Are side-projects good to list in lieu of work experience? I have a few on my resume, because I haven't had a job yet, and I want to demonstrate my ability. But some of the recruiters that I have spoken with lately have implied that they don't count if I'm not getting paid.
Does this sort of experience matter when recruiters consider entry level applicants? Are side projects acceptable experience to list in my resume?
Absolutely yes. Though at the end it depends on the nature of your side projects.
etc etc, see what I mean? It depends on what kind of things that you do.
"getting paid" has nothing to do with the value of your experience.
I'm not kidding; this actually happened with one applicant we had who did this twice on separate occasions. So this is a definite a DON'T.
– Spoike May 31 '12 at 16:16IT depends on the following.
If you are a fresh graduate, projects in academics and aside are very valuable because they are the primary factor to evaluate your insight while you still had no opportunity to face real world. But it truly depends on the depth of the project.
Even if you are graduated and yet to find a job (this happens quite often in some countries) and you show Additional project, it applies as above for evaluation and on top of it, it backs your claim I wants to constantly learn
If you are continuously employed, sometimes additional project is a great way to show capabilities you have otherwise learnt. For example, you want to switch to new technologies, but if you don't get opportunity in your current employment, additional project is a great way to tell your new potential employer that you are already learnt these things on your own and you are so keen that it will worth the employers' investment to grow with these area.
But, if you have a deep gap in employment and just to show that you were busy - it will never give you at par rating as much as doing things on the job. This definitely is significantly dependent on quality and depth of the work.
Don't only do it - seek evaluation
University projects gets evaluation grades, and company projects gets appraisals. This must be true for self starters as well. A most critical point in projects where you actually want to ensure is that some how you should get a reference to evaluate. For example, if you develop a piece of software (for this purpose), it might be best to publish it to end user or open source it - so user critic and stats tells (anyone neutral) how big deal it is. If you do some other kind of project - seek who can be a potential user - may be donate your prototype to some academic lab or something for actual use and get recommendation in return. And if it is pure theoretical see if you can publish that somewhere. (like some magazine, blog etc.)
Peer reviewed work has always highest value in any science and engineering work..
In general, like any other projects during the job, additional project which is based on relevance to the position you are applying, but a listing of additional projects shows that you are self-driven enthusiast and that is always a great point.
It's definitely a positive thing no matter which way you slice it. I think for an entry-level person even more so as the employer is looking for evidence that you can do the job so even though its not as good as real work experience (ie. dont hold off on getting a job to build up your 'projects portfolio') its better than nothing.
In my opinion, doing freelance work or a volunteer project for a business/charity is worth as much as Open Source stuff because you've had to deal with 'the client' which is an important skill to have in the workplace - even though typically the OS stuff will be more challenging technically.
A brand spanking new open source project doesn't have the limitations and real world challenges such as getting changes approved by superiors, dealing with existing 'bad' design decisions, technology choice limitations etc.. therefore can't be considered as valuable experience as the above.
I would rank it like so:
My first job as a web developer was won based on already having a Github account and having a quick javascript tutorial and a small script on there. Doing anything differentiates you from everyone who's done nothing.
When you have very little experience, it can only help you to mention small positive items. Some companies won't be impressed, but I don't see anyone saying "we would hire you if you hadn't done a little but not much work on your own time".
When I screen resumes, side projects are worth more (for technical jobs).
Let's say I have the choice between someone who is a "senior programmer" with 4 years experience and a fresh grad who programmed a game when he was a teenager.
The guy who has 4 years may or may not be good. He could be promoted solely on seniority. There's little sign of him actually being competent at his job. Unless he has a portfolio or could demonstrate skills during the interview, he's on par with many fresh graduates.
On the other hand, the guy who made a game actually made something. He's got an understanding of how programming works. He can pass a FizzBuzz test.
When I screen resumes, I look more at the side projects and hobbies section more than the work experience section. If this guy has 7 years of experience, a long list of programming languages and certifications, but hasn't made one hobby project, that's a massive red flag.
It means that the guy probably doesn't love his job and lacks the creativity required in programming. One of the key things in hiring is looking for attitude instead of skills.
Of course, many people drop out their side projects from their CV so they may certainly be competent. But I'm saying that it certainly doesn't hurt to include them!
However, please don't include your assignments, unless it was really cool (like some elite colleges practically expect you to make a sellable product).
