Engineering Still Struggling finding a data science job

[austinuni]

Here's another entry-level position I found in Canada after 10 minutes of searching. There were some other requirements that you may not have, but I would apply anyways. Sometimes the employer will waive those requirements because they can't find a candidate meeting their ridiculous number of requirements. I know it's not much for a PhD, but it's something to get started on your career.

https://www.linkedin.com/jobs/search/?currentJobId=721758582&f_E=2

Software tester:

• Working with the testing frameworks.
• Write test and integration reports.
• Participate in writing and reviewing test and quality control procedures.
• Report results to developers and help to debug the test

• Education: Bachelor’s degree in computer science, software engineering or electrical engineering with relevant development experience.
• Experience: 1-4 years’ experience, graduates are welcome;
• Required knowledge: MATLAB/Simulink, Python, C++, Linux operating systems, GIT

 

[Anachronist]

... I had my resume critiqued by a senior data scientist. He said he thinks I know data science from my field, but I don't know how. I edited my resume accordingly, but still not getting responses (to be completely honest, I got one phone interview after I edited it, but not sure if it was a coincidence, or because I edited it, because I applied to tens of positions after editing it, and the responses were negative if there was a response at all).

After being on both ends of job search (hiring and trying to be hired) for many years now in Silicon Valley, I might have something useful to say. I also switched fields in my past, from electromagnetic physics to electrical to mechanical engineering and finally to software program management.

I would confidently wager that your problem is your resume.

Bluntly, you are either making a bad impression with it, or no impression at all. Or you're applying to positions in a field for which you're clearly unqualified. Or you're using a format that makes it hard to tell your background.

The point of your resume isn't to get a job, it's to get an interview. I can't tell you how many times I've seen academics try to write a resume, and fail. They go on for pages, listing every publication, and none of it is relevant to the questions that I, as an employer, am asking while I read it: "What's in this for me? What pain points will this candidate resolve?"

Most hiring managers spend a few seconds looking at the top 1/3 of the first page, after which they put the resume in one of two piles: (1) trash, or (2) give it a deeper look. You want to be in pile #2.

But first you must make sure your resume even finds its way to the hiring manager. Most resumes are filtered out by sophisticated matching software before a real person in Human Resources ever sees it. That's why it's often best to work your LinkedIn network to get personal referrals to companies that interest you.

I highly recommend investing in a 6 month subscription to http://resunate.com. It let's you set up a resume, then copy and paste job descriptions, and uses the same sophisticated contextual matching algorithms to show how well your resume fits the job description, on a scale of 0 to 10. If you can't get score a 9 or 10, your resume won't get any attention. I used it last year to tune my resume into a strong and hard-hitting 2-page document, with every single sentence in it relevant to the jobs I was applying.

Don't have an academic look at your resume. Find a job coach. Or find someone working in the company you are interested in, invite that person to lunch, and ask to critique your resume.

-A

 

[EngWiPy]

I think you are right. Part of the problem is my resume, because as someone told me once, if you don't get interviews, your problem lies in your resume, but if you don't get job offers after interviews, then your problem is in your interviewing skills. I haven't reached the second stage yet. My resume seems to find its way to the trash, because out of the 100s (I think they have exceeded 1000 now) of applications I submitted, I got only 3 phone interviews with HR people (with no follow-up technical interviews, which, I guess, is a hint that I need to work on my interviewing skills as well).

Another part of the problem is the lack of hands-on experience. Maybe these two are intertwined (writing my resume, and the lack of hands-on experience), because I tend to write my experience in research because it is the only "real" experience I have. I have done some personal projects for data science positions, but I guess they are not enough, although I watched someone (he is a physicist who knew nothing about Python and data science, but knew some statistics, which I think is similar to my case) on YouTube who said that he did a project on Basketball games, because he was interested in the game, and got hired within six months or so from his journey to switch careers from physics to data science. He didn't solve a real problem related to increasing the profit of a company for example, he just applied what he knows and demonstrated it on the Internet. I have done that.

Connection is another problem I am facing. All the people I know from my studies are still doing research positions in the academia. I have reached out to people in the field I am interested in, and invited them to a coffee, but without responses. Only one person has responded, and actually he invited me to talk over coffee. He is a data scientist by the way, and in the industry, he is not an academic (he was).

 

[EngWiPy]

..I can't tell you how many times I've seen academics try to write a resume, and fail. They go on for pages, listing every publication, and none of it is relevant to the questions that I, as an employer, am asking while I read it: "What's in this for me? What pain points will this candidate resolve?"...

Can I ask you how they need to answer these questions in their resumes? Can you give an example of this, because I am not sure how applicants should know what problems are facing employers? All they know is the job description, and a background about the company.

 

[symbolipoint]

Can I ask you how they need to answer these questions in their resumes? Can you give an example of this, because I am not sure how applicants should know what problems are facing employers? All they know is the job description, and a background about the company.

List the skills you have and the things you know how to do. You can include within your listing of employment, achievements or things you accomplished; as brief, precise descriptions.

 

[EngWiPy]

List the skills you have and the things you know how to do. You can include within your listing of employment, achievements or things you accomplished; as brief, precise descriptions.

I do list my skills in different areas (programming, software, ... etc), but for the accomplishments, for me they are irrelevant, because I have accomplishments in a field, and I am trying to break into another field. So, I list my employment history only (years, company, location) without any further details.

 

[analogdesign]

I do list my skills in different areas (programming, software, ... etc), but for the accomplishments, for me they are irrelevant, because I have accomplishments in a field, and I am trying to break into another field. So, I list my employment history only (years, company, location) without any further details.

I think this is a mistake. If you have measurable, substantive accomplishments, list them. If I were looking at a resume for someone trying to break into IC Design, but only has FPGA coding experience, and this person put things like "Implemented JESD204B-compliant serial interface in three weeks" or something, I would sit up and take notice, even though that isn't directly relevant to an analog IC position. It would at least get you into pile 2.

 

[EngWiPy]

OK, I have changed that a while ago (someone helped me understanding why I should put them even if they are not directly relevant). I did some resume writing coaching, and I started to get more phone interviews. An interesting observation is that, if the job poster is a manager or a CEO, or any other technical person, and this normally happens with small startups, I get a response to schedule a phone interview, more than if the job poster is an HR person. I haven't done on-site technical interviews yet, but I did some semi-technical phone interviews because the job posters were highly technical with PhDs.

 

[analogdesign]

An interesting observation is that, if the job poster is a manager or a CEO, or any other technical person, and this normally happens with small startups, I get a response to schedule a phone interview, more than if the job poster is an HR person. I haven't done on-site technical interviews yet, but I did some semi-technical phone interviews.

This is very common. Most HR people are looking for keywords (or arbitrary things the hiring manager told them). When I am looking for a new engineer, I specifically tell HR to forward EVERY resume to me. Last time I had to look over 200 but that is OK because we ended up getting a great engineer.

 

[EngWiPy]

Is it because managers don't have time to filter resumes, they delegate the process of filtering resumes to HR? Maybe HR can conduct some phone screening interviews, but I think the process of filtering resumes should be done more efficiently. In resume writing coaching, you will be told to cut and paste keywords from the job description, because of the ATS and the HR. I don't think this makes it any easier for the initial filtering process, because most people are told to do the same thing.

 

[analogdesign]

If by "don't have time" you mean, "choose not to prioritize it", then yes, I would say yes. I think that is astonishingly short sighted. I can screen a technical resume (in my narrow area) in less than a minute. Then, I know whether to email for more info or set up a phone interview. I think it is stupid to let HR filter because they may eliminate someone really strong or who has potential because you said "5 years experience" and this person has 4. Or you said "experience with a certain technology" and they have experience with a similar, but not exactly the same technology and HR doesn't know. (e.g. MATLAB vs. Octave vs. SciPy). Or you said MS or PhD and you have an amazing experienced genius without a college degree apply.

For example, if I had a resume from an experienced PhD physicist who said he or she wanted to move into mixed-signal design and while didn't have formal training had done self-study and a personal project, then YES, I would want to at least chat with that person. Such a person would never get through HR.

It is worth the investment for a manager to try their hardest to get good employees. A strong team member makes everything better. Nothing is more important in technical management than the quality of your team.

This is probably why you're doing better in small companies. Networking (although hard) may end up being your best bet.

 

[EngWiPy]

Interesting. The HR probably is afraid to forward a not-so-good applicant to the manager, because they want to look good themselves. So, I understand why they play it safe with the word matching technique. But that is why, I think, someone technical should be involved in the filtering process, and who can make a decision on the potentials rather than the exact requirements and experiences.

 

[symbolipoint]

Interesting. The HR probably is afraid to forward a not-so-good applicant to the manager, because they want to look good themselves. So, I understand why they play it safe with the word matching technique. But that is why, I think, someone technical should be involved in the filtering process, and who can make a decision on the potentials rather than the exact requirements and experiences.

 

[EngWiPy]

Once I expanded my search to the US, I started to get responses for R&D positions in wireless communication, even from the big companies. There are many more positions in the US than in Canada in R&D. However, the sponsorship thing is an obstacle. One company decided not to continue the process only because I am not Canadian, and they cannot sponsor me from outside the US. Otherwise, I think I did well in the first interview. I have the same problem in Europe. I recently got a message from the founder of a company in Europe to see if I am interested in a position, but when I read the description, I found out that to be eligible I need EU citizenship, or a valid work permit in the EU.

So, finding a position in academia is not possible, R&D positions in the industry in Canada are very few, and in anywhere else I need a sponsorship, which is a stumbling block. The only options I left with is to take on engineer positions, which in my experience won't work either because I am overqualified (and don't have experience), and switching to another field like data science isn't easy without any experience.

 

[symbolipoint]

EngWiPy comments:

... which in my experience won't work either because I am overqualified (and don't have experience), and ...

That's an interesting problem. Those two should not be taken as if to be in conflict.

 

[EngWiPy]

EngWiPy comments:
That's an interesting problem. Those two should not be taken as if to be in conflict.

What do you mean?

 

[symbolipoint]

What do you mean?

which in my experience won't work either because I am overqualified (and don't have experience),

If you are overqualified, then you have the education and experience for the job in question. If you don't have the experience then you are underqualified for the job in question. One cannot be both underqualified and overqualified for the job at the same time. Try to look at the logic there. At times, some employers might give comments or messages to you - saying you are overqualified because of having a degree or having advanced degree in desired subject; but they may be both more interested in experience in the field and are afraid your level of education would allow you to change to different company too fast ...

(internet interrup problems...)
(EDITED: during brief period of stable internet connection)

 

[EngWiPy]

You have a point, but what I meant is that engineer positions don't require advanced degrees. In that sense, I am overqualified. If I apply to positions that require Bachelor's degree, employers won't consider a PhD, because it is not required. But I don't have practical experience, even if I tried to downgrade my credentials. To me there is no conflict between the two the way I wanted to convey it.

 

[Anachronist]

Can I ask you how they need to answer these questions in their resumes? Can you give an example of this, because I am not sure how applicants should know what problems are facing employers? All they know is the job description, and a background about the company.

I know this is an old thread. This question was directed to me and I missed seeing it. In my experience as a hiring manager, if you're trying for a job in which your skills may not be a match, I would want to know how you approach and solve problems, but even more, I would want to know if you can even identify problems that you solved.

A good way to do this is phrase your bullet points as result-solution. That is, state the outcome of a challenge you tried to solve and what you did, without stating the problem. An example from one of my old resumes "Flattened workload among project management and engineering staff by developing a capacity planning tool for the PMO director." I stated the result, followed by how I achieved it. An aspiring data scientist might have a statement pertaining to data analysis: "Optimized profit margin and market share by developing a pricing model based on analysis of publicly available historical data on competing products." An academic would have similar statements about research problems: "Expanded university's patent portfolio by developing an innovative technique to <fill in the blank>" or "Improved university's academic reputation by publishing a paper on XYZ that generated over 1,000 citations".

If your resume is full of statements like this, then you have some control over the interview, because this sort of statement leads an interviewer to ask about it, and then in the interview you tell the story in the form problem-solution-result. State the problem, explain your approach to the problem, and conclude with the outcome. Everyone likes to hear stories. If you can tell a story in the problem-solution-result format as an answer to every interview question, you will have a good interview.