This is Part 3 of a three-part series. Read Part 1: The Invisible Polymath and Part 2: The Job-Hopping Myth if you haven’t already.
Dear recruiters,
This one’s for you. Not as an attack, but as a wake-up call. You’re in my network. You can see my work. My GitHub contributions are public. My npm packages have download counts. My NuGet packages are being used in production. My teaching experience is verifiable. My community contributions are documented.
Yet somehow, the first question is never “Tell me about what you’ve built” but rather “Why did you change jobs so many times?”
It’s time we had an honest conversation about what you’re missing and why the best candidates are slipping through your fingers.
Look Beyond the Timeline
When you look at my resume and see multiple positions over several years, what do you see? Job hopping? Lack of commitment? Red flags?
Let me tell you what you should be seeing:
- Adaptability: I’ve successfully integrated into different teams, learned different codebases, and contributed value quickly in multiple environments
- Diverse experience: Each role taught me something new, exposed me to different technologies, and broadened my problem-solving capabilities
- Proven value: Companies hired me repeatedly, which means my skills were in demand and my contributions were recognized
- Growth mindset: I actively seek challenges and opportunities to expand my capabilities rather than becoming comfortable in stagnation
But instead of recognizing these strengths, you reduce my career journey to a suspicious pattern that needs explaining. Research confirms this bias exists. A dynamic person under a lousy boss will want to leave, yet we’re the ones who have to justify our decisions while bad managers continue unchecked.
The Teaching Factor You’re Ignoring
I’ve taught multiple subjects at private colleges in Nepal while working full-time. Let me break down what this actually means for any employer:
Communication Skills: If I can explain complex programming concepts to students with varying levels of understanding, I can communicate effectively with team members, stakeholders, and clients.
Mentorship Capability: Teaching isn’t just delivering lectures. It’s understanding where students struggle, adapting explanations to different learning styles, and patiently guiding them to competence. These are exactly the skills needed to mentor junior developers and elevate team capabilities.
Documentation Excellence: Good teachers create clear, comprehensive materials that students can reference later. Good developers create documentation that teams can actually use. The skills overlap completely.
Time Management Mastery: Balancing full-time work, teaching multiple subjects, and personal projects requires exceptional organizational skills and discipline. These are traits every employer claims to value, yet you question how it’s possible rather than recognizing what it demonstrates.
Leadership Potential: Anyone who can stand in front of a classroom and effectively guide students toward understanding has leadership capabilities that translate directly to team environments.
But somehow, when you see “teaching” on my resume alongside full-time work, the reaction isn’t “This person has valuable mentorship skills.” It’s “Why were you teaching if you had a real job?”
That question reveals more about your limited perspective than it does about my capabilities.
Public Work Should Be an Advantage, Not a Liability
I’ve built in public for years. My contributions aren’t hidden behind corporate firewalls or NDAs. They’re out there for anyone to see, use, and evaluate. This should be a massive advantage for recruiters, yet somehow it becomes another point of skepticism.
“You talk about your work a lot.” Yes, because I’m proud of what I’ve built and I believe in sharing knowledge with the community.
“Nobody can do all that.” Actually, many people do. You’re just not looking for them because they don’t fit your narrow definition of what a career should look like.
“It sounds like you’re showing off.” No, I’m demonstrating competence through actual work rather than just making claims on a resume.
In an era where everyone talks about the importance of GitHub profiles, open-source contributions, and public portfolios, why do recruiters still treat extensive public work with suspicion rather than enthusiasm?
The Anxiety You Create
Let me share something vulnerable with you. I’m more anxious during interviews now than I was years ago. Not because my skills have deteriorated, but because I’ve experienced so much rejection that it’s become a self-fulfilling cycle.
Research shows that up to 75 percent of professionals experience imposter syndrome, and rejection compounds this exponentially. Every skeptical question, every raised eyebrow at my resume, every implication that I’m somehow fabricating my experience chips away at confidence.
Studies confirm that rejection erodes confidence and makes candidates downgrade their own worth. When someone says “no” enough times, you start believing maybe they’re right. Maybe you’re not as good as you thought. Maybe all that work doesn’t actually matter.
But here’s the thing – this anxiety isn’t a reflection of my capabilities. It’s a reflection of a broken system that judges candidates on superficial patterns rather than actual merit.
When talented professionals become anxious in interviews, they might not present at their best. And then you use that anxiety as justification for not hiring them, never recognizing that your evaluation process created the problem in the first place.
The Recruiter Paradox
Here’s what frustrates me most: you’re in my network. Many of you have been connected with me for years. You’ve seen my posts about projects I’ve shipped, talks I’ve delivered, and contributions I’ve made. The evidence of my capabilities is right there, publicly available and easily verifiable.
Yet when I apply for positions, it’s as if that entire body of work doesn’t exist. Instead, I get screened out by automated systems looking for keyword matches or flagging job tenure as a red flag. If I’m lucky enough to get past that, I face interviewers who haven’t looked at my portfolio and ask generic questions that could apply to anyone.
The information is there. The proof is there. The track record is there. What’s missing is the willingness to look beyond surface-level patterns and actually evaluate what a candidate brings to the table.
What Recognition Actually Means
I keep saying my work should be recognized, and I want to be clear about what that means. It’s not about ego or needing constant praise. It’s about fundamental respect and fair evaluation.
Recognition means:
- Actually looking at the portfolio of work I’ve built rather than dismissing it as impossible
- Asking about what I’ve learned from diverse experiences rather than only why I left previous positions
- Valuing teaching and mentoring experience as the leadership indicator it actually is
- Understanding that someone who builds extensions, packages, and tools across multiple platforms has valuable technical breadth
- Recognizing that juggling multiple responsibilities successfully demonstrates exceptional time management and dedication
- Appreciating that public contributions and community involvement show commitment to the field beyond just collecting a paycheck
Research confirms what I’m experiencing. Studies show that 55 percent of employee engagement is driven by non-financial recognition. When work goes unrecognized, even the most passionate professionals become disengaged. This isn’t about being fragile or needing validation. It’s about basic human psychology and the need to feel that our efforts matter.
The Cost of Your Bias
Every time you screen out a candidate because they have five jobs over six years instead of one job over six years, you might be missing someone exceptional. Someone who learned five different tech stacks, adapted to five different cultures, and proved their value five times over.
Every time you dismiss teaching experience as irrelevant, you lose out on someone with proven mentorship and leadership capabilities.
Every time you doubt someone’s extensive portfolio because it seems “too much,” you miss the opportunity to hire someone who genuinely loves what they do enough to work on it beyond the 9-to-5.
The cost isn’t just to candidates like me. It’s to your organizations, which struggle to fill positions while qualified candidates get filtered out by outdated evaluation criteria.
Current data shows that 51 percent of employers are finding it harder to find top talent, while simultaneously, 50 percent of job seekers report it’s harder to find work. This disconnect isn’t a coincidence. It’s a symptom of evaluation systems that don’t actually measure what matters.
A Better Way Forward
I’m not asking for special treatment. I’m asking for fair evaluation based on actual capabilities rather than superficial patterns.
Here’s what that looks like in practice:
Review the portfolio before the interview. If someone has public work, look at it. See what they’ve actually built, how they code, how they document, how they contribute to communities.
Ask about growth, not just gaps. Instead of “Why did you leave?” ask “What did you learn there?” Instead of “Why so many changes?” ask “How has each experience shaped your approach?”
Value diverse experience. Someone who has worked across different companies, taught multiple subjects, built various tools, and contributed to communities has a breadth of perspective that specialists often lack.
Recognize transferable skills. Teaching, mentoring, community building, and public speaking are all highly relevant to workplace success, even if they happened outside traditional employment.
Challenge your assumptions. When something on a resume seems “too good to be true,” verify it rather than dismiss it. In many cases, you’ll find it’s absolutely true and you’re looking at an exceptional candidate.
To My Fellow Overlooked Professionals
If you’re reading this and seeing your own experience reflected back, I want you to know something important: your worth is not determined by whether recruiters recognize it.
Every project you built matters. Every skill you learned counts. Every contribution you made to the community has value. The fact that others don’t see it doesn’t diminish its reality.
The anxiety is real. The frustration is valid. The doubt that creeps in after repeated rejection is understandable. But none of it changes what you’ve actually accomplished.
Research shows that professionals experiencing imposter syndrome often hold themselves to impossibly high standards while simultaneously doubting their competence despite clear evidence of success. Sound familiar? That’s not because you’re inadequate. That’s because you’re being evaluated by systems and people who don’t understand what you’ve actually done.
Keep building. Keep learning. Keep contributing. Not for their approval, but because that’s who you are. The right opportunity will come, and when it does, you’ll be ready because you never stopped growing.
The Challenge
To recruiters and hiring managers reading this: I challenge you to do better. Not for me specifically, but for all the talented professionals you’re currently overlooking because they don’t fit traditional molds.
Look at portfolios. Ask better questions. Challenge your biases. Recognize that the best candidates might have unconventional career paths precisely because they’ve been actively pursuing growth rather than comfortable stagnation.
The talent is out there. We’re building, learning, contributing, and proving our value every day. The question is whether you’re willing to look beyond surface patterns to actually see what we bring to the table.
Because right now, while you’re asking why someone changed jobs three times in five years, your competitors might be hiring them and benefiting from the diverse experience, adaptability, and proven growth mindset those changes represent.
Final Thoughts
This three-part series started with a simple frustration: why doesn’t anyone see my full potential? But it evolved into something bigger. A recognition that this isn’t just my problem, it’s a systemic issue affecting countless talented professionals who don’t fit traditional career templates.
We’re in a new era. Technology changes rapidly. Skills evolve constantly. The idea that someone should stay in one place for decades no longer makes sense in most fields, especially tech. Yet our evaluation systems are still built around assumptions from a different time.
Something needs to change. Either employers and recruiters adapt their evaluation criteria to recognize modern career paths, or they’ll continue missing out on exceptional talent while complaining about talent shortages.
As for me? I’ll keep building. I’ll keep learning. I’ll keep teaching. I’ll keep contributing. Not because I need anyone’s permission or validation, but because that’s who I am.
And to everyone else out there feeling invisible and undervalued: you’re not alone. Your work matters. Your growth matters. Your potential is real, even if others can’t see it yet.
Keep going. The right people will eventually recognize what you bring to the table. And when they do, all this experience, all this growth, all this persistence will prove its worth.
Until then, we build.
Thank you for following this three-part series. If any part of this resonated with you, share it with someone who might need to hear it. And if you’re a recruiter or hiring manager who made it to the end, I hope you’ll take the challenge to heart.
References
- Welcome to the Jungle – Overcoming the invisible foe: Imposter syndrome in job hunting
- LinkedIn – How I Faced Down Imposter Syndrome After Two Layoffs And Landed The Perfect Gig
- HRKatha – Job hopping: the new normal or a cause for concern?
- Zippia – Vital Employee Loyalty Statistics
- TestGorilla – The State of Skills-Based Hiring 2024 Report
- Shortlister – Why Can’t Companies Retain Employees?
