One problem upper-management jobseekers encounter is
maintaining their objectivity. Lack
of neutrality distorts one’s judgment. Those same executives are often
cool-headed in other matters, but when it comes to their résumés, the rulebook gets flushed down the toilet.
That begs the question: Does such
a résumé rulebook exist? In the large schema—yes, though it is constantly
evolving, and not something etched in papaya. The book of résumé etiquette might
be entitled: The dos and don’ts of résumé
frivolity.
Having worked with thousands of jobseekers,
a few caveats have been learned—some by accident, but more the old fashion way—trial and error.[1] In those
early days, I accepted clients at face value. I believed whatever the jobseeker
told me. Over time, it became apparent that while most did not outright lie, many
overstated things, which drew into question their
veracity.
Roughly speaking, it took about 300
résumé preparations before it became glaringly obvious what consistently
worked, and what puffery did not. While I was eager to pursue methods that worked, it became equally apparent that
some clients entertained other
priorities. Those priorities trumped my best intentions.
Here are a few Pinocchio dichotomies
I regularly encounter. If I encounter these, it’s a damn-sure bet employers confront
them as well.
Many jobseekers believe that
overly charged verbiage succeeds.[2]
They spotted it in Zoe’s résumés and gosh-by-golly they become hell-bent on
having identical verbiage appear in their material. (Time is wasted on those
resorting to befuddled logic.)
The problem with using charged verbiage
comes down to believability. Here is
where ambitious intentions clash with reality. What if the employer thinks the
jobseekers is just another Pinocchio?
What value is that? How does that work to the individual’s advantage?
^›
Another popular ploy among
jobseekers involves the urge to explain
things. Somehow, the notion that if they explain their situation, any
transgression associated with it will be (a) deeply appreciated and (b) fully accepted
as fact by the potential employer.
Oh, if that were true, turtles would
gallop like horses and butterflies would sing like canaries. In reality, this
amounts to magical thinking, of course. The moment you resort to “But I need to
explain,”—you lose. In the world of reality,
explanations and rationalizations are for Pinocchio to recite.
^›
Many fret over the depth of résumé
content. (Some resort to obsessing.)
To satisfy this thirst (or obsession),
they infuse the technique known as stringing
prepositions.[3]
Why use an eight-word sentence when a long-winded, 35-word sentence, strung together
with prepositions will appear more
impressive. Some sentences leave readers thinking, --Huh? And say what?
The notion that stringing endless
prepositions will convey a greater depth of knowledge or experience is grammatical
rubbish. Concise sentences work better than expository blither. Reader comprehension
also improves. (This reality is often wasted
on those with opposing mindset.)
^›
At the forefront of jobseekers’
minds are keywords, whom many confuse
with buzzwords.[4] The appearance of keywords is vital in résumé effectiveness. They constitute the
foundation for selecting candidates—especially when the résumé is pre-screened
and processed via an Applicant Tracking System (ATS).
Keywords are not what most
jobseekers think they are. They tend to be simple things like contact
information, level and type of education, current and previous positions, type
of industry experience, and skillsets relevant to a particular industry or
occupation.
Whenever applicants come up short
in these basics, they lose points and ranking. In turn, this lowers their
prospects of being contacted. Jobseekers tend to learn this lesson the hard way
when attempting to switch careers.
›^
As for using buzzwords, think of a swarm of angry bees buzzing around their nest. Except for beekeepers and bears, the
noise—annoys. If you have limited exposure to résumés, the buzzing will not be overpowering,
nerve-wracking or self-evident. Start reading reams and stacks of résumés and
the endless buzzing drives you nuts.
It should come as no surprise
that the Pinocchio résumés are cluttered with buzzwords. Some will use
prepositions to string the buzzwords together. While depth of experience should
speak for itself, they fear being passed over for not including me-to verbiage.
›
The ultimate dichotomy is hiring
an experienced writer, and then not trusting the individual’s judgment and
recommendations. Chances run high that individual will get more right by
accident than a novice will by intentional design.
*
Copyrighted © 2015 by
Robert James. To visit James’ website, click here. To visit his LinkedIn
page, click here.
Footnotes
[1] Five top errors learned were,
1: The résumé is an ad—not a job app,
2: Lack of focus in an attempt to cover everything, 3: Content relevancy is
more important than length, 4: Clean layouts perform better than busy or
cluttered ones, and 5: In many cases, less can be more.
[2] Worthless superlatives
such as “all, always, never, every, almost,
very, only” rank among the highest abused, followed by “successfully, completely, totally and entirely.” Infusing charged verbiage has little-to-no influence on sharp-minded
decision makers who regularly see such usage.
[3]
As a former college English
instructor, I can attest that there are roughly 150 prepositions in English. In
case freshman English has been forgotten, the common prepositions are to, at, on, with, of, for, over, from,
within, by and aside. Sentences
containing more than three propositions should be considered excessive.
[4] The use of
buzzwords dates back to the mid-1940s. Usage is considered an attempt to
impress those less educated, and those with less intellect. Seven of the most
commonly overused résumé buzzwords include motivated,
passionate, creative, driven, extensive, track record, and expert.
The balance of the top ten is experience, responsible and organization.
The usage of these buzzwords however, is often unavoidable. With limited
options, it is difficult to address experience
and responsibilities without referencing
those words.