The problem is most companies want someone with 3-5 years of experience in that new skill set. So, unless you jump on that particular band wagon early you're out of luck.
In my experience, companies say 3-5 years but this requirement is written by someone in HR translating what the hiring manager said. The hiring manager is more likely to hire someone who has less than 3-5 years of experience, or even hire someone with zero experience, as long as the candidate demonstrates aptitude.
The trick is to write your resume so it gets past HR's filter, but without putting bullshit on it. It's unfortunate but I consider this kind of thing a critical skill for anyone applying to technical jobs.
> The trick is to write your resume so it gets past HR's filter, but without putting bullshit on it. It's unfortunate but I consider this kind of thing a critical skill for anyone applying to technical jobs.
I'd argue that skill applies even after you get hired. Fudging details to get around wasteful trivialities without outright bullshitting the person asking for the requirement is truly an art, and it's very hard to navigate this field without that skill.
Let's say the job listing says "3+ years experience with JavaScript," among other requirements. You only used JavaScript for 6 months, so you roll JavaScript up as part of your web development skills. You say, "5 years writing web apps, using Java, .NET, C#, and JavaScript." This is true, the hiring manager understands that you have not necessarily spent all 5 years writing JavaScript, and it gets past HR's filter.
The hiring manager will then make sure that your skill set is a good addition to the team.
Keep in mind that the hiring manager may have asked for someone "with some JavaScript experience" and HR might have translated that into "3+ years". In some cases, when the hiring manager sees the job posting, they're surprised by the requirements and say, "So, this is why we haven't been getting any applicants!" This is, yes, somewhat dysfunctional but it is a common dysfunction. Yes, you are essentially second-guessing the job listing and this is not the way the world should work.
As a rule of thumb, if you are applying to a job and you meet all of the listed requirements as written, you are overqualified and should apply to a higher level position.
It's often easy to spot when there is a recruiter/manager disconnect. When the language is overly gregarious/buddy-buddy, or uses the stereotypical bad job offer language ("rockstar ninja programmer", "we have ping-pong tables and free snacks!", etc...), you know the requirements can be taken with a grain of salt.
Definitely brush up on the things listed, though. Walking into an interview without at least a cursory recognition of what a listed language/framework does sucks, as it wastes your time and the interviewers'.
Also, be wary of bad recruiters. If they drink their own kool-aid and actually enforce the arbitrary x # of years in foo language blurb, you might be screwed (as well as the manager that put out the request for a hire in the first place).
One idea I heard recently was to include a copy of the job description that the HR person wrote in your resume. You include it in such a way that it can’t be seen visibly. For example, make the font size really small and the colour the same as the background colour.
The theory here is that programs that automatically scan resumes for keywords will always find the ones they are looking for.
I can’t say I have tried this or know how well it would work in practise.
This problem has existed at least since the 90s, probably longer than that. I remember the joke being job descriptions asking for 3-5 years Java experience in 1996.
