…as long as WE are the ones who define success for ourselves. Otherwise 99.9% of the world’s population would fall well short.
Seems obvious, right? For example, if you take money as a measure of success, for every billionaire (~2,600 as of 2019) there are nearly 3,000,000 people who are just ‘getting by’. So for the vast majority of us, the chances of being a big success [in monetary terms] are very slim.
The same applies for any other success factor where you are comparing yourself to the world’s best, there is very little room at the top.
If you’re fairly new to this ‘privacy stuff’, you might be wondering why I used the phrase ‘data privacy’, not ‘data protection’. Well, unlike the security industry where we can’t even agree on when to use ‘cybersecurity’, ‘data security’, or ‘information security’, the privacy world has its act together. Hell, security folk can’t even agree on the spelling OF cybersecurity/cyber security!
But for the purposes of this blog, and the Part 2 guest blog to follow, it’s important that you accept my definitions at least, whether you agree with the names or not. It’s the points I’m trying to make that matter, not the nomenclature.
I have written several blogs on the poor state of cybersecurity recruiting, all with the hope that they may trigger at least some positive change. Even if that change is only in the very few people who are actually reading this crap.
When I say “poor state”, I of course mean fundamentally, systemically, and damned near fatally broken. It just does not work, not for the employers, not for the candidates, not for the recruiters, and not for the industry as a whole. As much as I have criticised/blamed recruiters, it’s really not their fault as much as we might think.
Recruiters, like any other salesperson, are rarely [if ever] subject matter experts in their chosen industry sector (i.e. they cannot DO the jobs they are trying to fill). The real experts, the ones who can actually do the work, are in turn rarely [if ever] capable of doing what the ‘salesperson’ does (i.e. they have no idea how to sell themselves).
Each time I think I’m getting to the heart of the challenges faced by those on all sides of cybersecurity recruiting, a further complexity raises its ugly head.
While I still think that job titles are horribly limiting, that job descriptions completely miss the point, and that the cybersecurity skill-gap misconception is mostly the fault of the organisations asking for help, there’s no getting away from the fact that cybersecurity recruiters are doing themselves no favours.
5 years ago, when I was still smarting from being laid off [fired, cough], I found myself back in the job market looking for …something.
After 12+ years in the same organisation, I had worked my way up from ‘Firewall Administrator’ to ‘Director of Delivery’ for EMEA and APAC. Through poor planning and various character flaws I was at a complete loss where to even start looking for an equivalent position. My safety-net was non-existent as making connections has never been what I would call a strong suit.