<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for DVClub Blog</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.dvclub.org/blog/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.dvclub.org/blog</link>
	<description>Sharing Knowledge Among the Verification Community</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Jan 2011 16:44:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Top 20 Most Downloaded DVClub Presentations by saturday</title>
		<link>http://www.dvclub.org/blog/2010/06/top-20-dvclub-presentations/comment-page-1/#comment-227</link>
		<dc:creator>saturday</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Jan 2011 16:44:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dvclub.org/index.php?option=com_wordpress&amp;p=267&amp;Itemid=127#comment-227</guid>
		<description>No, they are alphabetical by presenter&#039;s last name.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No, they are alphabetical by presenter&#8217;s last name.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Top 20 Most Downloaded DVClub Presentations by Alan M. Feldstein</title>
		<link>http://www.dvclub.org/blog/2010/06/top-20-dvclub-presentations/comment-page-1/#comment-224</link>
		<dc:creator>Alan M. Feldstein</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Jan 2011 00:47:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dvclub.org/index.php?option=com_wordpress&amp;p=267&amp;Itemid=127#comment-224</guid>
		<description>Are these in descending order?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Are these in descending order?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on July 2010 Employment Outlook for Design Verification Professionals by Alan M. Feldstein</title>
		<link>http://www.dvclub.org/blog/2010/07/july-2010-employment-outlook-for-design-verification-professionals/comment-page-1/#comment-223</link>
		<dc:creator>Alan M. Feldstein</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Dec 2010 00:17:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dvclub.org/index.php?option=com_wordpress&amp;p=270&amp;Itemid=127#comment-223</guid>
		<description>&quot;Those whose resumes are clear, concise, and list current technologies, [longevity] at past positions and can show excellent cost saving results are sure to get an interview.&quot;

Don&#039;t you think companies (and the economy) would be doing a lot better if that sentence read, &quot;Those who would be best for the company are sure to get an interview&quot;?

We, the best of the waiting talent, are not sure to get an interview. In fact, interviews are few and far between. So called &quot;technical&quot; recruiters tend to be technically incompetent. Most of them could tell the difference between an outstanding candidate and an inadequate candidate even if the outstanding one bit him in the ass! Just look at the resumes of the recruiters themselves (e.g. their LinkedIn profiles) and you&#039;ll see the problem. In many cases, their past experience is poor preparation for their current role. In almost all cases, their technical education is nonexistent.

Next comes the hiring manager. This is usually a person who is very busy throughout the year, doing the things that he is good at. When it comes time to recruit, he puts on a different hat, one he might be less comfortable wearing than his usual hat. The first thing he usually does is to write the job description and pass that to the recruiter, who doesn&#039;t really understand it. If the job description is not well though out and the recruiter doesn&#039;t understand technology, then the hiring manager has put into place a process that could very easily eliminate the best candidate before his resume even reaches the manager.

For example, the job &quot;requires&quot; x number of years of paid SystemVerilog &quot;experience&quot;. The best candidate found another way to learn SystemVerilog. Furthermore, this candidate won Think Verification&#039;s 2nd anniversary Article Contest (http://www.thinkverification.com/articles/1-main/47-article-contest-2009-.html) with an article that includes a discussion of HVLs. You&#039;re going to let your &quot;technical&quot; recruiter eliminate him from consideration?

And why did you sent a job description to your recruiter as your first action? Don&#039;t you already know someone who might be perfect for the job? What are your LinkedIn connections for? You at least try to keep in touch with them, don&#039;t you?

When interviews do come, far too much emphasis is placed on the technical test part of the interview (e.g. blank whiteboard). Not every great design verification professional can do very well with this kind of testing. So he tries to rescue the interview by describing a similar problem that he solved for Cosmic Horizon (the only business in the world dedicated to SPARC microprocessor core verification). How could he have solved that problem is he is as bad as your test suggests he is? But you&#039;ve stopped listening! He failed the test and you can&#039;t get past that.

As for a record of longevity at past positions, we can&#039;t falsify the past on our resumes, so advice to the job seeker on that point isn&#039;t very helpful. That&#039;s why these comments aren&#039;t for the job seeker. They&#039;re for the decision maker. He&#039;s the one who needs help. Again, what the decision maker needs to remember is that he&#039;s looking for the candidate who would be best for the company. It&#039;s not about longevity at past positions. It&#039;s about longevity at the next position! For clues, look at what the candidate is passionate about.

I&#039;ll give you an example of a case where past longevity is a poor predictor of performance. My father is on his fourth marriage. What woman in her right mind would marry a man who has already been married three times? But if you look a little closer, you&#039;ll see that he was still very young by the time his first two marriages ended in divorce. His third wife died of cancer. He&#039;s much older now. And this fourth marriage has lasted more than ten years.

I&#039;m sure to get an interview? My last boss wrote a great letter of recommendation for me. Along with supporting details, he basically wrote that you would be a fool not to hire me. I never asked him to write the letter. If you&#039;re a fool not to ultimately hire me, what are you when fail to even invite me for an interview, particularly when the job is microprocessor core verification? So before you pat yourselves on the back for how selective you have always been about the quality of people you hire, ask yourselves how you could have let a candidate like me slip through your fingers for so long.

(Note that for brevity, &quot;he&quot; above refers to &quot;he/she.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Those whose resumes are clear, concise, and list current technologies, [longevity] at past positions and can show excellent cost saving results are sure to get an interview.&#8221;</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t you think companies (and the economy) would be doing a lot better if that sentence read, &#8220;Those who would be best for the company are sure to get an interview&#8221;?</p>
<p>We, the best of the waiting talent, are not sure to get an interview. In fact, interviews are few and far between. So called &#8220;technical&#8221; recruiters tend to be technically incompetent. Most of them could tell the difference between an outstanding candidate and an inadequate candidate even if the outstanding one bit him in the ass! Just look at the resumes of the recruiters themselves (e.g. their LinkedIn profiles) and you&#8217;ll see the problem. In many cases, their past experience is poor preparation for their current role. In almost all cases, their technical education is nonexistent.</p>
<p>Next comes the hiring manager. This is usually a person who is very busy throughout the year, doing the things that he is good at. When it comes time to recruit, he puts on a different hat, one he might be less comfortable wearing than his usual hat. The first thing he usually does is to write the job description and pass that to the recruiter, who doesn&#8217;t really understand it. If the job description is not well though out and the recruiter doesn&#8217;t understand technology, then the hiring manager has put into place a process that could very easily eliminate the best candidate before his resume even reaches the manager.</p>
<p>For example, the job &#8220;requires&#8221; x number of years of paid SystemVerilog &#8220;experience&#8221;. The best candidate found another way to learn SystemVerilog. Furthermore, this candidate won Think Verification&#8217;s 2nd anniversary Article Contest (<a href="http://www.thinkverification.com/articles/1-main/47-article-contest-2009-.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.thinkverification.com/articles/1-main/47-article-contest-2009-.html</a>) with an article that includes a discussion of HVLs. You&#8217;re going to let your &#8220;technical&#8221; recruiter eliminate him from consideration?</p>
<p>And why did you sent a job description to your recruiter as your first action? Don&#8217;t you already know someone who might be perfect for the job? What are your LinkedIn connections for? You at least try to keep in touch with them, don&#8217;t you?</p>
<p>When interviews do come, far too much emphasis is placed on the technical test part of the interview (e.g. blank whiteboard). Not every great design verification professional can do very well with this kind of testing. So he tries to rescue the interview by describing a similar problem that he solved for Cosmic Horizon (the only business in the world dedicated to SPARC microprocessor core verification). How could he have solved that problem is he is as bad as your test suggests he is? But you&#8217;ve stopped listening! He failed the test and you can&#8217;t get past that.</p>
<p>As for a record of longevity at past positions, we can&#8217;t falsify the past on our resumes, so advice to the job seeker on that point isn&#8217;t very helpful. That&#8217;s why these comments aren&#8217;t for the job seeker. They&#8217;re for the decision maker. He&#8217;s the one who needs help. Again, what the decision maker needs to remember is that he&#8217;s looking for the candidate who would be best for the company. It&#8217;s not about longevity at past positions. It&#8217;s about longevity at the next position! For clues, look at what the candidate is passionate about.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll give you an example of a case where past longevity is a poor predictor of performance. My father is on his fourth marriage. What woman in her right mind would marry a man who has already been married three times? But if you look a little closer, you&#8217;ll see that he was still very young by the time his first two marriages ended in divorce. His third wife died of cancer. He&#8217;s much older now. And this fourth marriage has lasted more than ten years.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m sure to get an interview? My last boss wrote a great letter of recommendation for me. Along with supporting details, he basically wrote that you would be a fool not to hire me. I never asked him to write the letter. If you&#8217;re a fool not to ultimately hire me, what are you when fail to even invite me for an interview, particularly when the job is microprocessor core verification? So before you pat yourselves on the back for how selective you have always been about the quality of people you hire, ask yourselves how you could have let a candidate like me slip through your fingers for so long.</p>
<p>(Note that for brevity, &#8220;he&#8221; above refers to &#8220;he/she.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on August 2010 Employment Outlook for Design Verification Professionals by Mike Mintz</title>
		<link>http://www.dvclub.org/blog/2010/07/august-2010-employment-outlook-for-design-verification-professionals/comment-page-1/#comment-157</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Mintz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Aug 2010 14:20:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dvclub.org/index.php?option=com_wordpress&amp;p=289&amp;Itemid=127#comment-157</guid>
		<description>Hi Dayna,

Very good points. I might also add that honesty is very important. 

Also the applicant should show enthusiasm during the interview.

Take Care,
mike</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Dayna,</p>
<p>Very good points. I might also add that honesty is very important. </p>
<p>Also the applicant should show enthusiasm during the interview.</p>
<p>Take Care,<br />
mike</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Highlights of DVCon 2010 by The Art of Deprecation &#171; Verification Horizons BLOG</title>
		<link>http://www.dvclub.org/blog/2010/03/highlights-of-dvcon-2010/comment-page-1/#comment-6</link>
		<dc:creator>The Art of Deprecation &#171; Verification Horizons BLOG</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Mar 2010 18:38:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dvclub.org/blog/?p=167#comment-6</guid>
		<description>[...] It seems it’s always easier to add new features than to remove them. There are many places to create lists of your favorite enhancements. At the same time, people complain about the size of the Language Reference Manual – it’s over 1200 pages. Doug Smith of Doulos writes “Will this language ever stop exploding?” [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] It seems it’s always easier to add new features than to remove them. There are many places to create lists of your favorite enhancements. At the same time, people complain about the size of the Language Reference Manual – it’s over 1200 pages. Doug Smith of Doulos writes “Will this language ever stop exploding?” [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on September 2009 Employment Outlook for Design Verification Professionals by admin</title>
		<link>http://www.dvclub.org/blog/2009/09/september-2009-employment-outlook-for-design-verification-professionals/comment-page-1/#comment-5</link>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 20:29:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dvclub.org/blog/?p=81#comment-5</guid>
		<description>We&#039;re adding new jobs several times per week, so check back often or subscribe to the feed. At the time of this writing, we have 13 opportunities posted. While we would like to have more, this is indicative of the market right in Austin now. Best of luck out there, Abunasser. Hope to see you at the next DVClub in December.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We&#8217;re adding new jobs several times per week, so check back often or subscribe to the feed. At the time of this writing, we have 13 opportunities posted. While we would like to have more, this is indicative of the market right in Austin now. Best of luck out there, Abunasser. Hope to see you at the next DVClub in December.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on September 2009 Employment Outlook for Design Verification Professionals by abunasser</title>
		<link>http://www.dvclub.org/blog/2009/09/september-2009-employment-outlook-for-design-verification-professionals/comment-page-1/#comment-4</link>
		<dc:creator>abunasser</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Sep 2009 04:51:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dvclub.org/blog/?p=81#comment-4</guid>
		<description>I can only see few DV engineer job postings in Silicon Elite.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can only see few DV engineer job postings in Silicon Elite.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on DAC 2009 in Review by SKMurphy &#187; DAC 2009 Blog Coverage Roundup</title>
		<link>http://www.dvclub.org/blog/2009/08/dac-2009-in-review/comment-page-1/#comment-3</link>
		<dc:creator>SKMurphy &#187; DAC 2009 Blog Coverage Roundup</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Aug 2009 01:09:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dvclub.org/blog/?p=71#comment-3</guid>
		<description>[...] Brian Bailey &#8220;DAC2009 in Review&#8220; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Brian Bailey &#8220;DAC2009 in Review&#8220; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Random Test Generator Taxonomy by William H. Oldendorf &#187; S3 Graphics Chrome 400</title>
		<link>http://www.dvclub.org/blog/2009/02/random-test-generator-taxonomy/comment-page-1/#comment-2</link>
		<dc:creator>William H. Oldendorf &#187; S3 Graphics Chrome 400</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 May 2009 12:44:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dvclub.org/blog/?p=16#comment-2</guid>
		<description>[...] Random Test Generator Taxonomy [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Random Test Generator Taxonomy [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

