TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:References From:"Doug, Data Librarian at Ext 4225" <engstromdd -at- PHIBRED -dot- COM> Date:Tue, 14 Jun 1994 14:39:32 -0500
We've talked about portfolios, interviews, degreedness and
non-degreedness, so references seems like a logical progression.
While everyone recommends you either supply references with the resume or
be prepared to make them available, many (most?) hiring managers I know
either blow them off completely or give them very little weight. So, are
"good references" still a big deal or not?
I have a personal reason for asking. I hope to have a long career with my
present employer, but probably won't stay 30+ years to take retirement; not
a shocker in the present environment. However, company policy prohibits
managers from giving any information concerning former employees to outside
sources, except to confirm the dates of employment. So at some point in
the future, I'll hit the job market with this big black hole over some of
my best work; portfolio samples, my version of events, but no confirmation.
I understand this is becoming more common because of liability concerns.