Knowing When to Ask for Help

One of the skills everyone needs to have is asking for help. Whether that’s in our work, our education, or our personal lives, we all need help from time to time. We are focused on work here, but this same basic rules apply in all aspects of our lives.

The right time to ask for help is, like so many things, a balancing act. Struggling through a complex issue can be a great way to learn something new. But often we can short cut that learning by simply asking the right questions at the right time.

On the flip side, if we ask too early not only do we risk missing a chance to build deep understanding, we also risk frustrating colleagues by asking them to do our job.

One short cut for when you need to ask for help is if another team member asks if you have already asked. Generally, I want to have called for support before my PM suggests it. By then they are frustrated that I haven’t already solved whatever the issue is solo.

Signs You Might Need Help

Given my current role and skill set, I’m often the person who gets called when a project goes sideways. That means I see a lot of places where someone didn’t call for help until they were in crisis. While that’s going to happen to us all from time to time, it’s better to call for help when the problem is small. If you want until the project starts burning down around you, it’s way too late.

You might need help if:

You have absolutely no idea what to do next.
You are about to re-design a large portion of your project to get around a challenge.
You have spent more than a day pounding on a problem without success.
You are avoiding working on a task, because you don’t know how to get started.
You are about to use a mode/tool/technique that everyone says is a bad idea.
- In Salesforce that can mean things like:
  - loading data in serial mode
  - setting batch size to 1
  - using view all data in your tests.
- In Drupal that can mean things like:
  - hacking a module
  - loading data in the theme layer
  - writing raw SQL queries

What to do Before Asking for Help

As I said before, asking for help is a balance: you can wait too long, or you can ask too soon. The real trick is hitting the sweet spot.

There are several things you should always do before taking another person’s time.

Google It! I kinda can’t believe I have to say that, but not everyone bothers.
Make sure you can explain the question clearly. If you don’t know where you got stuck, how can I help you get unstuck? And thinking it through might make the answer obvious.
Develop a theory. When asking for help, it can be useful to pose a theory about an approach. Even if you’re wrong it may help me understand your thinking.
Try a few things. Experimenting with what’s going wrong can help you formulate your question, and may help me short cut my research if you have eliminated obvious issues.
Explain the problem to your dog, cat, rabbit, stuff animal, etc. As someone who spends time being a human rubber duck, I can often tell when someone tried to explain it once already.

Where/Who to Ask for Help

For me, the hardest part is knowing who to ask.

As a consultant I try to avoid asking questions in places clients may see it. Our clients pay for us to be experts, they do not want to see us asking questions in public – particularly if the question has a simple answer.

As a Salesforce MVP, one of my favorite perks is the MVP Slack channel, where we ask each other questions that run the full range of complexity. While access to a community that hard to access, and that advanced, is a privilege there are other ways to find similar groups like your local user group.

I love having a good internal network of people to ask for help. Most of the places I have worked at as a consultant have had some kind of information place to ask questions and help each other out. If you work in a consultancy find or create such a back channel.

If concerns about being seen by clients isn’t relevant to you, check out this list of 7 Salesforce Communities to Join recommended by Salesforce Ben.

Help Build a Helpful Community

The final thing to know about asking for help, is that it’s important to offer help as well. A good question can be valuable to someone else who has the same issue in the future. A good answer is helpful to both the person who asked the question and the person who looks again in the future.

But offering answers, even if not perfect answers, is a great way to learn and encourage others to seek help. Any time I post a question on Stack Exchange, I try to hunt around for one or two to answer as well. That both allows me to pay it forward, it also helps encourage the tone that people can be experts in one thing while still needing help in another.

Smart people need help, and should be comfortable asking for it.

Writing for Developers and Consultants: Know your Documents Types

When I started this series on writing for developers and consultants, I thought of this piece first, but I couldn’t get the ideas to come together. Sometimes it takes a few tries.

Anytime you write something, you should be aware of what kind of document you’re writing and who is it for. The definition of “document” in this context is very broad it could be: an email, letter, solution design, chat messages, blog post, test script, work of fiction, book, poem, presentation, marketing slide deck, scope of work, and so on: anything that involves writing words.

For example, this is a blog post, about writing, meant for people who are developers or technology consultants who may have been told good writing isn’t important.

Common Work Documents

I’m going to put aside poems, novels, and other personal writing forms to focus here on work related writing. Developers need to be able to describe their work to other people. We also need to communicate about what is happening on a project, support one another, and ask for help. We do all these things with words, and often in writing.

In my career I’ve written a wide variety of documents as part of my work. A partial list (because I doubt I can think of everything to create a complete list) includes:

Emails
- to my boss
- to colleagues or friends
- to direct reports
- to clients
- to large mailing lists
Solution Design Documents
Scopes of Work
Contracts
Invoices
Test Scripts
Conference Talks
Research Reports
Chat Messages

Some require more detail and longer prose than others. Some are expected to be polished where others can tolerate typos and mistakes. But each has its own style, structure, audience, and expectations that the writer must meet.

A Document’s Purpose

When you start to wring something, know your purpose in writing.

Not all documents are created equal and so understanding your purpose is critical. Are you writing an Solution Design that needs to outline how you plan to solve all the hard problems in a project? Or are you writing an email to your boss asking for a few days off? Is this a research report meant to support an advocacy project or a cover letter for a resume? All of those are important things, but none should be written in the same tone or with the same style.

A Scope of Work (SOW) is a lasting artifact during a projects that sets the bounds of the work you’re going to complete. A sloppy SOW can cost you, or your employer, vast sums of money. A SOW writing purely to defended against those concerns may not express the client’s needs and interests, and result in them refusing to sign.

An email to a client might be a friendly reminder about pending deadlines, or a carefully crafted notes from a contentious meeting. Written well, both could leave you in a better place with your client. Written poorly, both may cause your client to become frustrated with your sloppiness.

If you don’t know why you’re writing something, you are likely to write the wrong thing. At work, if you aren’t sure, ask for guidance.

A Document’s Audience

There is no such thing as a “general audience” you should always have a mental image of who you are writing to, and why.

We all know that it’s important to think about your audience, but we don’t always do this well. In part because determining the audience is sometimes a little complicated.

When your audience is the person or people you are writing to, you need to leverage your understanding of their knowledge, skill set, and project engagement. You want your text to meet them where they are.

Sometimes the audience you care about most isn’t the direct subject of the message, but a 3rd party you know, or suspect, will read the document later. I find this is true particularly in contentious situations.

FOIA Warning

If you work in, for, or with government agencies in the US (and for similar reasons elsewhere as well) – including as a subcontractor – you should understand if your content is subject to a Freedom of Information Act requests. Sometimes your audience isn’t the person you are writing to at all, but the reporter who could read the message 2 years from now after they get copies of everything related to your project. In those settings, don’t put anything in writing you don’t want on the front page of a major newspaper.

But FOIA can also be a blessing for a developer who knows a bad decision is being made. Carefully worded expressions of concern, and requests for written confirmation of next steps, can trigger FIOA-cautious readers to recognize they need to follow your advice.

Finding the Right Level of Technical Detail

One of the hardest things for developers, and other people with lots of technical knowledge, to do well is communicate clearly about technical minutia. There is a balance to be struck between providing transparency and overwhelming readers with details. Developers have to think about details in our work. We also use field specific jargon that can be confusing to people whose work is in other areas.

Too often we confuse that specialized knowledge of our field, with intelligence. I have watched developers lose their audience in the nuances of small details, and come away announcing their audience was a bunch of idiots. Early in my career I was guilty of this as well. Assume you’re audience is as smart as you; they just know different stuff.

When you make that assumption you can avoid talking down to people, and start to work on finding their level.

The right level of technical detail will also vary by document type. When I’m exchanging emails with a client’s in-house developer we go deep into the weeds often. When I’m writing a SOW, the technical detail is nearly absent as we are defining functionality and purpose, not the exacting detail of how that functionality will be delivered.

The more you can be in conversation with the people you’re working with about their background, the easier it will be to find the right level of detail to explain yourself clearly.

Summation

Hopefully by now it’s clear, this is an overview of approach, not detailed guidance. In a future post I plan to write about some of these specific documents types, and how to write them. Hopefully this overview gives you ideas and things to think about as you work on your next document.

As I said in my first post on this topic, communications skills for developers and consultants is an enormous topic. The plan for this series is evolving as I go. If you have suggestions or requests feel free to leave me a message.

Tool Building Mindset

Earlier this month, at Mid Atlantic Dreamin’ in Philadelphia, I gave a talk titled Software Super Heroes: Building the tools you wish you had. My goal with the talk was to convince people that should, can, and in fact do, built tools for themselves. If you work with technology, and your job involves repetitive tasks the same applies to you too.

What do I mean by “Tool” and “Tool builder’s mindset”?

I like to use a very expansive definition of tool: “A tool is anything that makes a task easier which would be repetitive, hard, or impossible without it.” In that sense just about anything you make that simplifies you work can be considered a tool: a project estimation spread sheet, a good set of directions for a complex task, a flow for a Salesforce admin, a piece of code to normalize a large collection of files, and more.

My intention with that expansive view is to help encourage people to take on a tool builder’s mindset.

To be a digital tool builder does not require knowing how to write complex software, it just requires you to do what you already do now, but with intention. When we use a broad definition of tools, it’s easier to see ourselves as tool builders, even if we’re just talking about a spreadsheet or a Salesforce flow meant to handle an administrator’s daily tasks. When we see ourselves as tool builders we are more likely to make something worth using more than once.

Why does this matter?

When we approach problems with a tool building mind set, instead of insurmountable challenges caused by gaps in our tooling, we see opportunity to create something new to make the impossible possible. Instead of facing hours of boring repetitive tasks, we have chance to build a more interesting special purpose solution.

Fight the Tool Building Excuses

There are several excuses I commonly hear from people when I encourage them to build their own tools. They range from concerns about not having the right skills, to assuming someone else already built that tool or that the time required isn’t worth the effort.

My general response to these concerns is that while people should indeed look around for tools that already solve their problem, and that some problems are very hard to solve completely, if you start to chip away at a complex problem you often will find that you can create tools that are good enough to save you time and effort.

Don’t try to build the perfect tool that solves all possible edge cases on your first go. Create a tool that takes out some annoying and repetitive task. Then create a tool that solves for another task, or builds on your first time. Chip away.

I often tell developers who are early in their career that I should never see them doing rote repetitive tasks for hours on end. Instead once they understand how a repetitive task is done, they should start thinking about how to build a tool to take over. But that’s not just advice for developers: we invented computers to do repetitive asks (calculating artillery firing tables and cracking codes), let them do that.

Pick Your Tool Building Path

When you set out to create a tool you have two main options: use something you already know, or use tool building as a chance to learn something new. I’ve used tool building as was to teach myself new features of Excel, Google Sheets, Salesforce Flows, Git, and several programming languages. This can be a great way to learn how to use the tool that’s just right for the job. But learning a new tool or technique takes time, and if you have a deadline you may need to move faster.

Personally I try to take both paths from time to time. I use things I know when: they are exactly the right tool, I am under time pressure, or I want to keep my skills sharp. I will take the time to learn something new when: it’s something I need to learn anyway, I am building on my own time, or it’s exactly the right tool for what I need to do.

Neither path is correct 100% of the time. By using them both I am able to create the tools I need, and broaden my skills over time.

Just Start Building

The next time you’re faced with a task that is repetitive or hard with the tools you have: create yourself something new. Don’t get hung up on being perfect, just create something that’s better than what you have at the start.

Then save your tool to use again later. Share it with colleagues, friends, or as an open source project.

When in doubt, just start building.

Writing for Developers and Consultants: Use of Language

Words matter.
Grammar matters.

How we use language affects how our audience perceives us. In school teachers and professors taught many of us formal – and strict – rules for writing. Those rules are useful to know, but my point is not that you need to follow them strictly.

You need to control the language you use with intention, and create the impression you want your audience to have.

When we write at work, we are a reflection of ourselves, our team, and our companies. We want all those things to look good to our clients, customers, leadership – our audience. That is not the same goal as learning all the rules of Strunk and White. It’s about choosing the right words and structures to meeting our audience’s expectations.

To do this well, you need to understand the patterns and rules people think of as formal writing, and when to use idioms or patterns that break those rules. Sometimes it is better to follow the rules; sometimes it’s better to break them.

It’s a matter of fashion, pure and simple. People do need to be taught what the socially acceptable forms are. But what we should teach is not that the good way is logical and the way that you’re comfortable doing it is illogical. It should just be, here is the natural way, then there’s some things that you’re supposed to do in public because that’s the way it is, whether it’s fair or not.
John McWhorter

Strategic Use of Passive Voice

In college several professors demanded I never use the passive voice in my formal papers. Microsoft Word of the day backed up that assertion by flagging every passive sentence as a grammar error. In those papers they were right, since they controlled the grading standard, but those are not the rules I follow today.

Shortly after graduation my wife and I discovered the power of the passive voice when our rabbit chewed through a power cable of our brand new printer. When I called support I said: “The power cable is frayed.” They didn’t ask how the cable became frayed, they just assumed it had arrived that way and shipped us a new one. Perhaps not our most ethical moment, but a useful one in understanding the power of breaking the formal rules we’d been taught.

A simple definition of the passive voice is:

A passive construction occurs when you make the object of an action into the subject of a sentence. That is, whoever or whatever is performing the action is not the grammatical subject of the sentence.
UNC Writing Center

The classic joke is “Why was the road crossed by the chicken?” where we have clearly reversed the subject and the object of action. More commonly we leave the true actor, the person who should be the subject of the sentence, out of the sentence entirely. There are lots of discussions on the passive voice around, because it is an important concept to understand. But banning passive sentences is the wrong approach.

Passive construction makes sentences weak and frequently unclear. Without editing I will often write too many passive sentences in a post. But sometimes the weakness of passive construction helps to drive my point home.

In writing with clients over use of active voice can become accusatory. Think about the difference between “The data set provided has many errors.” vs “You provided me a data set with many errors.”

The first gives the reader room to blame a file, a process, or another cause other than themselves (which may be correct). The second points a finger. When I am trying to resolve a problem caused by bad sample data, pointing fingers, placing blame is not helpful. Sometimes we need to be clear, and identify actors explicitly. Sometimes we want to indirect to avoid creating unneeded tension.

Other Rules to Follow Strategically

In school our teachers taught many of us that paragraphs should always have three, or more, sentences that mirror the three sections of a paper: introduction, body, conclusion.

But a sentence by itself stands out and draws attention.

If every sentence were by itself they would stop standing out, so mixing emphasis and longer structures is still a good idea. The readability checker I use for my blog dislikes long sentences, preferring short choppy structures. Short punchy writing is easy to skim, but exhausting to read. Overly long sentences are hard to follow and may reveal incomplete thinking because they contain too many ideas. It’s a balance to be used carefully.

Punctuation is also taught as a series of strict rules. However use of commas, semicolons, periods, dashes, and so on are also matter of personal style. If you know the purpose of a mark you can decide when you want to use which to add emphasis and clarity to your text.

Starting sentences with conjunctions was most gracefully debated in Finding Forester (movie staring Sean Connery as an aging writer teaching a young African American boy how to become a writer):

Forrester: Paragraph three starts…with a conjunction, “and.” You should never start a sentence with a conjunction.

Jamal: Sure you can.

Forrester: No, it’s a firm rule.

Jamal: No, it was a firm rule. Sometimes using a conjunction at the start of a sentence makes it stand out. And that may be what the writer’s trying to do.

Forrester: And what is the risk?

Jamal: Well the risk is doing it too much. It’s a distraction. And it could give your piece a run-on feeling. But for the most part, the rule on using “and” or “but” at the start of a sentence is pretty shaky. Even though it’s still taught by too many professors. Some of the best writers have ignored that rule for years, including you.

More or less any rule or pattern you have been taught, you should explore when to follow and when to deviate.

Practice Until Your Comfortable

I know of no magic way to become comfortable using language carefully, except by doing it. Be thoughtful when you write. Edit carefully at every chance. Ask for feedback when available. And write in as many contexts as you can justify.

My whole point in keeping a blog, even well passed the era of independent tech blogging (and with limited care for the theme being used, SEO, or monetization) is to force myself to write regularly. I write different types of posts with different styles and attention to care. Some of that is months I’m being lazy, and some of that is very intentional.

I first wrote for this blog when I had a job that actively discouraged me from communicating well – I was told time and again that developers cannot write clearly. That’s crap: it was then, and it is now. So I started writing at least monthly to keep myself in practice.

Your practice does not need to be a blog. Find yourself some form of routine writing, and play with your style over time. Just a few suggestions of things to try:

Letters to friends and loved ones (on actual paper and with a stamp)
Short Stories or other fiction writing
Contribute project documentation to an open source project
Essays for Medium (more or less blogging with less commitment)
Participate in an online writing challenge
Journaling
Take a writing course

Still More to Come

As I said in my first post on this topic, communications skills for developers and consultants is an enormous topic. I have not yet planned the series, but you should expect more to come.

Writing for Developers and Consultants: Editing

The most important thing you need to have to be a successful consultant is excellent communications skills . If your client doesn’t understand and trust what you tell them, it doesn’t matter what you suggest, create, build, or deliver.

I have been helping a few colleagues lately work on their client communication skills and figured I should write down my suggestions for how developers can communicate well with clients.

Everyone on a project team needs to be able to communicate what they need, what they are doing, and how their piece of the project works. They also need to know how to address their own errors and mistakes so the project moves forward and the client trusts that errors will be resolved.

As I sat down to write this piece I realized the topic is huge; far too large for one post. I’ve thought about the importance of good writing, editing, grammar, the kinds of email messages we send, documents we write, and presentations we give.

All of those probably justify at least one post, so I’m starting here: editing.

Why Editing is Important

Editing probably feels like an odd place to start a series on writing, but it is a thing you can start to do now that will help you write more effectively. If you have a college degree you probably got into the habit of writing papers fast, and turning them in at the deadline. But you almost certainly didn’t do enough editing of those papers (I’m married to a college professor, and I talk to college professors a lot: No. You. Didn’t.). If you don’t have a college degree, it’s also unlikely many people have sat down and talked to you about the importance of editing. If you’ve come to consulting from a writing-heavy background you’ve figured out by now the value of editing – this post isn’t really for you, so please come back for later installments.

Editing is how you take poor, or merely acceptable writing, and make it clear and compelling.

Good editing is about more than basic mechanics, it’s about testing that your idea or explanation makes sense. Editing lets you clean up awkward, but technically correct, expressions. And it gives you a chance to reflect on how your audience will read the material. As you edit, see if each sentence makes sense to them the same way it does to you.

Editors Are A Luxury

A good editor is worth their weight in gold – sometimes more. Well known authors have been known to change publishing houses to follow a good editor. They are also not part of your typical consulting team. For consultants, having an editor is a rare luxury.

For large documents, good teams will make sure one or two people give completed drafts an editing pass. Often getting support from a marketing department to edit a conference talk is possible. Another person reading an email and offering edits happens exceptionally rarely. It’s the same with internal presentations. No one will edit your chat messages except you.

So, while an outside editor is an invaluable tool, a consultant should not expect to have access to one.

Be Your Own Editor

That means you have to be your own editor. Editing your own writing is hard. If you could see the mistake the first time, you would have fixed it before you write the next sentence (those kinds of fixes are not the same as editing, that’s “fixing typos” or “not being lazy”).

There are three main tricks I use when being my own editor:

Put the document aside between writing and editing – the longer the better
Reading it aloud to yourself (yes really, out loud)
Edit on paper (use one of those printer things)

I wrote the first draft of this while sitting in the Atlanta airport. I revisited and edited a printed draft a few days later (my wife also took a pass – see above). And again after I put it into my blog. It’ll probably get a few tweaks after it’s posted.

Don’t Let Edits Be Personal

Writing, even technical writing, is very personal; editing should not be.

A good edit may be brutal to the original material. If you get too attached to your first draft, you will be tempted to skip asking for an edit or doing an editing pass yourself. That’s part of why I put a document aside for a bit between writing and editing, it gives me space to see the flaws in my words and ideas.

Several years ago I was editing a long report for AFSC, and the first draft was far too long, too detailed, had too many tangents, and didn’t focus on the intended audience. I attacked it. She and I spoke several times to make sure she understood my goal was to help make her was succeed. Through aggressive editing we made sure her great work achieved her intended goal: stopping the unchecked growth of private prisons.

I deleted entire sections, rewrote the summary (which someone else then edited for me). I pulled in favors, got my wife to edit drafts. We debated chapter order, technical details, and sentence after sentence. What started at 100 pages, ended up being 20 page report with an 8 page summary that journalists and politicians cited as they debated proposed private prison expansion. Because of that work, and follow on efforts by people using it as a model, private prison growth has slowed substantially (if that’s not a topic you know about, trust me that’s a good thing). The author and I became friends and worked together well on follow up projects and efforts. She appreciated the value of the edits even if they were painful at first.

Edit Aggressively

Whether your editing for yourself, or for someone else, dig deep and edit aggressively. If you haven’t done much editing you want to think about every word, every piece of punctuation, every detail. As you get more practice you’ll find short cuts and learn your own weaknesses (or your team’s). I use too many words, and write long sentences – I attack those. Shorter is better.

Using traditional grammar tools can be helpful, particularly if you are unsure about the basic grammar rules. But if you use tools like Grammarly or ChatGPT to rewrite things make sure you think carefully about if, and why, you like that version better. Used well Generative AIs are a useful tool, but if you lean on those tools too much you don’t actually get better yourself.

More to Come

As I said at the top, communications skills for developers and consultants is an enormous topic. I have not yet planned the series, but you should expect more to come (and I’ll edit this section to add references).

Salesforce Nonprofit and Education Scratch Orgs

During the recent Open Source Commons sprint in Chicago, I tried to create scratch orgs for nonprofit and education clouds. Despite having some of the best people in the market in the room, including two Salesforce Solution Engineers, two levels of their bosses, and of course Google, I couldn’t figure it out.

As a follow up to a conversation there, Larry Fontillas sent me links to the help docs that contain what I consider partial answers. While I’ve sent feedback to help improve those articles, I am posting my current solution to this challenge.

My Example Scratch Config

On Github I created a repo that contains two scratch org configuration files:

Each is my attempt to create a definition that works for the named cloud. If are new to scratch orgs, I suggest you start with the Trailhead Salesforce DX Quick Start. With a Devhub setup, and connected to your sf cli, you can easily create these scratch orgs from my settings with one of the two following commands:

sf org create scratch -d -f config/nonprofit-cloud.json -a npc-org

sf org create scratch -d -f config/education-cloud.json -a edu-org

Industry Org Scratch Config Breakdown

The two new clouds leve re-usable components Salesforce built, licenses, and deploys across different markets. Salesforce does not currently provide one master switch you must use. Instead you need to know what features to include and tell the Devhub which collection to enable.

That is done in two major parts of the configuration file. In my Nonprofit cloud config file there are several sections, but two are critical: features and settings → IndustriesSettings. The features list includes Salesforce components to enable. In this case I included the nonprofit specific Fundraising, Program Management, and Grantmaking modules, but also OminiStudio, Accounting Subledger, and more because they included with NP Cloud by default. Under Industries Settings you’ll also see I enable Grantmaking and support for Program Management.

The Education Cloud config file has even more detail. That’s because Salesforce as made more available for Education Cloud. The Industries settings section includes more flags as well for the same reason. As I Followed the setup guide for Education Cloud, I further adjusted some of the base-line object permissions.

Here are the features I know you need to include for each cloud:

Feature	NP Cloud	Edu Cloud	Notes
AccountingSubledgerGrowthEdition	Optional	Optional	Starter Edition is also available
AccountSubledgerUser	Optional	Optional
AnalyticsQueryService	Yes	Optional	This is listed in the docs under Fundraising, but I have not yet found a direct description.
Assessments	Yes	Yes
EducationCloud	No	Yes (requires a quantity parameter)	Main Education Cloud objects, but only a sliver of the features.
EnableSetPasswordInApi	Yes	Yes	Allows the cli to set the password, you always want this.
Fundraising	Yes	Optional
Grantmaking	Yes	Optional (Rare)
IndustriesActionPlan	No	Yes
IndustriesSalesExcellenceAddOn	Yes	Yes	This is listed in the docs under Fundraising, but I have not yet found a direct description.
IndustriesServiceExcellenceAddOn	Yes	Yes	This is listed in the docs under Fundraising, but I have not yet found a direct description.
LightningScheduler	No	Yes	Lightning Scheduler gives you tools to simplify appointment scheduling in Salesforce.
LightningServiceConsole	Optional	Yes	Allows the Lightning Service Console and access features that help manage cases faster.
MarketingUser	Yes	Optional	Provides access to the Campaigns object.
OmniStudioDesigner	Yes	Yes	Listed in lots of samples, but I have not yet found a direct description. But clearly needed for OmniStudio.
OmniStudioRuntime	Yes	Yes	More for OmniStudio.
OutcomeManagement	Yes	No
PersonAccounts	Yes	Yes	We all love Person Accounts now! Technically this is optional, although the assumption is it your default.
ProgramManagement	Yes	No	Enables the NPC Program and Case management features.
PublicSectorAccess	No	Yes	Not entirely sure about this one, but some of the features for Education Cloud seem to leverage these objects and settings.

Feedback Please!

I have tested these configurations to the degree of seeing that they work as a basic level. But I have not, yet, used them for a serious project. I am confident other people will find details that are missing, or just wrong. Please file an issue on Github or leave me a comment here with suggested changes.

Mid-Career Resumes

As we exit the Great Resignation, and move back to more traditional hiring patterns, application materials are increasingly important again. Over the course of my career I’ve been involved in a lot of hires, and read a large number of resumes. I know what I like to see, what I don’t like, and I have a bunch of friends in a similar position (although their likes and dislikes are sometimes different).

Recently, I realized that much of the advice online about resume writing is for people early in their career. That’s fair; they are the people with the least experience and need the most help. But as someone who is now mid-career, and reading resumes for other people who are also mid-career, I am noticing resumes from people who seem to still follow the early career advice.

So a few weeks ago I reached out to my friends who, like me, sometimes review mid-career resumes. While none of us are a full-time recruiter, we are the people who you need to impress if you want a job on our team. This post is a combination of my take, and the input I got from those people.

There are NO Hard Rules About Resumes

Resumes are not a regulated industry. There are no hard and fast rules. Any advice you see is just a set of suggestions. In the end, you have to decide what makes you look good and guess at what is effective.

Studies are rare, and even the best are poorly done. That is not the researchers’ fault. You cannot double blind a job hire. You cannot have 1,000 managers at different companies all hire for the same job from the same pool of applicants. Any one who knows a researcher is watching them work, likely changes their behaviors. Any study that finds bias creates legal risk for companies that participate which in turn limits participation and openness to data publication. List of problems with studying the process goes on and on.

Anyone who tells you there is one best way to create your resume, is wrong.
Anyone who is entirely focused on the hiring manager, risks failing to give advice to beat automated filters.
Anyone who is entirely focused on beating the automated filter, ignores that nearly ½ of the jobs in America are at small companies and unlikely to use such filters.

Write the best resume you can. Ask friends, particularly those who do hiring, for feedback. Consider paying a resume writer for help. But don’t expect even paid experts to be correct all the time.

Mid-Career Resumes Should Highlight Your Experience

The biggest mistake I see in resumes of people in mid-career, or even late career, is failing to highlight their experience. People who were at one employer for a long time struggle with this the most, but I’ve seen resumes for people with 15 years of experience that read like a recent graduate.

Your experience should be front and center. Everything about your resume should say “this is an experienced person.”

I like some form of summary at the top. Tell me what kind of employee and colleague you are. Not an objective section, but a summary of who you are. It can come in many forms:

a short paragraph:

Salesforce MVP, developer, administrator, and consultant with 20 years of experience in the nonprofit and higher education sectors. Seven Salesforce certifications, experience in more then 20 programming languages. Proven experience leading teams and working closely with non-technical clients.

list of titles, or key phrases

Salesforce MVP, Technical Architect, Nonprofit Fundraising Expert

After that, your job experience and skills are next. How exactly you do this can vary. Some people like skills in a sidebar. Some people put a list at the top. Some people put that list after their job experience. Frankly, as a reader, I don’t care. But I want to be able to find your list of skills and your relevant job history fast.

Your currently valid certifications should be included near your skills. But only those the reviewer will find relevant.

Think About Your Audience

Likely the person reading the resume of an experienced person is an experienced person. We have habits, routines, and work styles that are built on experience. We also have things like aging eyes, old printers, out of date external monitors, and other things that it are tempting to ignore.

Text should be high contrast, print well in black and white (there is a huge exception here for graphic designers, who benefit from showing off graphic design skills), and be generally easy to read. I don’t want your pretty three color graph, head shot, or blue text that prints light gray.

If I am reading a handful or resumes, I’ll do that on a screen and I can zoom in if I need. But if I’m digging through a big pile, I’ll print them. I will print them on my 20+ year old laser jet, blank and white, printer. When I last worked in an office and reviewed resumes, I used the office’s even older laser jet black and white printer. Your shaded background might make the whole thing unreadable on those devices. Besides, you should have too much experience to waste space on a picture (and that’s before we talk about companies trying to avoid identity based biasing who might not want reviewers to know what you look like too early in the process).

I strongly recommend going for simple, clean, classic, design approaches.

Mid-Career Resumes Should be More Than One Page.

I haven’t used a one page resume in more than 20 years. I don’t know who is still saying one page is the magic number. A new graduate might benefit from the one-pager, but if you have 10-30 years work experience, and you only need one page to tell me, it better be the most amazing page of text you’ve ever created. When I see a one-page resume, before I see the words I see a person with limited experience.

Personally, I like the two pager. Two very full pages. I want to see that you were forced to edit and format aggressively to make it fit on two pages. You want me to think you have 5 pages of content, but you compressed it effectively.

Two pages gives you plenty of room to show off, without wasting my time. It shows me you can edit and filter content. Ideally, it’ll leave me wanting more information, that gives me questions I can ask in your interview.

Some people like longer. When I spoke with friends who hire, most people liked two pages. But some were open to 3-4. Beyond four you are into academic CV land, which is a different thing entirely.

Connect the Dots

You have experience, you are showing it off well, good. But are you showing off the right experience? One of the most consistent pieces of feedback I got from friends who do hiring is that we want to know you know who we are as an employer.

No every detail, but tell us what your public persona is. Is there a values statement in the job ad? Reflect some of that language back in a cover letter. Do we work in a specific market? Make sure to include some experience that connects you to that market.

When I worked at a nonprofit, we wanted people excited by the work we did. Which means they needed to find ways to tell us in their resume, cover letter, application, and interview they knew something about that work. Since becoming a consultant, I’ve been consistently amazed that people will send resumes and come to interviews that don’t know what kind of customers we have.

Write a Cover Letter whenever Invited

This applies not just to mid-career applicants, but everyone else too. Not all jobs accept a cover letter, but when given the chance to say more: say more. The numbers I can find on resume review suggest an average of 6-7 seconds. I think that’s low in practice (see comments on studies), I know when I dig through a large stack I find ways to filter out some very fast, and others get more careful review. So an average will likely be far from my median or modal times. Even so, a resume that isn’t tossed out because it’s an applicant who is wildly unqualified, will get 15-30 seconds in my first pass. You add a cover letter, now I’m spending more time reading. You could double, or even triple, the time you get in the first review 45-90 seconds – that’s huge.

It also means you can connect some additional dots for me. If your resume includes experience that you consider related, but that might not be obvious, you have a couple sentences now to tell me that story. Are you career pivoting? Tell me what about your old career makes you better than your experience suggests. Do you volunteer in your community? Tell me what about that helps you understand our work, or support our company values.

In Mid-Career Resumes the Basics Still Matter

Details matter: fix your typos, use consistent formatting, etc. I saw a resume recently with a red-line through their summary line. That’s a bad first impression.

Write resumes you want to read: If you have read resumes as part of your job, think about the ones that impressed you and mimic those.

Get feedback from a friend: You probably have friends and professional contacts who will give you blunt feedback. Ask for it. I did as part of writing this post.

Consider hiring an expert: There are people who do this for a living. Some of them are really good. When you ask your friends for feedback, ask them for references to services they used.

Not everything is needed: Edit down your experience. Keep the stuff that says you’re awesome, cut stuff that’s not relevant to the hiring manager.

References for More Thoughts on Mid-Career Resumes:

The internet is full of advice on resume writing. Most for beginners, but some for people with more experience. Here are a few things I found useful:

The Queries Part 3 of 3

This is the third and final post in a series of posts to break down the questions from my Queries on Queries talk. The full talk is available here.

Is your solution reusable?

Migrations feel like one off processes, but teams that migrate once usually migrate again.

Have you ensured that as much of your solution as possible can be reused? Do you have a shared library of migration tools that your whole team can access? When you create new functionality are you thinking about ways to make it usable in your next project?

On any technology project you will generally benefit from designing for re-usability. I mentioned in my comments on the question about repeatability that people get tempted to see migration work as fundamentally one-off, but you need to plan for many runs. That question is focused on repeating the same project, this is about recycling parts of this project in another.

To a consultant, the value of reuse should be obvious: we like to sell projects to new clients based on successful projects for another client. For that I want libraries of tools the developer designed for rapidly assembled to meet a new client’s needs.

But even when I was the client, I was moving similar data into the same systems over and over. I created API libraries, and rough interfaces, to handle some of that work so I didn’t have to do the same tedious work again and again.

In both cases those libraries are only useful if whoever needs them knows they exist, has access to them, and can figure out how to leverage them.

Is your migration testable?

All good processes are rigorously tested.

Do you have an automated testing solution that validates your process? Can you tell if the data migrated accurately after each test run? Do your tests cover the positive and negative cases?

Testing migrations is hard. Testing software is hard. The testing tools that developers are most familiar with are unit testing tools, test one very small thing at a time. Multi-system data comparison is not their forté. The tools that do exist for such work tend to be quite expensive and/or so complex the task of creating tests is nearly as hard as the task of creating the migration jobs themselves.

But just because testing is hard does not mean you shouldn’t do what you can do within the budget and time you have. When you cannot use something like MuleSoft’s MUnit you can still create queries that sanity check the migrated and generated data. You select records for spot checking that cover edge cases you are aware of, and some that represent primary use cases. You can look for records that create invalid data states that would violate your new validation rules.

Is your work fixable?

Migrated data often needs to be updated after the jobs have all run.

Do you have a plan to fix your data if errors are found post migration? Does your plan include ensuring you have external Ids, or other connections, to be able to update all records of every type? Have you validated this plan will work in practice?

When you do a data migration, because everything is determinant, you feel like perfection is possible. But when you’re moving millions of records that were entered by humans, extracted by humans, mapped by humans, validated by humans, and represent human behaviors, there is a lot of room for human error.

You can either pretend your process is good enough to squeeze out the error, or build a process that allows you to fix the errors that slip through. Obviously I don’t believe the first is possible, so I encourage the second.

Make sure you can go back and update anything. If you’re migrating into a database that allows for a lot of easy changes – great. If you’re migrating into a financial system – make sure you understand the rules for editing.

Planning for mistakes you don’t want to have makes it far easier to recover from those mistakes when they appear.

The Queries Part 2 of 3

This is the second in a series of posts to break down the questions from my Queries on Queries talk. The full talk is available here.

Is your work repeatable?

You will need to do this more than once.

Is your process designed so you can run it over and over without error? Can you easily erase test attempts and start over from a clean slate? Do you have the capacity to do all the practice runs you need to complete your project successfully and on schedule?

Because a migration is fundamentally a one-way operation, designed to move data once, it’s tempting to build the whole process as a one-off affair. I’ve seen (even used) migration processes that required hours or days of hand polishing data to get it to load – this is a terribly way to do the job.

A good migration process should be automated. To automate anything you need to test it. If you test something you should expect it to fail many times before it works. And when it fails you need to run it again and again until it works.

By their very nature data migrations create data – in a target system no less – and so you need a way to roll back your changes to migration to a pre-run state for each subsequent test. I like to use a staging database for the main complex parts of my migrations. I created Salesforce2Sql just to make that so easy no one would be tempted to skip that step. When I create processes in an ETL, I like to have jobs start by deleting data from the staging database related to the job, so I can make Idempotent jobs as much as possible. Run, test, adjust, repeat. If you know how many times you ran your migration process, you didn’t run the jobs enough.

Is your work measurable?

To know you moved all the data, you must know how much data is going in and how much should come out.

Can you accurately predict your output data volume based on the input size? Do you have valid estimates of the running time required for each stage based on the data volumes? Are the estimates of expected data set size from a reliable source?

It seems like knowing how to measure your work should be obvious, but in truth most interesting migrations are not a simple record-in, record-out – they involve splitting records, combining tables, filtering data, converting tables to fields, fields to tables, and other similar adjustments. But the only way to know if you got it all to work out right is to work out the math wherever you can.

It’s also important to know how long a process will take. Sometimes a few thousand records here or there doesn’t matter much, but sometimes that is a matter of hours. Particularly when running samples it’s important to know the average running time. I’m working on a project right now where we know that the first 3 million records will load in about 6 hours, the last 45,000 records will take 12 hours.

In that project we’ve worked out those running times, and we have a good understanding of total records counts. In other projects we thought we knew, only to discover the person giving us the source record counts was talking about the per-year instead of total expected migration size. But with per-record estimates we can adjust expectations quickly when information changes.

Do you scope your data migrations carefully?

Limiting bad data in your system allows for better decisions in the future.

Do you only load data into the new system that you truly need? Can you easily spot the difference between new and old records? Are there data points getting loaded that have no use case or maintenance plan in the target system?

Everyone wants to keep all their data. My entire career I have understood that storage is cheap, and big data is king. AI driven data analytics have been around for a few years, and now we have all the attention on generative AIs, both benefit from large data sets.

These all tools are great, but they aren’t magic.

Big data processing, whether it be AI driven or not, is all about correlations. If you give a correlation engine bad data, it will give you bad results. Garbage in is still garbage out.

You only want to migrate data that’s good.
You only want to migrate data that’s useful.
You only want to migrate data that you will maintain.

So before you start a migration make sure you know your data will fall into those categories. Organizations can always archive data they don’t migrate.

There are other reasons more data isn’t always better.

If your system, or data archive, is ever breached that presents a risk to an organization. Privacy laws are steadily tightening, increasing the chances you will have to admit to your audience you were the cause of their information falling into the hands of bad actors.

Also, old data is often bad data. Colleges often have the email address used by their applicants squirreled away in their alumni systems. How useful do you think the AOL address I used in 1997 is to Hamilton College today? If they use it, they will fail to reach me. It provides them no value, but does provide them the chance to make mistakes. Same is true of old phone numbers, addresses, and more.

Keep the good stuff, let go of the stuff you don’t need.

The Queries Part 1 of 3

This is the first in a series of posts to break down the questions from my Queries on Queries talk. The full talk is available here.

Are your tools good enough?

Our migrations live and die by our tools.

Are your tools built for the scale of your project? Do they empower you to do your best work or impede rapid progress? Would a new tool serve you better now or in the future?

Having the right tools is critical to any job. In data migration we primarily talk about ETLs (Extract, Transform, and Load): tools like Jitterbit, Informatica, Mulesoft, Talend, etc. We also use additional tools to help support the process: a task tracker like Jira, a Data Modeler like Lucidchart, staging database prep like Salesforce2Sql, and more.

It’s easy to say that it’s a poor carpenter who blames his tools, but anyone who has spent time with actual carpenters knows they care a great deal about what tools they use. They might be able to make due with poor tools, but they will do their best work with the right tools for the job.

Each tool you use needs to meet your team’s needs. It should play to your strengths, supports the kinds of projects do you do, and has an eye to the future. A tool that works great for a team of declarative Salesforce consultants might drive developers crazy. A tool that works great for 10’s of thousands of records might struggle with millions; a tool scaled for 10s of millions of records may be overly complex for a project of 30,000.

Make sure you’re using the tools that let you do your best work, now and in the future.

Do you make the data atomic for processing?

Smaller pieces of data are easier to track, manipulate, and test.

Do you divide the source data into its constituent parts? Can you process individual pieces of data easily and cleanly? Can you stop your process after each stage to validate the results?

It can be tempting to process data as it comes: handling whole rows of data in the form they were provided and treating fields as a single data point. In practice exports may have extra rows or columns to deal with related records. Organizations may have encoded multiple points of data into fields like ticket names including a show name, date, and time into the name field. Fields can also contained semi-structured data, like Joomla’s use of arbitrary JSON blobs.

To process this data it is often easier and clearer to extract it from these structures prior to direct processing. It’s not always needed, and rarely required, but doing this clean up of structure – like creating interstitial database tables or predictable data objects – can greatly ease the rest of your job.

Like many problems in software engineering, it’s easier to do good work when you are operating on atomic pieces. Think about the right ways to pull your data into constituent parts when they aren’t there already.

Can you process samples of your data set?

When you have lots of data you need to test small parts to be sure your process works.

Do you know how to create and run small segments of your total input? Are your segments made up of complete and valid samples? Does your sample include all the errors and edge cases your data set will throw at your process?

If you are working with small data sets your sample can be all the data. But when you have a large data set you need to test your process with samples. When you have a multi-step migration you likely need to test the second phase while the first phase is still under construction – again a sample data set is critical.

Having valid test data, that covers all your edge cases, is critical to making sure you have a working solution.

A few years ago I worked on a project that involved a two stage migration for a membership organization with some 600,000 active contacts. Every one of them needed to be migrated into Salesforce and then into Drupal. To test the Drupal migration we needed samples of all the types of membership statuses we would see, which involved hand creating several hundred records. At the next Salesforce Commons Sprint I raised the idea of needing a better tool for this kind of work, that question eventually helped lead to Paul Prescod‘s creation of Snowfakery. Snowfakery will build you testing data sets of any size and complexity to make sure your processes will succeed.