, and as long as the section is well-written, I don't think it matter which form you use. The profile is also sometimes called a summary. This distinction is utterly meaningless.
The objective or profile section is a written version of your elevator speech, tailored for the job to which you are applying. It should only be a couple of sentences long. In fact, my current profile is a single sentence. If you are sending the resume to a networking contact who has offered to help you, you should try to craft a version that can plausibly cover all of the types of jobs in which you might be interested. Yes, this is hard. I know, because I have struggled with it every single time I have run a job search. It is worth doing, though, because this is the first thing the person looking at your resume sees, and it gives them the reference frame into which they will fit the rest of your resume. It is worth sweating over this section.
Here is what a summary or profile might look like for someone who is just starting out:
Scientist with interdisciplinary experience in basket-weaving and snorkeling, strong technical skills in reed preparation, snorkel selection, and demonstrated ability to quickly master new weaving techniques.
Here is what an objective might look like for the same junior underwater basket weaver:
To obtain an entry-level position in underwater basket-weaving in which I can apply my interdisciplinary snorkeling and weaving experience, strong reed preparation and snorkel selection skills, and learn new weaving techniques.
You should tweak the order of the clauses and include/exclude specific skills and experiences based on the job to which you are applying. If you have one of the key skills that the job description calls out, try to get it in this section. If you could plausibly apply to two different types of jobs, have a different summary or profile for each type. For instance, I have bounced around among jobs that are more science-oriented, more computer-oriented, and more management oriented throughout my career. When I apply for a job now, I use my profile section to emphasize the part of my experience that is most relevant to the particular job to which I am applying.
Key Skills
There is some debate about whether this section should go right after your summary/objective or at the end of the resume. I think this is another case where there is no one right answer. My personal bias is to put it after the summary for more technical/hands-on positions, and move it to the end when you start applying for management positions. I've seen it in all sorts of locations, though, and I personally have never cared where I find it in an applicant's resume. I definitely want to see this section, though, particularly for more junior positions.
The key skills section is exactly what it sounds like: a listing of your key skills. The combination of this section and your profile is the "TL; DR" version of your resume. I read the profile and the key skills, and then decide how carefully to read the rest of the resume. This sounds harsh, I know, but remember that I review hundreds of resumes for any position I post. I have to use something to tell me where to focus my time, and using the profile and key skills is better than using the formatting and font choice.
Only list skills in which you have reasonably strong proficiency. Do not list things that you know about from reading a paper or two or have just dabbled in. If those things are truly relevant to the job, mention them in your cover letter, not here. Stretching the truth in this section is a disqualifier, in my opinion. If I interview someone who does not turn out to have the skills he or she listed, I will not hire, end of story.
It is best to divide this section into bullet points, arranged by type of skill. For instance, here is what our basket weaver might have:
- Basket-weaving: cross weave, Thompson's anti-fray weave, reed preparation
- Diving: snorkel selection, Jones' free dive technique
- Basket-finishing: advanced decorative design, design testing
This section is the meat of the resume, in which you summarize your work experience, in reverse chronological order. For someone just leaving academia, I would recommend listing post-doctoral positions, your graduate research assistant position, and any relevant experience from before graduate school. If you worked for awhile between college and grad school, list what you did, even if it is not directly relevant. If it isn't relevant, it is fine to make it a very short section, but don't leave it out, or the hiring manager might assume something bad was happening then. If you were traveling the world for two years, briefly mention that in your cover letter, but leave it out of your resume. Same thing for less desirable reasons for an interlude.
I include a job title, the date range, and a very brief summary of the job (e.g., "responsibility for all lab basket-weaving. Hired and managed two technicians.") before listing 3-6 specific accomplishments for the job. The more recent positions include more accomplishments, but this is also something I customize for different jobs and I include more detail about older experiences if they are relevant to the job requirements.
I would only include part-time positions you held during college if they are relevant- e.g., research work or a position in which you garnered some supervisory experience, but this is truly an area for which there are no right answers. You'll just have to do what you think is best.
Don't list jobs you held in high school unless you had some sort of super awesome internship or something like that. I scooped ice cream at a Baskin-Robbins and sold popcorn at a movie theater. No one cared about that, even when I was fresh out of graduate school (and I didn't do a postdoc, so my resume was light for that first job application).
The standard advice is to make the bullet points with your experience action and result oriented. Don't just list what you did: list how it benefited your employer, and try to quantify that benefit. I think this is difficult for most people without much industry experience, but you might find some bullet points that you can rework into this style. For instance, you could turn this:
- Designed novel 5-point basket weave to improve fish capturing capacity.
- Designed novel 5-point basket weave, resulting in 5-fold increase in average fish catch.
- Increased average fish catch 5-fold by designing a novel 5-point basket weave.
Education
Some people put the education section right after the key skills. I put it after the experience section, but I am much further away from my educational experiences than someone just starting out is. I don't think it makes a huge difference for someone straight out of academia whether it is after key skills or experience. Actually, I don't think it makes a huge difference at any point, but I do think it was sort of weird when the first thing someone who has some post-graduate experience wants me to see on their resume is where they got their degree.
In this section, you should list all of the degrees that you have obtained, in reverse chronological order. When you are relatively junior, you can flesh out your resume by including the title and a summary for any undergraduate thesis you wrote. As you get more senior, you'll drop the undergraduate thesis but keep this information for your graduate thesis (although you'll keep trimming it, as you search for more room for your professional accomplishments). List your advisors. Don't bother listing your high school education. No one cares where you went to high school, even if it was an awesome school with an excellent reputation. In most cases, your college and graduate school GPAs are irrelevant, too. As a friend of mine used to say: there is no such thing as a PhD-minus.
If you have taken any additional formal training that is relevant, list it. When I was first starting out, I listed the database course I had taken via the extension school at a nearby university. I still list that. I now also list my various project management and some other training courses.
I am not sure what to recommend in terms of EdX courses and other MOOCs. Certainly only list them if they are relevant: if I am hiring a scientific programmer, I don't care that you completed a MOOC about Greek myths. I suspect that listing relevant MOOCs might be helpful for a scientist attempting a transition into a different field, such as programming. I do not have any direct experience with this, though.
Awards
List any awards you have received, reaching back to college but not before. This is another section that slowly dwindles over the course of your career. When I first started out, I listed my National Merit scholarship and my college honors scholarship. I later dropped those, but kept the research fellowships I won in college and my NSF award for graduate school. I have now dispensed with the section altogether and just mention the NSF award in with my PhD thesis title. Don't stress too much about this section. I've never seen it matter. In fact, I had to open up my resume to see what I do with this section. I discovered that I do not have this section anymore, probably because I wanted more space for my professional experience section.
Publications and Presentations
List these, much like you would for an academic CV. This can be a separate page (or pages!) and does not count against the usual 2-3 page length for a resume. It is nice to put your name in bold in the list, to make it easier for the person who is reviewing the resume to find you.
If you have patents, you should list those, too.
Other tips
Your resume should be 2-3 pages without publications. This probably won't be a problem for early career folks, but might be challenging for someone who is more senior. Do the work to trim your resume down to size, regardless. Most industry hiring managers that I know are annoyed by long CVs, not impressed. Keep what is relevant to the position to which your are applying, condense or drop what is not.
Yes, you really do need to customize your resume for each and every job to which you apply. Yes, this is a pain in the ass. Do it anyway.
If you have gaps in your employment or educational history or are making a career change beyond just moving into the industrial equivalent of your academic field, explain this in your cover letter. This is not optional. The hiring manager will notice, and if you haven't explained, he or she might skip your resume in favor of someone else.
Have someone proofread your resume, even if you are a native English speaker. I'll overlook a typo or two, but some hiring managers are really annoyed by them. Grammatical errors and sentences that don't make sense will probably always count against you. Remember, the person reading your resume is going to be reading many, many emails and reports from you if you are hired. No one is enthusiastic about struggling through incomprehensible written communication.
OK, that's all I have. Commenters- what did I miss? Add your tips or ask your questions in the comments! Also, please comment if you disagree with any of my tips. It will help people to see that none of these tips are truly rules, and that there is no one single right way in which to write a resume.
Sunday, March 09, 2014
Low Stress Side Projects
This week's Tungsten Hippo post is very short- I collected the reasons I love short ebooks, which I had tweeted out a few weeks ago, and posted the list. I think it is a good list, but I fully admit that it is not a particularly meaty post.
But that is OK. Tungsten Hippo is a hobby, just like this blog is. I refuse to let my hobbies stress me out.
I was thinking about that as I thought about the management blog I was considering starting. That blog would not be a hobby- it would be part of my professional life. It might be a great thing to do for my professional life, but there is no doubt that it would sometimes add to my stress, because I would necessarily take it more seriously than I take this blog or Tungsten Hippo.
So I started thinking about how I could manage that, and I tried to really understand what would make it add stress. I think it would come down to the fact that there would be a schedule I'd want to stick to. Of course, I have a posting schedule for Tungsten Hippo, too. In that case, the things I "have" to post on certain days (book recommendations and quotes) are short and easy to create- I designed the site that way. The more time-consuming items- i.e., the blog posts- I intentionally left loosely scheduled. Furthermore, since Tungsten Hippo is not something attached to my professional identity, there isn't a huge amount of pressure to write brilliant blog posts. Obviously, I don't want to write dreck, but posting something like this week's lightweight list is fine.
I was still intending to setup my management blog, though, until my company's legal department put out a new policy which would require that I prescreen any posts with them. THAT would add a lot of stress. So now, I'm not so sure. Maybe I'll try again to get permission to write a column for the other site that has asked me to do so- at least then, I'd get paid for the hassle of getting my columns approved by the legal department!
I may still write fewer blog posts for Tungsten Hippo, because I am now thinking I'll devote some extra time to my chosen learning project for this year, which was to create an app. I also have another kids' story that is now completely drafted. It needs revision and fine tuning, and then I'll try it out on my captive audience and see what they think.
Mr. Snarky and I had a nice dinner out on Thursday, courtesy of my visiting in laws. We were talking about hobbies and side projects, and I realized that of all my non-work activities, the kids books are the most fun. I took some time last week to finish drafting my current work in progress, and that was pure fun. I think that is due to a combination of a lack of time pressure and the fact that writing children's books is completely different from what I do at work. It isn't that it is entirely easy- I was stuck for months on a plot point in my current story- but the problems are nothing at all like work problems.
Mr. Snarky wondered why I didn't just write more books, since I enjoy that so much. I don't think it works like that. I think I need a balance of things to keep me happy. That was one of the key bits of insights into myself that I picked up from reading the books about being a "scanner." I know that sometimes other people look at all the things I have going and think I'm insane and adding stress to my life, but I am actually fairly careful to structure my extracurricular activities such that they do not add stress. It is hard for people who aren't like me to understand this, but I would find it very stressful not to have some side projects going. I just need to be sure to pick the right side projects.
What about you? Do you like to have side projects going, or do you prefer to be focused on one thing at a time?
But that is OK. Tungsten Hippo is a hobby, just like this blog is. I refuse to let my hobbies stress me out.
I was thinking about that as I thought about the management blog I was considering starting. That blog would not be a hobby- it would be part of my professional life. It might be a great thing to do for my professional life, but there is no doubt that it would sometimes add to my stress, because I would necessarily take it more seriously than I take this blog or Tungsten Hippo.
So I started thinking about how I could manage that, and I tried to really understand what would make it add stress. I think it would come down to the fact that there would be a schedule I'd want to stick to. Of course, I have a posting schedule for Tungsten Hippo, too. In that case, the things I "have" to post on certain days (book recommendations and quotes) are short and easy to create- I designed the site that way. The more time-consuming items- i.e., the blog posts- I intentionally left loosely scheduled. Furthermore, since Tungsten Hippo is not something attached to my professional identity, there isn't a huge amount of pressure to write brilliant blog posts. Obviously, I don't want to write dreck, but posting something like this week's lightweight list is fine.
I was still intending to setup my management blog, though, until my company's legal department put out a new policy which would require that I prescreen any posts with them. THAT would add a lot of stress. So now, I'm not so sure. Maybe I'll try again to get permission to write a column for the other site that has asked me to do so- at least then, I'd get paid for the hassle of getting my columns approved by the legal department!
I may still write fewer blog posts for Tungsten Hippo, because I am now thinking I'll devote some extra time to my chosen learning project for this year, which was to create an app. I also have another kids' story that is now completely drafted. It needs revision and fine tuning, and then I'll try it out on my captive audience and see what they think.
Mr. Snarky and I had a nice dinner out on Thursday, courtesy of my visiting in laws. We were talking about hobbies and side projects, and I realized that of all my non-work activities, the kids books are the most fun. I took some time last week to finish drafting my current work in progress, and that was pure fun. I think that is due to a combination of a lack of time pressure and the fact that writing children's books is completely different from what I do at work. It isn't that it is entirely easy- I was stuck for months on a plot point in my current story- but the problems are nothing at all like work problems.
Mr. Snarky wondered why I didn't just write more books, since I enjoy that so much. I don't think it works like that. I think I need a balance of things to keep me happy. That was one of the key bits of insights into myself that I picked up from reading the books about being a "scanner." I know that sometimes other people look at all the things I have going and think I'm insane and adding stress to my life, but I am actually fairly careful to structure my extracurricular activities such that they do not add stress. It is hard for people who aren't like me to understand this, but I would find it very stressful not to have some side projects going. I just need to be sure to pick the right side projects.
What about you? Do you like to have side projects going, or do you prefer to be focused on one thing at a time?
Friday, March 07, 2014
Weekend Reading: The Better Than Nothing Edition
I am smack in the middle of a really busy period, both at work and at home. It is all "good busy" so I am not complaining. But it does mean that I haven't written a post all week, and I only have a few links for you this week, and no coherent theme for them whatsoever.
Ah well. The glory of this blog is that it is just a hobby so it doesn't really matter if I slack on it! (In fact, I have a post forming in my head about just that- what makes an activity stressful and what makes it stay fun. Maybe I'll find more time to blog next week and tell you all about it.)
Anyway, here are a few links:
Google really needs to do better at recognizing names if it is going to insist that we all use our real names.
This is a really good post about why the people who made fun of Kim Novak at the Oscars should shut up.
And still talking about Kim Novak, I thought Ta-Nehisi Coates generalized the situation beautifully.
A nice post about why venture capital isn't the only path to success for a start up.
And finally, something new for me- a podcast recommendation. I've been listening to podcasts to take the edge off of my commute, and I really enjoyed this one from NPR's Planet Money about mescal and global trade and a little village in Oaxaca.
I have heaps of potentially interesting things in my Twitter favorites- maybe Petunia will have a hard time falling asleep one night next week and I'll catch up.
Ah well. The glory of this blog is that it is just a hobby so it doesn't really matter if I slack on it! (In fact, I have a post forming in my head about just that- what makes an activity stressful and what makes it stay fun. Maybe I'll find more time to blog next week and tell you all about it.)
Anyway, here are a few links:
Google really needs to do better at recognizing names if it is going to insist that we all use our real names.
This is a really good post about why the people who made fun of Kim Novak at the Oscars should shut up.
And still talking about Kim Novak, I thought Ta-Nehisi Coates generalized the situation beautifully.
A nice post about why venture capital isn't the only path to success for a start up.
And finally, something new for me- a podcast recommendation. I've been listening to podcasts to take the edge off of my commute, and I really enjoyed this one from NPR's Planet Money about mescal and global trade and a little village in Oaxaca.
I have heaps of potentially interesting things in my Twitter favorites- maybe Petunia will have a hard time falling asleep one night next week and I'll catch up.
Sunday, March 02, 2014
Thoughts from Quiet Time
Mr. Snarky's parents are in town, and they all took the kids to a museum this morning. I stayed behind, because I need some quiet time to think through what I should do next on the career front. It has been delightful, even when I was folding laundry (in the quiet! with no one asking me any questions!) and perhaps I should arrange to do this more often.
It has not, however, provided me with 100% clarity on what I should do.
Awhile back, I had a few sessions with a career counselor, to help me sort through the various things I'm interested in doing. There was a definite outcome from those sessions, and using that, I formulated a plan for getting where I think I want to be. I have been doggedly trying to execute on that plan. It is slow going, but there is a clear goal and clear intermediate steps to getting there. I haven't blogged the details because I'm not ready to have the details out there yet. "Playing the long game" is an extremely accurate summary of the plan, and I'm still in the early innings.
After Thursday went so poorly, I came home and immediately starting trying to turn up alternatives to my current situation. And surprisingly, I did- but they are not necessarily consistent with my long term plan. Or, they may be consistent, but would further lengthen the time to getting to my ultimate goal. But, as Mr. Snarky points out, a new job would probably make me happier in the short term. So I am looking at a big mess of risks and benefits and trying to decide what the best thing to do right now is.
To be honest, I'm leaning towards "stay right where I am and keep working on my long term plan." That is almost certainly the smartest financial decision. But money isn't everything, and we are very fortunate to have quite a bit of wiggle room in our finances, so it is not an obvious or easy decision.
I do think, though, that I may start a blog about management, and write it under my own name. I appreciate all the suggestions for names (keep them coming!) and other advice, offers for help, and support. I cannot convey how much these have meant to me- you guys are awesome.
If I start the blog, I will probably alternate my Sunday posts with Tungsten Hippo. I intend to keep writing about random things here. I am still on the fence about what to do about Twitter. I am currently leaning towards just posting the management things on my @wandsci account, but I need to think carefully about whether I am being too cavalier about doing something that might lead to more people I know in real life reading this blog. I don't think I write anything here that should cause problems, but... I really don't how some of my more feminist-y rants would be taken by some of my colleagues. Perhaps, though, I don't care. And perhaps I think it would be a good thing if any followers I picked up from the management focus also occasionally read something I wrote about being a mom in the workforce. Or perhaps I am crazy.
I'll keep the separate Tungsten Hippo* account, though. Writing more about management feels like a natural outgrowth of this blog, and I suspect those posts would be of interest to a lot of my readers and Twitter followers. The short ebook posts seem more specialized, and since I'm using Tungsten Hippo to learn about some marketing things, it seems natural to keep it separate.
This online identity thing is getting confusing. I am starting to better appreciate the argument to "be your whole self" but I do wonder if that is going to lead me to self-censor even more than I already do.
So, TL; DR version: lots to think about still. Thanks to all who have sent support and advice!
---------------------------------------
*Speaking of Tungsten Hippo, This week's Tungsten Hippo post is about reading to understand race better, and how if white editors and reviewers can't do that, they aren't doing their jobs.
It has not, however, provided me with 100% clarity on what I should do.
Awhile back, I had a few sessions with a career counselor, to help me sort through the various things I'm interested in doing. There was a definite outcome from those sessions, and using that, I formulated a plan for getting where I think I want to be. I have been doggedly trying to execute on that plan. It is slow going, but there is a clear goal and clear intermediate steps to getting there. I haven't blogged the details because I'm not ready to have the details out there yet. "Playing the long game" is an extremely accurate summary of the plan, and I'm still in the early innings.
After Thursday went so poorly, I came home and immediately starting trying to turn up alternatives to my current situation. And surprisingly, I did- but they are not necessarily consistent with my long term plan. Or, they may be consistent, but would further lengthen the time to getting to my ultimate goal. But, as Mr. Snarky points out, a new job would probably make me happier in the short term. So I am looking at a big mess of risks and benefits and trying to decide what the best thing to do right now is.
To be honest, I'm leaning towards "stay right where I am and keep working on my long term plan." That is almost certainly the smartest financial decision. But money isn't everything, and we are very fortunate to have quite a bit of wiggle room in our finances, so it is not an obvious or easy decision.
I do think, though, that I may start a blog about management, and write it under my own name. I appreciate all the suggestions for names (keep them coming!) and other advice, offers for help, and support. I cannot convey how much these have meant to me- you guys are awesome.
If I start the blog, I will probably alternate my Sunday posts with Tungsten Hippo. I intend to keep writing about random things here. I am still on the fence about what to do about Twitter. I am currently leaning towards just posting the management things on my @wandsci account, but I need to think carefully about whether I am being too cavalier about doing something that might lead to more people I know in real life reading this blog. I don't think I write anything here that should cause problems, but... I really don't how some of my more feminist-y rants would be taken by some of my colleagues. Perhaps, though, I don't care. And perhaps I think it would be a good thing if any followers I picked up from the management focus also occasionally read something I wrote about being a mom in the workforce. Or perhaps I am crazy.
I'll keep the separate Tungsten Hippo* account, though. Writing more about management feels like a natural outgrowth of this blog, and I suspect those posts would be of interest to a lot of my readers and Twitter followers. The short ebook posts seem more specialized, and since I'm using Tungsten Hippo to learn about some marketing things, it seems natural to keep it separate.
This online identity thing is getting confusing. I am starting to better appreciate the argument to "be your whole self" but I do wonder if that is going to lead me to self-censor even more than I already do.
So, TL; DR version: lots to think about still. Thanks to all who have sent support and advice!
---------------------------------------
*Speaking of Tungsten Hippo, This week's Tungsten Hippo post is about reading to understand race better, and how if white editors and reviewers can't do that, they aren't doing their jobs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)