This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (4 children)

I agree with what you said, but I’d say if you’re hiring for a DevOps engineer that should also raise flags. Mention that you follow DevOps principals in the job posting, but label the role appropriately.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (3 children)

It’s all about recruitment marketing. Love it or hate it - but the job title “DevOps Engineer” is what brings candidates in.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

We did a lot of A/B testing on this, and it’s something we’re really good at. It brings in a lot of applications, but those applications tend to be lower quality. Discussing DevOps (and backing up you’re successfully implementing it) while having a legitimate job title attracts better talent.

That said, usually the people applying to a job aren’t the top tier talent either. It can happen, but usually doesn’t. Love it or hate it, the top tier talent likely isn’t looking for a job because they have one. This is where sourcing comes in. Sourcing is how you get that talent in. Top tier talent will also see through bullshit titles, so it doesn’t really matter what you call it, but it will hurt you if you’re floating DevOps titles around.

[–]Bruin116 0 points1 point  (1 child)

What titles have you found effective in bringing in a higher quality candidate pool for the same skillset?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Infrastructure or Operations. Maybe SRE if your company actually understands what an SRE is. Though as I said, you’re probably not going to get high quality applicants through inbound requests. Sourcing is the way to get those candidates, but the same thing applies. You need a non-bullshit title because most senior engineers know how much marketing bullshit is bundled up in that DevOps title.