As I was reading though the assignments for last Friday, the article that stood out the most was “Rands In Repose: A Glimpse and a Hook.” The further down the article I got, the more intimidated I was by this individual. It’s bad enough to be so pessimistic in such a competitive and unforgiving market. And when I read this piece on how an individual looks at a resume, I pray that the person I hand mine into is more merciful.
I think the only reason this article appears so extreme is because they go into detail how resumes are broken down when I only understand the general importance of a resume. This is the first time I came into contact with such honest material on resume critiques. Up until now, I’ve been told to format, organize, use “power verbs,” and follow the same procedures. However, this article is going to haunt me as I review my resume for the next week.
This person ignores the objective on a resume? They also skip the skills and qualification section? And they suggest never including a cover letter? These ideas go against the grain of everything I have been taught about resumes. And as equally important, it seems this person ignores a significant amount of my resume. Yikes.
One of the more important things that I took from this article is understanding how audiences change in taste. It is important to balance these different reader’s needs to optimize your resume. Just because you follow the mind numbing format like everyone else, does not mean that the critique obeys the same designs. In the same respect, I should not be completely intimidated by those who review my resume because they potentially do not share the same ideas as this person. However, it is in your best interest to be aware of the cut throat types.
Cut throat reviewers
I got the same impression from that article. After reading it, I felt like it was impossible to win with these types of recruiters. On the other hand, leaving something off of a resume because one person said to can also be a mistake. Imagine if the recruiter at the company you are applying to thinks that part of the resume is the most important. Every recruiter has their own system for going through resumes, so it's impossible to predict what parts of the resume they will actually look at. Because of this, the only real way to prepare your resume for recruiters is to make sure that you have as much pertinent information in each section as you can, so that no matter where the recruiter looks, they will find hopefully find something that they like.
It's really a question of audience ...
At first, I shared your extreme surprise at this author's suggestion that you omit your objective statement and forget cover letters. The more I read, the more I started to wonder how he could possibly suggest these things, but then I realized something. He's the final eye on this resume, and it's been put in his box for a reason. Without an objective statement, it might never have gotten to his box. If he's going to skip it, look at that as a free pass with this audience. He may be your primary audience, since he ultimately decides if you get the position, but you needed that objective statement on there to satisfy the requirement of a gatekeeper audience (e.g., an HR rep who sorts the resumes). I think that this author has a pretty narrow view on resumes, and his advice is great for someone who wants to hand a resume to HIM. While I think he has valid points in places, I think it's also worth considering with a grain of salt in the sense that you know that he (or the person in his role for your organization) won't be the only person looking at your resume.
Kristin