Oy vey…multiple thoughts here:
First - I think we’re confusing two issues here:
a) Value of contributing to an open source project
b) Lack of Recent Commercial Experience
His problem is the latter not the former - there are significant differences in the day-to-day workplace culture and expectations between a corporate/consulting position and an academic or public sector enviroment. Specifically: greater focus on results and/or deliverables, more accountability for quality, easier to get fired, adherance to acceptable standards/architecture, better documentation, more competition with peers, stronger engagment from the customer (I’m aware there are probably some snickers out there but you get my drift…any GOOD corporate IT department will be have some of these). His challenge, pure and simple, is to show that he can run with the big dogs and toe the line on quality, efficiency, and teamwork… (incidently, there is probably a converse of this for corporate IT people going into the public sector…to be fair balanced…)
Unfortunately, contributing to volunteer open-source projects has about as much relevant to proving you can function in a corporate technology organization as being president of the board for your homeowners association has to proving you can be mayor of a city. While both roles involve exercising the same underlying skills, there’s a big difference in standards/pressure/margin for error.
The recruiter is just being honest…your counterpoint (that you have used the same technologies in open-source) doesn’t refuse her view. Your real issue here is that the company she is working on behalf of wants people with a commercial background…probably because they’ve experienced the same fit issues I mention above. Speaking as a hiring manager myself…we don’t (usually) impose this stuff just for fun - generally speaking, certain backgrounds tend to work out for certain roles and others…struggle… which isn’t fair to the company, other qualified candidates, and ultimately the applicant (while we all gotta eat, do you really want the stress of struggling at work because I hired you for a role that my experience tells me you aren’t well prepared for? I don’t…it’s a slow painful death of the soul).
Second…there is another major red flags in your approach:
If I give you a coding test, I expect to see some solid answers to MY PROBLEM, which should be fairly strongly related to what you will encounter in the daily job. That should also be a very MAJOR signal that I’m not interested in analyzing your open source code which - by the way - I’m not even sure you personally wrote (if these are collaborative projects). Not sure about the rest of you, but it usually takes me about 5 - 10 minutes to understand how another coder is approaching the problem (assuming it’s a decent sized piece of work) and figure out their coding/commenting style as well as any unique objects/libraries which they are using. I’m going to invest that time later - before I hire you - and after you prove yourself worthy of my attentions by solving the exact same problem I gave the other four candidates. Bringing up the open source work as a rebuttal to failing the test is ARROGANT…and ultimately burns bridges…
(actually, in my case, you would probably get a piece of my mind about how small time open source projects don’t always run with a high level of rigor, admittedly with some significant exceptions)…
So…regarding the first point…as a corporate IT hiring manager, I DO see significant value in open source experience…particularly if you are working on problems and/or using languages that indicate you’re smarter than the average bear (major applications, crypto, unique services, early adoption of new technology, LISP, etc.)
But don’t expect me to use that in lieu of relevant experience in my space…