I have a ton of questions about this because I've seen similar numbers before:
1. What tools does Codesmith track to know conversion rates? Do they have a central tool that you have to log all applications in and what type of application it was? I work at a job hunting and interview prep platform and I know for a fact that people don't love logging all of their applications and tend to start logging them after the interviews start rolling in, so it could appear that conversions are higher but it's a lack of information. We have a completely custom in house built centralized platform for this and it's still hard! So I'm curious how people log the applications and how this data is collected.
2. This is really granular data, so what are the placement rates for people, I'm assuming they shared this if they shared that detailed data? Median time to offer is useful for one aspect, but if 100% of grads got offers with a median of 4 months, versus 50% of people getting offers with a median of 4 months, that is very important to note. If the median offer is 4 months then they should have plenty of 6 month post graduation placement rates for most of 2023 (up until October grads) to share to compare to 2022. If they didn't provide them, ask!
u/Swami218 wrote (the comment Michael replied to):
“Codesmith Style” application is just more in depth vs things like ‘Quick Apply’. It starts with researching the company and making contacts at the target company to gain some insights about their product, stack, culture, etc. and tailoring your approach with your cover letter, r
u/michaelnovatireplied·★ FEATURED
Yeah I'm familiar with the Codesmith style 4 step application, with the double down and follow up, etc.. on the receiving side too haha.
I meant that I'm curious what people say and if how they portray experience in that process.
But yeah if you are using your own trackers, like sheets and notion trackers that Codesmith has access to, but it's enforced or standardized then they have no idea how successful Codesmith-style applications are.
It's entirely possible that people just log those more often because they put a lot of effort in them and they need to stay organized throughout the process. Whereas with quick applies, it's so easy that people might not be as diligent with recording them.
I'm giving direct insight though - if people are not required, they won't record all their job applications. Some bootcamps have people required to send in proof of applications to maintained job guarantees and refund policies etc... and some people still don't record them all, and just the minimum needed.
If Codesmith somehow normalizes for this and solved this problem, I would love to know that they did. If they haven't then that needs to be factored into the data.
u/MKPST24 wrote (the comment Michael replied to):
​
>codesmith style 4 step application
What exactly is their 4 step method? I didn't go to Codesmith so I'm unfamiliar. I did read your analysis though and found it pretty interesting. Thanks for putting in the work there, seems like a lot of research was done.
u/michaelnovatireplied·★ FEATURED
They go over it in public talks but its:
1. apply
2. send email/cold outreach to engineering leader (referencing blog posts or showing that you put in the work and it's not a random email you send everyone)
3. send double down email if no response from 2.
4. send final follow up email if no response from 3.
With more direction on what to say in each step. It's basically a sales funnel to sell yourself and follows like cold outreach sales model.
u/Swami218 wrote (the comment Michael replied to):
Yeah, the data isn’t going to be highly accurate in a quantitative sense - like you said, even with mandatory reporting which CS doesn’t have. But I think it’s enough to tell a decently accurate story. It’s not ground breaking technique, just solid advice and if you’re consistent
u/michaelnovatireplied·★ FEATURED
\+1, yeah definitely agree it's good advice to push grads to follow the advice
I don't have the full context on this presentation, but I do think Codesmith can do more though than use data to convince people to do the same old same old because what worked in <= 2021, doesn't work the same now, and alumni that talk to me don't think Codesmith is doing anything to address that. They've added 2-3 career support engineers, but a number of people feel like Codesmith is telling them everything is fine it's just taking longer to find jobs.
But with all of this new data they share to convince people of this, they haven't given any placement rates to compare and people aren't happy so I'm giving that feedback :D
u/CodedCoder wrote (the comment Michael replied to):
Wow look, another CodeSmith ad.
u/michaelnovatireplied·★ FEATURED
It shows 40% were above 120K, which seems about right. That's a very very large drop. The median was $115K according to this and this data is legit and up to date and it was $127,500 on their last CIRR report.
Regardless of the context around the numbers and cautions one should have, these are very larger drops in salaries.
Codesmith's CEO has attributed it to people taking lower offers sooner instead of waiting for a better one and that the world is changing - more types of companies are hiring engineers.
I attribute it to people taking less strong jobs are less tech-focused companies and that the world isn't changing.
But the jobs are clearly still very good compared to most bootcamps.
u/fuguefox wrote (the comment Michael replied to):
Are the double down and final emails long/have new info or solely about following up?
u/michaelnovatireplied·· edited
There are specific strategies and they want you through them all and then HP you case by case in your slack channel if you want more advice.
u/Swami218 wrote (the comment Michael replied to):
What could they change though? That’s an earnest question.
Applying and interviewing for a job is first getting noticed, then proving that you have the skills/experience and that you fit with their culture/team. This is largely influenced by the processes of the hiring companies
u/michaelnovatireplied·· edited★ FEATURED
Here are 15 changes we made, which is a subset of roughly a hundred: https://formation.dev/blog/year-in-review-2023-at-formation/
Obviously we're not a bootcamp and I'm not comparing apples to apples but just giving some examples of things people need that changed in 2023.
Codesmith's take is that they didn't change because they are the best and the world is changing because non tech companies are now hiring engineers and paying them a little less but close to what they used to.
They are making a narrative that fits the outcomes instead of making changes to fit the market. The types of companies hiring haven't changed whatsoever and the companies hiring engineers haven't changed.
Again, this sounds critical and insulting, but it's meant feedback. Most other bootcamp leaders just talk to me and I give my opinions privately, so maybe it's a weird way to give feedback, but people tell me they believe their leaders read most of my comments here.
u/Sufficient-Scar-913 wrote (the comment Michael replied to):
No one from my cohort that I spoke with has a 6% interview rate, and no one from cohorts graduating around the same time that I know of does. Also, maybe 1-2 people max have a cs job after graduating roughly 4 months ago who I spoke with. Idk where he got these numbers. And ho
u/michaelnovatireplied·★ FEATURED
Thanks for sharing, this is why I'm almost jerking insisting that y'all ask for placement rates. A median placement time of 4 months doesn't mean much if it's only 10 people in that number versus 100 in the previous comparable number. (Not saying the outcomes are those, just an illustrative example)
u/sheriffderek wrote (the comment Michael replied to):
Smart applications work
Dumb applications no one will ever see - don’t.
Makes sense to me!
This also is part of the whole “you need to cram an online CS degree or you’ll never get past the screeners” conversation. It might not be the CS degree… it might be the jobs people are
u/michaelnovatireplied·
The OSP projects I've seen recently have been great bootcamp projects but poor examples of real mid level code. So I'm not sure if those projects are actually getting through resume screens right now either.
u/sheriffderek wrote (the comment Michael replied to):
Well, they're certainly years ahead of "*my weather app"* (that basically just showcases how underprepared you are in every way).
I think it's unreasonable to expect a school project that somehow demonstrates that you have 2 years of on-the-job experience (real mid level code) (
u/michaelnovatireplied·★ FEATURED
I mean just look at the code yourself! I looked at two of the recent launches and found tons of commented out code without any reason why. Like a rushed school project flailing to the finish line, and then no further changes made to clean it up. It's not anywhere near real "work" in any stretch of the imagination - at least at strong tech companies, maybe it is at other companies.
Again, not bashing the students, it's just the nature of doing this thing in 3-4 weeks. Even though people can keep working on the projects - with vast majority not doing so - I see massive problems in the long standing stable OSP projects as well - like the ability for a bad actor to wipe a bunch of data from their database (which was disclosed privately to them)
u/Swami218 wrote (the comment Michael replied to):
I don’t think their take is ‘we’re the best, nothing ever changes’. What they do espouse is that technologies and the landscape may change, but empathetic engineers who communicate exceptionally well and can find solutions even if they haven’t seen the problem before don’t go out
u/michaelnovatireplied·★ FEATURED
I agree with your framing too, I awas being a bit flippant, but I would agree their stance is they are trying to make well rounded engineers who are leaders in todays world. My argument is that all of those qualities were things that always made a good engineer and that this hasn't changed, but I don't think it's a bad or wrong view to have.
To me it's not FAANG === tech. There are a lot of tech companies that are not FAANG but are "good tech companies", like [Bill.com](https://Bill.com), Twilio, arguable Salesforce. People use FAANG+ sometimes but to this is the definition (my personal one):
1. Engineers are empowered to make major decisions, if not are major deciders in most decisions
2. The company is product led - building the best tech-based solution to problems, and the money comes from that as a consequence
3. The company has strong technical chops in it's founding team (this is a sign that technology was weaved into the DNA early on)
4. Compensation is strong and often includes stock/equity in the company
u/Swami218 wrote (the comment Michael replied to):
The market for engineers goes far beyond even those kinds of tech companies as well.
Healthcare, finance, logistics, manufacturers, retailers - there are tons of companies out there who need software engineers. These are the opportunities people hear less about.
u/michaelnovatireplied·★ FEATURED
Yeah and those jobs to me are great first jobs and can be great jobs in general, just not what I call "solid tech SWE jobs". This companies have been hiring engineers for years and haven't changed that. Hiring ebbs and flows depending on the market, just like anything else. Banks doing fine with high interests hired a little more. Healthcare is hiring as more stuff moves online. These things go up and down and my point is there is no magical change in the world that results in those companies hiring more engineers now for jobs that didn't exist before .
u/WagonBashers wrote (the comment Michael replied to):
So 'Codesmith style' is just sending a follow-up email/statement to hiring managers, vs simply applying? (Looking at u/michaelnovati's comment below)
I was sharing this tip with folks on my cohort (I didn't go to codesmith).
\^This is good advice for anyone applying to any job.
u/michaelnovatireplied·★ FEATURED
It's more like this:
1. apply with the best channel, i.e. referrals if possible
2. send message to hiring manager/with the application - as personal as possible, referencing blogs or videos, or unique connection to company OR something special about your background
3. send double down - similar message to 2 but to an executive or very senior person and doing it shortly after 2.
4. follow up - if you don't hear back after a few days
But yeah I really don't buy that 5% of these end up in offers and the data sourcing seems iffy. I totally agree with this method but they literally tell people that this will result in a "minimum 20% conversation rate" and I don't buy that.
u/metalreflectslime wrote (the comment Michael replied to):
From what I have heard, Codesmith usually cancels their cohort if it does not have at least 20 students in that cohort.
u/michaelnovatireplied·
Have you heard of any canceled recently? haven't heard of one under 20 for a while but I'm not up to date