I have interviewed over 2500 programmer applicants, all having passed a "resume screening". I terminated 50% of the interviews before reaching the coding test because I knew by then that it would be a waste of time. Of the other 50%, 90% couldn't pass the simple coding test. I ended up hiring or referring less than 100.
Anyone else have similar experience with these percentages?
It's pretty amazing how easy it is to get a degree in compsci or game development and have no programming competence whatsoever. What amazed me too was the astounding quantity of terrible CVs, even among people who supposedly have a substantial amount of experience. I used to laugh at articles telling you to spell check your application and give other, seemingly extremely basic advice, but I swear about 80-90% of applications have glaring spelling, grammar and semantic mistakes and no discernible logical structure. Come on, how hard is it to assemble a chronological list of things you've done?
"All your base are belong to us!"
Perhaps if you had a different way of pre-screening candidates, something besides resumes.
Perhaps even if the pre-screening itself took much more time then scanning a resume - overall it might end up saving time?
Judging by myself: FSCKING YES!!!
The only thing I hate more than resume writing is Java,
This freaking "resume screening" selects best resume writers, not best programmers.
Its basically just a bunch of buzz words on the skills you have, and a paragraph about your last few positions/roles.