StartupsForTheRestOfUs.com podcasts have lots of great info.
Also check out the microconf videos.http://www.microconf.com/past-videos/
This is a good one too.http://businessofsoftware.org/2013/02/gail-goodman-constant-...
There is lots of information out there on SaaS but it comes down to execution and hustle.
Basically you need to start marketing, building an email list, put together information on property management on a blog to build up content/traffic and your email list.
Do this before hand leading up to launching your App.
Do you have any potential clients that would sign up right away? Get them in to a beta program early sign up to work out issues, give you ideas to improve it, what works, what doesn't.
Sounds like you have a good proven idea, from there it's just execution and hustle.
Here's some inspiration:
DHH Startup School Talkhttps://baremetrics.com/open
Not sure what stack you work on I would recommend building it with Rails or Laravel(Checkout Laravel Valet/Homestead, Forge and Spark) using Stripe, SparkPost, host on Digital Ocean or AWS. Lots of great tools out there.
I've built and managed SaaS apps for clients and am starting to work on my own this weekend looking forward to building my own.
Good luck with your SaaS!
You can test if you really have an understanding of the problem you're solving and if it's even worth building in the first place. I've personally gone down so many dead ends following my business ideas without validating first and I won't be caught dead making the same mistake.
Another benefit of talking with your customers is that you can collect information about how to market towards them. You listen to their problems and the solutions they're using and you instantly have ideas about blog posts you can write and other ways you can provide value for your target customer.
If you have no technical skills, then there is still a lot you can contribute. Every non technical person who comes to me with a "great idea" gets told the same thing by me:
"That sounds great, the best starting point for you is to go build some wireframes for us to look at. There are tons of wire frame tools out there, that you can check out, or even a note book and pen will do because we can scan them in."
Some people ask me what a wire frame is, I have a few places I can point them.
No one has ever sent me a wire frame.
If you are technical, then start with wire frames. It shows people that you are serious, that you have thought this out. If a picture is worth a 1000 words, then a page of wireframes is worth 1000 lines of code.
Or if you're looking to target bigger apartment complexes, you could get a job at a property management company for a year. That will give you a good view of the administrative side.
Your local community college might have a course on taking care of your home(to help with tenant turnover or knowing what your contractors need to do), or might be able to hook you up with a business mentor.
Once you've spent a year or two doing something related to property management, then you can write the code and probably will already know someone who can use it.
 FIRST http://www.firstinspires.org/robotics/frc
My hobbyist alternatives right now are lego or pulling stuff apart.
Functionality and ascetics are just better than any of the other text editors that I've used in the past, plus I'm happy with it so don't really go looking at alternatives these days.
When I first went to OSX a few years back TextMate seemed to be the dominant editor, Sublime for me just naturally replaced that with improved visuals and features. When your watching tutorial videos and the person is doing magic in a text editor, you start to question why am I still using my current one that doesn't have them features.
Marketing was just word of mouth, and how much support do you really need for a text editor? If it breaks it's not like you can't find another one to use...
I think it gained traction on OS X. The dominant text editors for OS X at the time were Textmate and Coda. The development of Textmate stalled and people were looking for an alternative. Coda had a very different approach from Textmate (you were either a Textmate or a Coda gay/gal, never both), and Sublime really comes close to Textmate.
It is cheaper than alternatives (time, licence)
It was introduced in right time (surge in web boom)
It have easy to use API (Python vs Elisp)
It is cross-platform (*nix comeback)
Recommending it is pretty easy: Less crashes than Eclipse/Atom; less setup, tinkering and learning curve than vim/emacs. Just works, cross-platform.
Finally, in a professional setting, the cost of Sublime is completely negligible vs e.g. losing work from crashes or even messing around with vim for two hours.
 http://dropbox.nakkaya.com/builds/ferret-manual.html http://nakkaya.com/2011/06/29/ferret-an-experimental-clojure... (Old version for more documentation on the idea.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literate_programming
GC lang to non-GC lang is a more interesting challenge. If anyone has transpiled a gc lang to C++ I'd love to know how they did it.
1- The chilling effect of people being scared to click on a link that may do searches their government cares about
2- The idea that if many people used a browser add in like this, it would make surveillance of search history much more difficult
3- Google accounts getting banned
All from one silly site.
I showed ruinmysearchhistory.com to a Pakistani Muslim friend, not having clicked it myself, and he thought it was funny until the ISIS application parts started coming up, when he consequently freaked out, as you might imagine.
But this got me wondering -- it seems to be widely accepted that googling things like "how to make a bomb," "bomb materials," "where to buy guns," etc will get you put on a government watchlist.
It's never been clear to me whether this is superstition or if there's truth to it. Google is fully HTTPS-- how could your searches be monitored unless google was handing them over to the government?
What I'm saying is, if you're not a US citizen, don't participate in those kinds of actions. The problems these campaigns highlight are real, but being foreigners, we have no legal recourses in the US in many areas, and can end up seriously fucking up our lives.
Also it'd be nice if US folks sharing those links and encouraging actions of the kind could be considerate of non-US people who don't necessarily have the leisure of getting on all kinds of list.
I still don't get why something so malicious was upvoted so much.
I did open it in an incognito window and saw what it does. It doesn't look like a big deal. It's probably the web-era version of sticking red-alert keywords in your Usenet signatures back in the 80's and 90's.
You'd think that someone reading this topic could get that cleared up pretty quickly.
It probably I ran it without signing in Google.
Ran it, wasn't too impress with the 'choices of words' being used for the Google searches, so I stopped it.
i've been planning on switching off of google products soon, towards fastmail, but haven't gotten the right domain name yet.
I doubt my lack of a Google login and random UA spoofing does anything to help this, though.
My workstation (FPGA development, programming, and a little gaming every now and then) was an ex-business unit. My 2013 MacBook Air belonged to an ex-student wanting to upgrade (can't think why - I don't even remember the specs myself because it runs as smooth as butter and I've never had reason to check otherwise!). Same with my phone - I bought a friend's old iPhone 3GS years ago. This year I've finally had to retire it because it was no longer reliable and I need it to get into my house (another story). My audio setup consists of a pair of vintage bookshelf speakers a friend picked up from a car-boot sale for a tenner, and my amp was gifted to me years ago by an old teacher (one new transistor and it was good to go)!
The bottom line is that buying second-hand made me realise that the extra bit of performance isn't worth the significantly higher asking price. I no longer care about small aesthetic imperfections like scuffs and scratches provided it doesn't break functionality (like a scratch on a lens for example).
Figure out what you really need your equipment to do for you then do your research and pick up something used. Be satisfied when it gets you 90% of the way, and you'll start to wonder why you ever lusted after shiny new things! At least that worked for me.
Someone entering a market after the first is going to look at the competition and try improve and create something more unique, if they win it'll be because they actually made something that's significantly better. And generally that improve the is going to be feature/design based rather than stability/performance etc...
I personally think first to market business can sometimes get a bit complacent, you always need to understand are people buying your product because it's the best, or simply because it's the only one. If it's the latter then you need to constantly innovate and improve, or someone else will.
The advantage of second to market is, a lot of your market research is already done...
Speculation. Have you confirmed this?
If the product has seen little usage & people show little interest, there are two possibilities (1) you aren't solving a real problem people have (2) you aren't marketing it well enough.
Then again sometimes first to market may not necessarily be a good thing, but due to it's popularity catches on anyway (nuclear fission power plants) Or in some cases first to market was too early for market.
On your effort - One advantage of first to market is while others are playing catch up you can be working on next generation - you already have the product skill, and also the opportunity to improve.
Applying this to your bugs and first impression: I would posit that if your product clearly met a market need, some customers would have been willing to work around those issues. If not, then you were educating/convincing them that this innovation was worthwhile and their lack of desire would have made your flaws harder to work around.
Reid Hoffman's great quote was that if you're not embarrassed by your first product version then you launched too late. What I would focus on is whether your potential customers are super clear about the problem they have, and whether you are super clear about how you solve that problem. If it's not a massive need for the market, that's ok, just be aware that your rollout process will take longer and cost more as you invest in educating them. Good luck!
I would pay 10-20 a month for a site that had high quality in depth analysis and articles, though. Something like a paid version of longform.org. The articles wouldn't have to be tied to current events at all.
It's not very efficient, I'm paying for a lot of stuff that I'm not interested in to get a small amount of news that I am interested in. It's probably value for money though as I do appreciate what I read and it's less than the price of a coffee.
I would possibly be interested in a curation service as long as I was in control of the curation and it had access to both free and paid articles. The problem I would envisage is that, for it to be worth oto $10 a day to me, I'd need it to cover most of my news requirements i.e. a digest of the sort of news that newspapers have, expert opinion of current political affairs in G4 from multiple political viewpoints, and topical journal articles in the academic subjects I'm interested in. Plus the musings of selected columnists.
To make it work, for me, it'd presumably need to do deals with a lot of publishers who wouldn't necessarily be particularly happy with the idea. Maybe if the bottom falls out of advertising for free news (highly likely) then it'd be more attractive.
I doubt I'd be interested in a yet another generator of "original" general news. Sure if it had a lot of high quality journalists who were out to inform rather than push an agenda and had interests that happened to largely coincide with mine. Not going to hold my breath though.
Paying does not help fix the news because, 1. the market actually forces the news publishers to become biased, 2. a sponsor can easily match any income from paying customers and provide stability of income on top.
I think the public broadcasting model is the best one can do as far as an unbiased news source, because at the very least, the bias will not be permanently leaning towards one direction. It tends to change with administration.
But really, how much is "general news", news worth to an individual? I would say very, very little. I don't remember of any particular instance where I read something that actually prompted me to take any kind of action.
I'd rather pay 5 and get an additional 10% discount to pay once a year. But hey, we're getting there :-)
Take the financial industry, there is a different set of regulations for each exchange and jurisdiction. To keep up with all the changes is daunting. There are a few providers in this space that charge like $30k a year to handle just the RSS feeds from these regulators.
Not much. Maybe not anything at all really.
That's because as much as I'd like a decent news service with well written, interesting pieces about current events (and no tracking, annoying ads, overt political biases, etc), I know that the internet has enough free content that I could find some of those of things on other sites and social media services (and can mix and match them for a decent overview). And it'll stay that way unless the amount of content online drops by something like 90%.
But that requires that the everyone hit by ransomware before people give up on making it be willing to sacrifice their own good for the good of those who would be hit after them, since equally obviously it's better for a company to lose $20k than $20MM worth of information.
It is very difficult to get people to sacrifice their own good for the good of others in the future, even when that future global good vastly outweighs the present local good.
See also: Climate change
That said, what is going to happen is no different then what has happened in history for other forms of "terrorism" (which essentially ransomware is, someone is terrorizing an organization by holding them hostage).
Once a company has been hit multiple times or has had enough the company will assemble one or more response teams, they will spend money to go after the people and start preventing it, that is when companies will stop paying. Companies already get the authorities involved, but face it that is an investigation after the fact right now. It won't change until companies essentially protect themselves better and become more offensive in nature, which in some corners they are doing. BTW -- offensive doesn't mean they are out killing people, just that they are putting on an offense to prevent this stuff instead of waiting for shit to happen and being forced into paying a ransom.
Its not that we are not capable to crowdfund the construction of a bridge without gov. intervention.
So I made T-Shirts with my resume ironed on the front. Best $100 in marketing I ever spent, and got me multiple interviews and a lot of laughs. IBM hated it.
I have posted my resumes to my current company three times, but without success. After two years I had "insider" there, who recommended me to his manager and I was hired only with formal interview process.
FOCUS ON DETECTION APPREHENSION AND/OR DETERRENCE OF TERRORISTS AND TERRORIST WEAPONS.
Most interesting is "I designed and implemented the C++ programming language."
Dates jumping around especially are a pain. Make it easy to read. Give to a friend to check, preferably a friend who has experience of hiring others.
https://snowdrift.coop/ (not operational)https://git.snowdrift.coop/sd/snowdrift (Haskell)
It turns out that many users of open source projects (especially libraries and packages) are other developers !
It is hard to find a piece of modern software which doesn't depend on some open source libraries. Those libraries might depend on other libraries and so on. Just do an `npm ls --depth=4` in a node-based project to see what a nice tree that is.Same thing with cocoapods, carthage, rubygems, pip, cargo, leiningen, etc.
In my view, money should follow the project structure - developers should donate part of the money they receive to the project dependencies and the devs of the dependencies should do the same thing, recursively and that's how you really spread the love !
I've started working on a prototype a year ago, but got discouraged after someone showed me that there are literally hundreds of projects trying to 'spread the love' and as a consequence no love is being spread :)... so I kind of gave up on it for now, but still think this is how it should be done.
I've also got the impression that most patrons rather prefer a predictable, monthly amount over a varied amount, even if it comes with a cap.
Central repository (database with website and API frontends) that contains links to donation pages for all open source software. This is crowdsourced information. So if you search for "spark", apache spark appears with link to donation page, and of course more obscure packages will be added as well.
Then a CLI tool is written that scans your code base. This is an open source tool, so for node it will look in NPM packages, for C projects it will look at the make files, etc. Developers can write custom code to detect their own packages if it's not standard.
The output of the CLI tool calls an API at the central repository that creates a report, so you can go to the URL and see all the open source packages you use and links to donate to them.
Now, here is the final piece that would make it so much better, but is more difficult: the central repository itself is a non-profit organization, so instead of having to go to each library's donation page, you donate directly to the central repo (perhaps a set amount every month), and once a month the central repo donates all of the amounts taken in. So if you only want to donate $10 a month, but use 500 open source projects, that's OK, because once a month the central repo will add up all the donations and donate one lump sum. Of course you can change the ratios of donations if you want, so some projects get more of your donation per month than others, and you can remove projects you don't want to donate to even if you use them.
In this way, individuals and companies can fairly compensate all the developers of the open source software they use, easily and fairly, in the amount they can afford.
At the end of the year, you only have to write off your donations to the central repo, and not the hundreds of open source projects, as the central repo is a non profit.
Snowdrift looks interesting too:
The idea works, the implementation could be improved.
For example, my company pays for OpenVPN Access Server not because it offers a ton of value over OpenVPN (it really doesn't, for our use case), but because they provided a way for me to give them money that's acceptable within a corporate budget.
So I'll definitely look at all the other, similar/identical products. Another takeaway is that this idea probably won't work on a per-commit basis - what's a good way to make sure recurring contributions correspond with actual development activity?
Some prior work from top of my head:
- Bountysource- Gratipay- Patreon- Flattr
businesses have a much greater incentive to ensure continued development of projects than individuals. Personally there's at most a handful of projects I would support with my own money, but my employer's money would be very well spent supporting at least a dozen different OS projects.
Even if you're supposedly giving money to reputable developers that are the percentile less likely to commit fraud, there's still a risk of it happening.
A more reasonable approach would be a monthly or a "version" contribution.
Even better than that would be a "fund" where you pledged your money to developers/projects, and it would be distributed equally or by a clear metric.
If you're interested in helping out you should join us. :)
2- a good linux ide for native remote developement with proper support for debugger and profiling
3 - a cheaper version of vtune with support for arm and powerpc
And if you want to complain about Gmail's spam filter, try using Yahoo Mail for a while, you'll quickly learn to appreciate it.
Anyway, it's a good habit to regularly check your Spam folder.
Narratives and echo chambers everywhere. Welcome to the future.
- Replication is harder to set up than MySQL. And there is no master-master replication like in MySQL. (Of course it also doesn't lose your data.... :-)
- I wish there were support for SQL:2011's bitemporal stuff. (There are some tools/extensions/published patterns to add "transaction-time" aka "system-time" support, but none I know of for "valid-time" aka "application-time", let alone both at once.) But this is very niche and not really fair to expect so quickly from a free product.
- I wish I could share a database between separate users, give them each their own schema, and not let them do `\dn` to see what other schemas exist. Again, very niche.
. . . Okay I thought I would have a longer list but I've run out of ideas. :-)
- EDIT: One more. You can't do `UPDATE ... ORDER BY ...`. This mattered to me once when I had multiple multi-row UPDATEs running at the same time, and if they touched the same rows but in different order, they would deadlock. You could solve that with `ORDER BY id` so that everyone obtained locks in the same order. Apparently this is not a big enough problem for anyone else in the world to care though.
I think the lesson here is that there are no real gotchas, just small annoyances that are very unique to your own project. Unless you have quite unusual requirements, I doubt there is going to be a deal-breaker issue.
1. Tooling is not on par with other databases. If you want nice GUI that holds your hand and does everything with one click - you may find offer for postgres lacking here. I don't care much about that, but some people do.
2. There is no "in memory" storage (but you can use in memory fs to get the same effect).
3. Extensions often define their own operators (that's good), which are made of some combination of +-*/>=~!@#%^&|`?. Yes. Your code may look like its perl. You can make "select foo @@>&!|~ bar from baz" to be valid query.
4. Finding hosting for postgres in not a problem, but its not something as universal as mysql.
Overall, it really is solid database. I've never been disappointed by postgres, while mysql is always a walk through a forest of wtf for me.
I simplify the selection to the more general architectural value. Do I need SQL, NoSQL, or graph? What about deep JSON queries, embeddability, specific performance requirements, scalability?
Given that, I use PostgreSQL as the default choice for SQL/JSON db in all cases that don't require imbedding. SQLite for imbedding.
There is one big disadvantage, the same for all fixed schema index based databases. Scalability. Engineering effort rapidly goes to infinity as we asymptotically approach the throughput event horizon.
- Tables cannot be organized as a clustered index (this can be useful to control rows ordering at the storage layer).
- No builtin query cache (but I'm not sure it's very useful).
- It's easier to find hosted MySQL services like Amazon RDS Aurora and Google Cloud SQL.
- YouTube Vitess for MySQL is really great. I don't know if there is something similar for PostgreSQL.
I won't write about the endless list of PostgreSQL's advantages since it wasn't the question ;-)
There were some attempts but none made it so far. See also: https://wiki.postgresql.org/images/6/64/Fosdem20150130Postgr...
Except for that the only thing that was a problem after switching is that Postgres is a bit more strict about some stuff, such as dividing by zore, which throws an error in Postgres but results in NULL in MySQL.
The main reason I love Postgres, and which is also why I switched, are the Database Definition language statements that support transactions (ALTER TABLE). This allows for much better migrations, if for some reason something fails you will not be in a state that is undefined.
There are so many upsides to PostgreSQL. I build my food app on redis as I did not know what my schema was going to be. That worked great, but simulating the power of what you get with PostgreSQL is that much harder.
I am in the process of converting things back to PostgreSQL now that my schema has settled. The one thing I will probably keep in Redis is the geo location code as this feature works super well.
Some people making just one app might look at SQLite, simply because it's simpler to set up. But those are my only two suggestions: PostgreSQL or SQLite.
Because of that, upgrades are either stressfull and cumbersome (ie. slony + switchover to a promoted and upgraded slave), or imply a large downtime (ie. pg_upgrade).
Also, because of that (WAL format), you can't use native replication between different major versions of PostgreSQL.
Other than that, Postgres is (IMHO, as always) the perfect RDBMS.
Oracle's installed base is the main reason my current gig is highly dependent on it. In so many cases, we have to integrate using Oracle "datapump" configuration. We'd look silly not running Oracle.
But this is for all of the right reasons.
It's a great db though, with very few bugs, high quality code, responsive devs, and relatively cheap support plans (like maybe $25k/year to get 24x7 support? I don't remember the numbers exactly) available from enterprisedb.com who have a bunch of core devs. In my one experience they knew their stuff.
Are you an engineer? What skill(s) will you be leveraging most as a Director or VP of Engineering? Leadership.
Are you a designer? What skill(s) will you be leveraging most as a Director or VP of Design? Leadership.
Are you a <fill in the blank>? What skill(s) will...you get it.
Back in my time at Georgia Tech, Warren Buffet came to speak and told an anecdote about a media executive who would go play records at one of his radio stations in the middle of the night. Buffet said something to the effect of, "the farther I get into this business, the farther away I become from why I got into this business."
I started working professionally at small companies in 1997 as a "Web Developer." I finished my degree in 2004 and I've been doing software engineering since then. I'm currently a Director of Engineering at PayPal and, while my technical skills are useful, my primary role is centered around the leadership of a large team. I haven't written a line of code professionally in over a year. I share these same statements with my managers and engineers from my team. Always be developing your leadership skills--they stay with you forever.
Accounting, Marketing, Reporting/Data Analysts, Customer Service, Design/UI/Product, and Sales.
Weather your running the website or building the software you sell lots of these folks are going to have varying levels of contact with it. By understanding what these folks do (even at a high level) and the language they use, your going to be able to communicate with them and service them better. Building relationships in other departments can be as simple as being friendly to the people you meet, and getting them out of the office for coffee or lunch on a regular basis. Ask them lots of questions and build a relationship.
It's not a trait I started out in life blessed with but the older I get the more I realise that understanding why something is being said is frequently much more important than what is being said.
Ergo, learn to defend yourself from it.
A well-written developer is someone who can organize their thoughts and then express them in a way that others can understand. This requires mental discipline, clarity of thought, empathy, and intelligence, all of which are skills that will take any developer to new heights.
Why is this important?
The single most important skill I see needed in technical people is empathy to the problems people are solving. Just because it's trivial to one group to solve, or prioritize does not mean it's not valuable. Being able to put yourself in the actual shoes of the user, their needs, their perspectives to ultimately empower them, instead of taking the easy way of interpreting from a distance how they must do their job/task based on how you would approach it.
There is a great deal of intellectual capital in any organization where people have a "why" of how to do things a certain way that is not 100% the standard procedure.
These things form the competitive advantage that software developers, implementors, and consultants can kill in an organization.
Want to be a better software developer? Help people solve problems better in their terms, not our own. Whether it is a sales, marketing, production, design or management problem, being able to relate to the problem and how it's beneficial to solve is the single biggest valuable skill that I have landed on.
There are thousands of programmers who are incredibly good at what they do (programming), but aren't being considered for jobs because they don't know how to market/write/talk about their own experience. What to write (and leave off) on a resume, a cover letter/email application, LinkedIn profile, what to mention in an interview, how to define an accomplishment, etc.
Job searches, interviewing, negotiating, how to make good career decisions based on your goals - these are all things that don't happen every day, so programmers aren't all that likely to really get good at them. Most other professional industries don't see the volume of career change that we see in tech, where it's reasonable that someone could change jobs several times in a decade. Knowing how and when to change jobs, how to handle those changes, and making good overall career decisions is a skill many lack.
With those two skills, all other skills can be obtained more readily, including the need for better oral and written communication.
Empathy and salesmanship require a modicum of innate ability. Everyone can certainly improve on their potential. I've never met a career salesperson who didn't already have some proclivity for sales.
You'll feel better and have more energy throughout the day.
Listening skills are going to get you FAR in business and life, and your going to hear lots of stuff that has nothing to do with your job. Learn NOT to repeat every thing you hear.
Sadly offices have as much gossip if not more than your average high school. Once people know they can trust you to keep your mouth shut, a well spring of interesting knowledge is going to start to fall in your lap. Some times this is just personal drama, but knowing that person A has a grudge with person B can some times be a clue to how a situation is going to resolve itself.
Even if you are severely introverted (I am) you need to make as much effort as possible to overcome it. People who can't communicate are effectively invisible, regardless of how well they do their jobs, and invisible people are replaceable people.
TED Talks: The Official TED Guide to Public Speaking
Impossible to Ignore: Creating Memorable Content to Influence Decisions
Both are insightful and exciting.
Leadership, Public speaking, persuasiveness/sales, writing, copy-writing, storytelling, design, diet, exercise, mental focus, personal appearance
Maybe target ones that programmers typically lack.
Alternatively, sales. Working at large software companies has given me a lot of exposure to software engineering and product management, but I rarely get to see the sales process.
Whether a reference is good, bad, or mixed is entirely in the eye of the interviewer/reference checker. The interviewer could have asked some question like "tell me about a time @anonnystate went above and beyond in this role" and your reference proceeds to tell about the time you left an after hours party to fix the thing that broke the site. In your reference's mind that showed dedication. In the interviewer's mind you worked on code while partying.
They could have asked your references to describe your role, if it doesn't match up with what you claimed your role to be: mixed reference.
And it's entirely possible that the people you asked to be your references didn't want to say no, precisely to avoid the followup question of why.
Call (do NOT email) each of your references and state the situation: "Hey Ms. Reference, I recently got feedback from one of my job applications that a reference check did not go as well as I expected. Given that I use you as a reference in these situations, I wanted to check in to make sure that if you had any feedback on my past performance or had any advice on how to make a reference check go smoothly, I'd appreciate it."
A reference should not accept to be a reference if they will give bad feedback.
I do agree with folks here who are saying this might not be the real reason for the turndown, but definitely approach your references if you are concerned.
EDIT: to answer your question directly you really don't have much of a right here. This is all lovey-dovey-fuzzy human stuff. I doubt your potential employer will share the feedback, nor would I even ask. If anything, ask for general feedback on what was said or what could have been done better by you.
So possibly what happened is that your reference said something along the lines of "I worked with anonnystate and he came on time and completed his work". Which sounds good to you, but to a potential employer, this is pretty mediocre and might indicate that the reference is hiding something. If your friend doesn't know how to give a real reference, then this may be the case.
In NY this is becoming a lame way to turn someone down, knowing that the reason will draw attention away from the company while the actual reason has nothing to do with references.
2. There is what the reference said. What the firm told told the headhunter and what the headhunter said. The information is third hand.
3. If there were multiple channels into the firm, then information could have come from one of their networks independently of the provided references.
4. Because the list of past employers are as much references as personal references, it could have been anyone at a former employer who was indifferent and contact could have been outside formal HR channels.
5. The headhunter could have formed the opinion on their own and withdrawn your candidacy. The headhunter could have been unable to reach favorable terms with the company regarding their compensation. Someone more appealing to the headhunter could have come along. The job might not really exist. It might have been filled.
Sure, not getting a job kinda sucks. It's probably not worth the risk of collateral damage due to insufficient or inaccurate information. Or both.
Meaning most companies use references to disqualify and that the reference checker may not ask followup questions to understand the context of the questionable information. That is not your problem, its the companies problem and they are missing great talent.
For example I always ask a references this question. "Everyone has something they can improve on what can this candidates improve on?"
Yesterday i received feedback on this question that was questionable. "The response was that you need to help the candidate to stay focus."
HMMMMM that's not good, I said to my self is this +/- I need to explore more. I asked some follow up questions and I found out that the candidates requested help to fix a new AppSec too. The request was not followed up on by the reference in a timely fashion and the candidate fixed the tool's code to make it work : )
Long story short, I was able to gather from this reference that it was the references' responsibility not to waste this candidates time. So for the next employer, he said its important to respond quickly to his needs so you don't waste valuable Building, Breaking and Defending AppSec time. Because he is smart of enough to find and fix anything.
So in essence, if I took what the reference at face value with out seeking to understand this would have been a mixed reference. Now I am able to educated the new hiring prospects on this feedback.
Hn, you can only do so much so you might change up your references a bit to be safe but there is a lot out of yours and their control.
Sorry and have a great weekend!
Asking the no-longer-potential employer or your current references about it is unlikely to do any good. Using different references might, but then again maybe not. You probably already know what negatives might have come up in a conversation with people who've worked with you. If those are affecting your career development, the solution should be obvious.
All kinds of crazy stuff can go down in interviews and unless it's part of a trend, you just have to chalk it up to their loss. I had an interview where the hiring manager came back with lots of praise and offer forthcoming news, turn into "team could not reach consensus" in under 24 hours. People in interviews will come up with all sorts of crazy reasons not to proceed. Sometimes it's a turf war, sometimes it's thinking they need to protect themselves, sometimes it's some innocuous occurrence in the interview that sows enough doubt to not proceed. Your career is way more than the few incidents that will occur over it that make no sense, so I'd just not worry about it for now. More bad could come from trying to McCarthy your reference network than good based on one weird interview scenario :-).
> I have asked the company ... but they are refusing to let me know which of my references provided them with the negative feedback.
Of course they are, because it's none of your business. You do not have a legal right to the information.
> What are my rights here?
You have the right to continue applying and to use different people for references.
> I simply want to know who is the snake
Based on your comments in this thread, the entitlement, the threat of lawsuits, and calling someone a snake for giving you a bad reference, it seems perfectly reasonable that someone would have given a bad reference.
If youre unsure about any of the referees you're using, set up a fake opportunty via friends and spoofed emails etc. Get real references, which of course are sent to you, or relayed if a friend phones "as a headhunter/employer".
There's also a distinct possiblilty that the referee had been hassled at a bad moment by the headhunter (not a species reknowned for consideration after all). The mixed part may have stemmed from this. Or perhaps he didn't cooperate in sharing leads at his current location. It might have been poor wording or misunderstanding either a question or answer rather than a real issue.
In short, you'll never know, but you can arm yourself better for next time.
One of my old employers had a very strict policy of only issuing a standard reference which was basically to confirm I worked there, my job title and my start/finish dates. Staff and managers were expressly forbidden from giving references - they had to refer all requests to HR.
I had a job offer withdrawn as a result of this. The potential employer asked specific questions in their reference request and my old employer refused to answer then - instead giving them their standard form reference. Not my fault, and nothing I could do about it.
It could be that someone who generally thinks highly of you gave a glowing reference, but once the headhunter or hiring manager started digging into specifics, the person softened, hesitated, or otherwise answered in a way that the company was not looking for. It's possible the reference was unaware that what he/she said was interpreted in a mixed or negative light by the company.
What is even a "mixed" reference? I mean, what a lame excuse. It is enough to say "he has great engineering abilities and some good accounting" to say that it is "mixed"...
If you want to invest time into it, round robin applications. For example, if you need 3 references per application, get 4 then cycle them in sets of 3 each time. Or find an application that requires only 2 references and split sets. Eventually you will have enough data to know who the bad reference came from. This is time consuming, but will net you your answer.
The truth is, your options are drop all the references you used, even the ones you think are solid, or find out who the lame duck is and delete them.
Legally, no one can say anything because it opens them up to a lawsuit, so stop chasing that avenue unless you know them personally.
But the best way that I've come across is to judge character traits. Intelligent people always have listening as a core component, where as less intelligent people will be very dismissive and constantly interrupt people. These are traits you can definitely sift out in interviews.
(Disclaimer: This comment hypothetically assumes that blockchain blockchain blockchain mania actually works.)