After reading the “resume draft readings” I feel somewhat discouraged and intimidated about creating the “perfect” resume, however subjective that is. It is hard to tell exactly how each person should construct their resume because there is no standard for writing them and no standard for the person(s) reading them. However, these articles gave some good insight on how to make your resume better and present your personal information/experience in way that people will notice.
The article I found most interesting was “a glimpse and a hook” by Rands in Repose. He was very straight forward with his information/insight and I feel like it helped me a lot. The section about cover letters is what drew me in first. I agree with his statement on taking the information normally on a cover letter and putting it under career objective or job history. This makes perfect sense to me. As we are all now well aware, recruiters/employers briefly read our resumes, so what makes you think they will take the time to read an entire cover letter? I think using well thought out key words in a career objective and/or job history would be much more effective in catching someone’s eye. This would also be a chance to use the right words and get past the scanning process.
The other topic I found interesting in “a glimpse and a hook” was “sounding like a human.” As funny and obvious as it sounds, I understand what is being said. When people write their resumes they tend to over think things and decide that having the most technical and wordy information on their resume is a good idea. Like Rands explains, this makes you sound like a robot and the person reading your resume knows you’re full of it. For example, I have a friend from Jersey who pumped gas one summer (they don’t pump their own gas in Jersey, in case you didn’t know that). On his old resume, under work experience, he put “Fossil fuel transfer technician.” As funny as it is, the potential employer can spot these things and know when someone is trying to spice up mediocre work experience.
Overall, I think the key to a nice, clean, effective resume is to be smart about the content and think about what the employer wants to see. Don’t include things they won’t read and certainly don’t try to make yourself sound like a robot and over complicate your true experience/skills.
Job Titles
I'd certainly agree with you that it's important for your resume to reflect a normal human being. I'm pretty sure that associates from human resources are able to tell when somebody sounds robotic, arrogant, or is not telling the truth. It's their job to be able to know and relate to people. In "A Glimpse and a Hook," the author notes the importance of accurate job titles and descriptions. If your responsibilities deviate from the job title on your resume, that's when the "warning flags" start popping up. Employers don't appreciate when applicants exaggerate or embellish their resumes, so I think that it's important to keep everything accurate and honest.
Don't worry about abstract perfection—you'll drive yourself nuts
You mention feeling intimidated about creating the perfect resume. I can relate, and I can give you some advice that was given to me: finding a job is often an irrational process. What this means is that there will be times when you find a job that seems perfect for you. It might as well say under qualifications: "0-2 years experience, name must be Stephen, williness to travel a plus," and somehow you don't even get an interview. This almost certainly will happen once or twice, and it doesn't immediately make sense. You start to examine your materials for the problem, and you can't find it, so your confidence takes a hit. All I can say is that finding a job involves so many layers, so many wheels within wheels, that it's mind boggling. And we as applicants often aren't privy to many of these factors.
Let me just make this personal. I and the other instructor Nathaniel are looking for jobs right now. I sent out 64 application packets. Each one was unique, because each place wanted things slightly differently. I interviewed with about 30 places, including some places where I had worked before, and some of them I never heard from again. Nathaniel and I applied for some of the same jobs that seemed perfectly crafted for us, and somehow both of us got rejected. Yet, Nathaniel also got an offer from a place where he thought he wiped out on the interview.
So what's the moral? First, finding a job is irrational. You can't completely suss out causes and effects. You never fully know what caused something to happen, and in many cases, it had absolutely nothing to do with you. Second, just because you wipe out one place doesn't necessarily have any bearing on how things are going to go somewhere else. We tailored our materials to individual jobs (64 bloody times), but of course there were big similarities from packet to packet, and some people loved them and some people hated them—despite the fact that the job ads for the places were often almost identical. This doesn't mean that tailoring your materials for a particular job is a waste of time—far from it; we got much better responses than some other job seekers—but it does mean that you should also deal in volume. I won't lie to you. We can't give you a magical resume formula, and you can never fully know the complexities of the situation. However, some resumes are clearly better than others, and you can play the odds by making your materials specific and concrete, and by applying for a lot of jobs. That's why, as the instructor blog says, getting a job is hard work.
I know what you mean
I can relate to what you’re saying as well. My last job and my current one required an interview process and neither gave me one. I simply gave them my resume/information and they called me up and told me to come into work. I was extremely puzzled considering I knew there was going to be an interview, but I didn’t complain. Then I did exactly as you said, I stopped and tried to examine how it was possible. “Does this happen?” and “I must have done something right” definitely ran through my head. All of this made me a little weary of the job search process but I know I need to be prepared for the next opportunity.
Catering To The Recruiters
After reading these articles it seems it is almost impossible to craft the perfect resume. This is because each recruiter is looking for something different. Some will want their attention to be drawn to certain items, while others will be looking for information to be easily read. I think that the best solution to this is to read as many articles like these as possible. Doing this, will allow us to notice patterns and figure out ways to create resumes that will cater to a variety of recruiters. The sad thing is that even with this work there still is no guarantee that a resume will be read, the only thing that you can do is increase the chances that it will be read.
"Perfection"
It may be less the case that it is impossible to create a perfect resume, than it is that "perfection" itself is situational. The "perfection" of the resume is, in part, its fit in any particular situation. As Jeremy has noted elsewhere, a perfect resume in one situation is a terrible resume in another. As you rightly point, "the only thing that you can do is increase the chances that it will be read." That is what the job ad analysis and the drafting process is all about.