I was an undergraduate at a no-name university for various personal reasons. A Google, Microsoft and other big tech co offices were nearby. Throughout my undergrad, not a single event, talk or recruiting opportunity emerged. I understand this: the top people are the same everywhere but it does not economically make sense to do events to potentially hire 1-2 people.
I am now at a world famous grad school and there are talks, events, opportunities every week. I would say the best 5% at the undergraduate school were approximately at least as good as the average undergraduate here.
Unfortunately, economically it makes sense to focus recruiting events only at certain schools.
How could companies reach the great students at unknown schools systematically?
> How could companies reach the great students at unknown schools systematically?
Maybe it's better that these great students at "unknown schools" DON'T get hired by google/facebook/amazon/microsoft ?
Maybe their talents are best directed at small-ish companies where they can contribute, grow, and do interesting stuff outside of monstrously large companies with cut-throat competition?
Having ALL the "top" candidates vacuumed up by the "top" employers just seems wrong to me. I feel it's more healthy to have the best students spread out all over the place rather than concentrated in the top 5 or 6 employers in Silicon Valley. After all, there are more employers than there are colleges.
> Having ALL the "top" candidates vacuumed up by the "top" employers just seems wrong to me.
In my experience, "top" employers are employers that pay the best. I'd probably be happier at a small and scrappy company, but they so far have offered worse compensation.
Well, sure, but they can do that with or without recruiting events sponsored by the top-5 at their schools.
I guess I am also trying to say that these students should not feel so deprived if google recruiters aren't easily accessible, there's plenty of great places to work.
Maybe companies could leverage this "internet" thing to reach the great students systematically? Maybe put these lectures online?
Continue with projects like codejam, though ideally come up with one that is less reliant on obscure math (or OEIS) and more reliant on problem solving.
It really isn't that expensive to send a couple of engineers to a school if you're hoping to hire a couple of talented students, and maybe some interns. You really only need one event a year.
Except that there are hundreds of schools that fit this description. Sending recruiters to any one of them isn't that expensive, but sending recruiters to all of them is quite expensive.
Which isn't to say that there aren't students there worth recruiting.
What about putting those schools in a pool and selecting from them randomly, eventually weighting them by historical success if/when you have enough data?
If recruiting is a competitive advantage, why not be innovative and data driven about it? If it's not a competitive advantage, then why spend time and energy on it?
I recently moved from St. Louis to New York City. The number of recruiting emails I receive has probably quadrupled (or more). In all things, it helps to be where the people you want to find you are looking.
Also: protip for people in the South or Midwest who are open to relocation: change your online profiles to say you're in the new location.
As a data scientist living in the South, I have no problem relocating to San Francisco or San Jose, but how do I signal this without letting my existing employer know? Changing my LinkedIn location from <tiny city> to San Francisco would raise some uncomfortable questions.
Maybe it's ok to let your employer know? It's not as if the desire to relocate could be solved by your current company if all of their operations are local. I suppose it depends on your manager, but hopefully if you said "Boss, I want to move to San Francisco. The growth opportunity there is too great to ignore." they might be supportive. Obviously if you think that conversation could go very badly then you might have to be a bit more low-key. Maybe try to reach out to a recruiting firm in San Francisco instead of changing your LinkedIn.
I would second this advice, and be ready to "put up" when people ask you to fly out. Be prepared to have a plan to get to interviews if you plan on fibbing about your current location.
I wouldn't recommend lying (or imagine you'd ever have to). If anyone asks, just be honest about your current and preferred locations.
There's nothing weird about signalling that you'd prefer to live/work somewhere else. ("I'm currently still in St. Louis, but want to field offers in New York," seems like a perfectly reasonable explanation to me.)
> but it does not economically make sense to do events to potentially hire 1-2 people
Google and Microsoft makes about $200k/year profit per employee, Facebook 4x that. The problem, I suspect, is that you probably don't net anywhere near 1-2 hires per couple of events at these schools.
This is exactly what we're solving at interviewing.io. We open up our practice platform to all students, and the best performers rise to the top, completely independently of school/geography. We're really, really proud of this.
I think you encapsulated the issue if you flip your statement: half the students equal the top 5% at your undergraduate. Much harder to find the needle in the haystack.
I am now at a world famous grad school and there are talks, events, opportunities every week. I would say the best 5% at the undergraduate school were approximately at least as good as the average undergraduate here.
Unfortunately, economically it makes sense to focus recruiting events only at certain schools.
How could companies reach the great students at unknown schools systematically?