As I keep looking for a job and browsing different recruiting sites, I keep running into different little issues across different sites. In this edition, I bring you a good mix of these examples.
The first one, being the most serious of all. Running a simple search on salary.com shows a serious server error.
In the second example, it’s a bit simpler, but either way it shows that Testing is important in any Software project. In this one, someone forgot to provide the consent message. Although the error is more innocent. This is a good example of how we can differentiate severity from priority. In this case, we can say it has low severity, because it doesn’t prevent the user from continuing and finishing submitting their application. The fix is potentially quick to implement, because it’s just adding a piece of text. However, we can say it may have high priority, since the text has legal implications and could cause legal problems.
In our third example, I bring you something a little different. This is probably an encoding error. This happens when the application doesn’t account for certain characters (such as accented characters in Spanish).
Lastly, in this example, it seems I was in a strange session state because I had logged in some time ago and, upon returning and going to a certain menu, it showed me the following blank page. I think instead of this experience, it should have sent me back to the login again so I could re-enter and access that menu with the content displaying correctly.
In summary, these “small” failures—from a 500 in production, a missing legal text, encoding problems, to expired sessions without handling—remind us that quality is not optional. It is culture, process, and responsibility. Testing early and often, automating what is repeatable, covering i18n and session states, and monitoring with good alerts prevents costly stumbles and safeguards the user’s trust. If you’ve run into similar examples, share them: together we can turn these “little issues” into shared learning and much better experiences for the next user.
This is a great idea, Gus. This is useful to job seekers and hopefully to the companies that made these websites to make the job search “easier.” I with I had catalogued the things I saw during my nine months of job searching, such as disappearing data in forms that were already filled, tiny click areas for entering data, 404s on newly advertised positions, etc.
This is a great idea, Gus. This is useful to job seekers and hopefully to the companies that made these websites to make the job search “easier.” I with I had catalogued the things I saw during my nine months of job searching, such as disappearing data in forms that were already filled, tiny click areas for entering data, 404s on newly advertised positions, etc.