[unshift]

this may be true in startup land, where hires are evaluated by the engineers/managers/founders but it's absolutely not the case in the world of BigCorps. many recruiters (including internal ones) are less technical than anyone would like and have to operate on looking at key words in a resume before deciding what to pass along to managers. a github account with a bunch of code in it would be so confusing they'd just move on.

if you're looking for work, it's worth knowing how to put together a good resume just so it gets you by the HR department.

i've also had experience where i was required to write (non trivial) sample code with my application, only to find out months after i started the job that nobody even looked at it.

code samples and projects are great to have, and especially helpful if someone cares, but the resume isn't dead yet.

[galenward]

Maybe a better title would be "Github is Your new Resume... At Progressive Companies With Strong Engineering Organizations."

I think Daniel nailed it.

[dblock]

Thank you. I wasn't writing about dinosaurs :)

[icefox]

Not everyone reviewing resumes at BigCorps are bad. For what it is worth I work for 'BigCorp' and when looking for new guys on my team I do read any code I am given and go out looking for any code on GitHub and elsewhere. Internal transfers are easier as I don't have to do any hunting and just go looking through our internal repository at their commits.

[almightygod]

I agree, a recruiter is not going to know what to look for on github. But the engineering team should, if they are worth joining. I think sites like coderwall.com and vizualize.me are interesting in that they summarize your experience to get you past the initial quick screening.

[kjksf]

I think you're mixing up BigCorps with IncompetentCorps.

I've had plenty of BigCorps asking me to interview with them based solely on my open source work (they contacted me). Those were companies like Amazon, Google, Twitter etc. (companies I would consider working for). So I know that this advice works also in the context of BigCorps that are technical and competent.

I haven't had similar offers from GM or WalMart or Shell (or name-your-own-bigcorp) even though I'm sure they also hire programmers.

But given that I do have an option of working at a company like Google, I wouldn't even consider working for GM, which, and that's an educated guess, doesn't pamper their employees as much as Google, doesn't pay them as well and doesn't respect them as much.

So add that as one more benefit of github-as-a-resume model: it attracts companies that treat programmers extraordinarily well so not only you get more work opportunities but those opportunities are of the highest quality.

[unshift]

for what it's worth, my experience comes from getting hired at vmware and ITA software (now google). in my experience, the recruiters who source and filter resumes at those companies are rarely technical.

[gaius]

Nah, not really, because "a github account with a bunch of code in it" is the signal.

Of course, it can be gamed by someone who just forks a bunch of other people's repos, which a recruiter won't be able to spot but "github" is a keyword that can be searched for on a CV like any other.