The company I work for recently had a position open; we needed to replace someone who left in our deployment group. I wrote a fairly targeted and reasonable advertisement (e.g. it wasn’t a laundry list of random acronyms;
it really did describe the position and list the qualifications) and posted it to a local bulletin board. About 100 responses came in (side-note: I was expecting more; the job market really is getting better). And it was my job to find the suitable resumes, and do the phone screening.
I realize it’s a tough economic climate. But people could manage the initial stage of the process a lot better. Here’s the most important things that I noticed repeatedly, that people could do to improve their chances:
- Only apply if you have a chance. The number of people who sent me their resumes when they didn’t meet most of the listed criteria, and only met some of the criteria by coincidence, was staggering. If I list 10 criteria, and you only meet 3, you’re not going to get the job. Sending your resume is just wasting both of our time.
- Write a cover letter. You should always include one. Please. Especially if the position is customer-facing and emphasizes communication skills. A well-written and concise paragraph explaining why you’re interested in the position and what makes you qualified is invaluable.
Note that I said paragraph– we’re talking a short note that positions you well. More than that is overkill.
- Get the name of the position right. Lots of people invent position names. If the advertisement says the job is ” Technical Support Specialist,” don’t apply for “QA Engineer.”
- Use a specific subject heading in your e-mail. “Re: [job name]” works perfectly. “Hello?” or “Job Application” does not.
- Use spellchecking. Use grammar checking as well. I know that most grammar checkers reject perfectly valid sentences. But they also catch some howlers.
- Don’t send word documents. In this age of viruses, why would you deliberately send me a Word document? Why assume that I have the right version and can read it? And why assume I’d take the risk? If you feel the formatting is that important, send the word document *and* a text version and let me choose. Or send me an HTML or PDF document (and if you have Word, you can send me HTML). I wound up running all the e-mail through a virus scanner and then opening the Word documents anyway. But … people who sent me text or PDF or HTML (and especially the people who sent both a Word
document and an HTML document) got a leg up. It makes a good impression when the cover letter says “I’ve included both a Word version and a text version of my resume.”
Slight modification to this, based on feedback. This should really be don’t send unsolicited word documents. If the people doing the screening want word documents then, by all means send them one.
- If you send your resume as a separate document, name it correctly. Resumes named “Resume” have a higher chance of getting lost somewhere. Resumes named “Resume_BobSmith_QAEngineer_Feb2003″ are much easier to find.
- Don’t make assumptions about the person reading your e-mail. Sometimes it’s an HR manager. Sometimes it’s the person who will be supervising you. Sometimes, it’s someone else who got dragged in to help process the applications.
- Don’t negotiate price in the cover letter. In the first stage of screening, the company is mostly interested in figuring out whether you’re a fit for the job. Anything else is a distraction and, worse, will lead to the “Hmmm. Why is she mentioning that?” question (once the screener starts wondering that, your chances have gone down). Similarly, mentioning availability isn’t a particularly good idea, unless you’re not going to be available for a while (the default screening assumption is that you’re available in a reasonable time frame. Otherwise, why would you have applied).
These aren’t rocket science. But, when you total up the statistics, over half the people who applied broke two or more of these guidelines (the single most common submission was a word document without a cover letter. In more than one case, the subject line of the e-mail was empty too).
Thoughts? If you’ve screened resumes, what do you look for?
Word as a public utility
I really despise the Word document meme. Everyone assumes, as second nature, that everyone in the developed world has three things: a toilet, a telephone, and Microsoft Word/Excel/Powerpoint/etc. Thanks for discouraging this practice.
Word as a public utility
I agree completely, however the majority of people out there want only Word documents. This is very unfortunate for many reasons, including the virus issue that you cited. Still, there are an enormous amount of job descriptions that say "Please send an MS Word document," or something else of the sort.
I think the worst mistake, by far, is when people apply for jobs that they're completely unqualified for. We recently posted a Security Operations Center Manager position. The ad specifically said we were looking for an open source centric person with lots of *nix experience. Out of the roughly one hundred resumes received to date, more than half of them were from Microsoft-focused individuals. Perhaps half of those remaining were from folks who hadn't really ever held professional IT jobs.
I don't think we've received one resume with the word Linux in it.
screening by keywords?
I read someplace that now companies are using computers to scan resumes for specific keywords. Those that that don't contain a set number of the keywords are automatically rejected. Wouldn't this just lead to people writting resumes filled with industry buzzwords?
Maybe, but not often
I'm sure some companies are doing that. I can only speak about my experience, and in my experience, that's not a huge factor. In the world of small to medium sized software companies, things are slightly different.
Here's the scoop. If a small to medium sized software company is actively advertising (e.g. the position is mentioned someplace other than the company web site), then you've got really good odds of an actual human reading, or at least giving a cursory once over to, what you sent in.
If the only place the position is mentioned is on the company web site (it's not being advertised elsewhere), then your odds go down. In fact, there's a very good chance that the position doesn't even exist, for two reasons. One is that companies often don't update the jobs part of their website in real-time. There's often a disconnect between the hiring group and the people maintaining the website. And, often, even if the information is communicated back to the people maintaining the website, doing the update is a low priority task.
The second reason is one I recently discovered-- some companies prefer to have a job or two on their jobs page, even if the positions don't exist. Not to get resumes, and not on the off-chance someone compelling might stumble in. But because it makes the company look more prosperous (they're still growing!) and that can help create a better impression for potential customers.
V. Useful
Thanks - lots of useful info here, and I'll be modifying my (Word) documents to suit..
I have noticed though that nearly all the recruitment agencies that I potentially deal with want CVs in Word format. I had a couple that claimed they couldn't handle RTF files which meant that as a Linux user I had to go and load up a copy of Star Office specifically for that :-)
Word as a public utility
You're right, it is hateful that we're all expected to have M$ Office, or at least Windows and WordPad (I don't - I use ThinkFree just to wrangle documents that arrive in that format). I usually send out my resume in PDF and RTF, with a pointer to an html version on a website.
The subject "Word as a public utility" gives me an idea though - what if there were a public website where you could upload Word docs and get PDF's back? That would allow receivers to go without Word, and senders to be more open and less obnoxious. Maybe this could be done with Mac OS X (print to PDF), Apache (for the server), Office (for the formats), and AppleScript (to run it all), though it might well violate Office's licensing terms.
Phone calls
Another very important tip: if the job announcement says "no phone calls, please," then don't call. You would think this would be obvious, but a lot of people apparently believe that if they call anyway, they are demonstrating that they are REALLY enthusiastic about the job. Wrong. When I was hiring people, if someone called me I would immediately take their resume out of the stack and toss it into the recycling bin, no matter how well-qualified they were. I would tell them that they just proved to me that they can't follow instructions.
Two way street
Applicants are only responsing in kind to laundry lists of requirements. Your familiarity with the post you're advertising leads you to expect similar attention to detail in return. But for many, job searches have become so futile and detached from reality and that's being reflected in the applications. A few months out in the cold searching will make you see things differently. I'd like to think otherwise, but the relatively low number of applications you've received indicates that people are not expecting success.
See what differently?
The blog entry was about ways to maximize your chances. While I understand that it's tough out there, I also think that taking a little time and effort will vastly improve your chances. I'm not passing judgement on anyone, simply saying that, when I have 100 resumes to read through, certain things will make resumes float to the top of the pile.
Take, for example, cover letters. One of the things that makes for a great cover letter is if it calls out something that's relevant, but not obvious. For example, if you're applying to a company that sells into the healthcare industry, mentioning that a previous employer also sold into the healthcare industry, and that you have knowledge of the vertical market is a very nice thing to point out (and something that could very easily be overlooked by the person reading the resumes). It will also show that you did some due diligence before applying, and that's a good thing too.
thanks for the tips, but...
Thanks for some good tips, my only comment is on you first point. How many qualifications are enough to make applying worthwhile?
For myself, if I know I can do the job based on what's described, I apply. The shop I worked in used Informix rather than Oracle, so I've applied to quite a few jobs where everything matched except they were looking for PL/SQL.
I also find it quite discouraging to find out a resume is circular filed, because I haven't used the right IDE. Like they don't all do the same stuff and take about 10 minutes to get up to speed.
See what differently?
The confusion I have about sending cover letters via e-mail is: Should I be sending it as a separate file from the resume, or all in one document?
Word as a public utility
If a potential employer requests a Word document, the candidate should submit one. The ubiquity of Office has triggered several communities to write repurposing tools, so there is little justification for keep being dependent on a closed and proprietary format. No one should be obliged to own a copy of Word, but a programmer should not feel uncomfortable with such a request. If the candidate uses open source software, he or she will have no difficulty in finding free tools to convert a document to RTF or DOC format. There is no issue about Office licensing terms: the exchange of DOC files and conversion to other formats is not restricted by Microsoft or other companies. Also, there are several web sites that provide repurposing services, which can be useful to convert from Word to PDF without having to run a converter locally.
looking for a woman who likes to fish for striped bass
Excuse my 'attention getter' subject, but having been a DBA for 13 years for DB2, SQL Server and Oracle on a variety of platforms, I have an issue with companies with a narrow laundry list of skills they are looking for. Any IT person knows all too well that the technology is not only extremely varied but changing at a rapid pace. Even the same product often changes their GUI from release to release, which requires 're-training'. I have to defend the practice of applying for a job even if you don't have a given percentage (what's reasonable anyway ?) of their requirements, ESPECIALLY if it's for a permanent or long(er) term position, after all, doesn't the qualities of the individual matter ? I'd like to think that I am somewhat unique, and at the risk of sounding egotistical 'better than average' in my job. I think you have taken a narrow techie view of hiring by reducing people to a specific list of skills. I would prefer to work for a company that appreciates the individual and if I don't know everything going in, they will be willing to give me a little time to 'tool up', after all, what good is a job where you can only come in with a narrow list of skills and with that company mentality you are more likely to leave with the same narrow list of skills. I'm sorry if my 'attitude' shows, I agree with most of what you said except that one point.
By the way, to draw a parallel, I have had some of my most pleasant surprises by being open about the women I date as I feel their essence is more than a narrow list of likes and dislikes, and I enjoy the enrichment it provides me to date a diverse group.
looking for a candidate with some personality
Ah but, those are only your personal preferences. Since there are no consistent standards – and your standards don’t exactly match those of professional recruiting managers – I think that you might have confused more than helped.
If you want applications in a particular format – say so! Don’t expect applicants to read your mind. If you want resumes or CV’s in Word 97 or text or rtf format, specify that. As many companies are annoyed by multiple copies of applications in different formats, as find it considerate. Some companies discard cover letters – or at least don’t pass them on to the hiring manager. Some companies use automatic scanners that only accept text. Some hiring managers prefer the professional appearance of a Word-formatted document over raw text.
I would say that not a single one of the people I have ever hired has done everything ‘correctly’ as specified in this article. But then, I’m not looking for clerks who follow the rules to the exclusion of their intelligence and creativity – and those seem to be the only ones making it past our (in)human resource department at the moment.
Job application maze
Your comments are a list of frustrations that are valid for your experience but, I feel certain, another person charged with the responsibility of selecting applicants from that lot would counter every point.
The fact is that people, including HR people, do not like to think nor to read, indeed cannot read, cannot connect the dots and, perhaps worst of all, are absolutely clueless about transferable skills.
Furthermore, the qualifications and education normally demanded are far in excess of anything that could ever be deemed reasonable. This doesn't just relate to the IT industry. I have often seen job advertisements demanding college and university degrees for security officers! Another example: an ad for a fully trained photocopy operator. What exactly is that? How daft can you get? None of this, whether IT work or not, is brain surgery. Anybody of average intelligence, i.e. an IQ of only 100, can learn any of this stuff without coaching. It takes about 10 minutes to get up to speed on any application. The key is a fully functioning brain and transferable skills.
For applicants, the trick is to gaze into a crystal ball and discover the prejudices of their unknown judge. Did he/she get up on the right side of the bed? Is he/she hung-over? Is this a real job? What reason would the concealed judge accept as valid for wanting this job? Is it enough to want it simply because one can do it, must eat, and has become accustomed to the luxury of living indoors?
Applying for a Job: Part I
Thanks for the viewpoint of a recruiter. Here's the viewpoint of an applicant.
In the first place it is not a resume you should be screening for but a person capable of performing the job and growing as a valuable employee.
In an effort to show ones ability to take on more responsibility and to learn a new position quickly an applicant tries to list all that they have accomplished. They can't anticipate what each screener is looking for.
Rather than screening out, I think a better option would be to screen in. Find that indivual who even though they may not match the exact requirements,is willing and capable of making your company a great employee. If you find the exact match to your requirements ask yourself is this too good to be true?
James Uselton
jamesu@yahoo.com
Two cents
1. Try not to be over-smart by voting or going against "Standards". MS Word is almost a defacto standard for resume processing. Companies have developed entire document management systems around it. Its foolish to suggest that applicants use some other format just for the heck of it.
2. Cover letters are so passe when again, the default method of application is via email. Email by definition is "free form", so long as content is within etiquette guidlines. What rules and norms are we talking about??
Some people want to regress into the stone age when the entire world is entering the information age. Let them.
Job application maze
"Your comments are a list of frustrations that are valid for your experience but, I feel certain, another person charged with the responsibility of selecting applicants from that lot would counter every point. "
Really? So, they'd want, for example, people to get the position name wrong, and to use a vague subject header for the e-mail? They'd be actively offended if the applicant used a spell-checker, or included a well-written and concise paragraph explaining why the applicant is interested in the position?
I'm not sure whether you're disagreeing with the main article or somebody's feedback. But, in either case, please be specific.
Applying for a Job: Part I
I'm not a recruiter, I'm an engineer who got promoted and, as a result, spent a fair amount of time and energy in hiring people.
I'm not sure I understand "In the first place it is not a resume you should be screening for but a person capable of performing the job and growing as a valuable employee."
Either this is obvious, or wrong. Of course, the point is to hire a capable employee. The way we often do that, like it or not, is through cover letters and resumes. This article is about: making sure that your resume gets read.
But past that, what are you trying to say? My article was about things like spellchecking and introducing yourself in a cover letter. It was very specific things that an applicant can do to make the reviewer's job easier and increase their chances of getting past the hurdles that do exist.
Cover letters?
Note that I clarified "cover letter"-- I wrote "A well-written and concise paragraph explaining why you're interested in the position and what makes you qualified is invaluable."
Do you really disaagree with that?
And which people "want to regress into the stone age"? What are you talking about?
looking for a candidate with some personality
Okay, so following simple rules like "Get the name of the position right" is an indication of a clerk-like mentality that excludes intelligence and creativty?
the resume trap
Hmmm, let me see now. In terms of clarity, logic, and correct English grammar, would I judge you a likely candidate by your own terms?
1. "Apply only if you have a chance." Strike one. In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
2. "Write a cover letter." Strike two. Computers don't read cover letters or e-mail.
3. "Don't end word documents." Strike three. The speller checker and grammar checker are insufficient, as witnessed by your own example. Would smoke signals do? Symbols, perhaps? Maybe photo documents?
This is too much fun.
4. "Don't make assumptions about the person reading your e-mail." Exactly which assumptions is one not to make? Please be specific. Is it fair to assume that a human will read the e-mail? And, if so, is it fair to assume that the human knows how to read, think and analyse? Or knows anything about the post? Or is fair to assume that some drudge, or an intern, or perhaps the CEO's son, is clicking the 'Delete' command because reading is hard work and, anyway, he is going to be a rock star, so who cares? And who knows what all that IT mumbo-jumbo means anyhow? Or is it fair to assume that the reader will be someone who failed potty training and who can see perfectly well that Informix is not Oracle (ha!, as if they're vastly different applications), so never looks at the resume?
5. "Don't negotiate price in the cover letter." Why go through multiples of interviews only to discover that the prospective employer is too cheap to pay a reasonable rate? People are working for money, not for the pleasure of killing themselves for a company. This is why contracting is more honest that employment. Contractors aren't expected to pretend that they're happy working for love.
What is your point
As far as I can tell, what I did was post a fairly reasonable list of things that will help people find positions.
You're free to disagree, of course. And there are valid circumstances in which you should. But, as far as I can tell, you're not adding any value to this conversation.
looking for a candidate with some personality
The folk who are responding to a vacancy by applying for a completely different position are generally hoping that any company that hires probably also hires .
In good times, it was normal to pass around resumes/CV's of promising candidates to other hiring managers. This is (or was) a good and sensible practice. No company advertises every detail of every vacancy, now and in the near-term future.
'Fishing expeditions' on the part of job-seekers may be annoying these days to hiring managers overwhelmed with applications -- but they do not represent stupidity or carelessless on the part of an applicant too lazy to get the job title right.
Applying for a Job: Part I
Thanks for responding. I think you were right-on on most points, the cover letter and the use of spellchecker in particular. I am a notoriously poor speller and use spellchecker extensively. The part I disagree with follows:
Only apply if you have a chance. The number of people who sent me their resumes when they didn't meet most of the listed critieria, and only met some of the criteria by coincidence, was staggering. If I list 10 criteria, and you only meet 3, you're not going to get the job. Sending your resume is just wasting both of our time.
I assume you were looking for a permanent employee. Is there no training in your company? What number of criteria should one match before applying? Most?
As an IT contractor I see postings with criteria that screens out very capable individuals. Criteria that is so specific as to be impossible to find matches. This causes applicants to falsify resumes and hope no one checks them out. I refuse to do that but my competition doesn’t. I must stand on my extensive background and ability to learn new technologies. Therefore I don’t customize my resume for each posting. If I were looking for a permanent position I would. Maybe I should anyway.
By the way you may be an engineer, I am also, but you were fulfilling the job of a recruiter at that time. And I see you are like my father. “Don’t do as I do, do as I say.” You could have used spellchecker.
Keep up the good work and thanks again.
James Uselton
Applying for a job part 1
Spell check and subject info are a given...My main objection to the article is HR posting requirements that they know nobody can fill. A fair amount of the HR requirements list is like going on a fishing expedition. The odds of them finding people to fill those jobs by fillig 80 to 90% of the reqmnts are remote.
Applying for a job pt1
I agree with most of you points except a few....
namely most employers want your resume in word format. If they are still using word 97 then they need specify or get with the times, a tech company that can't afford to upgrade to word 2000 I don't know if I want to work there anyway.
Also on your point regarding if you match 3 out of 10 criteria don't send your resume its a waste of time, I disagree because most companies list a laundry list of qualifications just to see how many applicants do match what they are looking for. If any company list 10 qualification and find someone that can do all 10 then the company doesn't want to pay them what they're worth. I say fax anyway because you might be the most qualified with your 3 or 4 matches, they may decide to go with you and work with what they got.
Worst - er, Word
You don't really need Word to create a "Word format" resume. Word is just the old DOS RTF TEXT processor in a Windows wrapper. (That is the reason things move about in Word documents.) WordPerfect and many other packages will allow you to save documents in the Word format. WordPerfect 8, 9, or 10 will open many, many Word documents that your version of Word may not open! WordPerfect 10 also allows direct publishing to PDF, HTML, and XML.
I am certified as a Word Expert, and have been consistently tasked to assist very advanced users and set up aids for users - even though my principal job is writing. I have never encountered any user who approached my level - which is more a testament to Word’s difficulty factor than to anything else.
As a writer, I absolutely HATE the fact that some misguided "IT standardization" clowns threw away HUGE amounts of productivity and flexibility in exchange for Microsoft's promise of "standard applications" - and free Microsoft certification courses for them, of course. In most companies, the cost of lost productivity is several multiples of total IT salaries - and thus dwarfs the supposed “savings from standardization” that were sold to management.
For an Expert user, Word requires at least 50% longer to create illustrated manuals for publishing than WordPerfect, Framemaker, or Interleaf. (The other packages are all true word processors and desktop publishing packages.) In the other packages, all document information is contained within the document - unlike Word, which requires that a separate “template” (.dot) file accompany the document. In the “real” packages, graphics and paragraphs actually stay where they are put, and the document prints exactly the same way every time.
Common Critical Errors:
Failure to send the “template” (.dot) file with the document.
Failure to place examples of the styles in the “template” file.
Microsoft does not specify, and most users do not know, that a Word “template” file MUST contain examples of all of the styles assigned to it - and that Word does not place them there (it “references” them). The “template” creator must place - and update - one or more actual example(s) of each style in the “template.” Otherwise, they will not be defined if the “template” is used for new documents.
In the above, “Template” is placed in quotes because the Word “template” is NOT a true template. A true template sets all layout document and page parameters and styles.
Failure to both add and attach the “template” to the document.
Most users do not know that they must both ADD and ATTACH a desired “template” to a document for it to produce the desired results. This leads to “template” styles appearing differently in different documents. This is caused by the fact that a “local copy” of the style appears in the document. The document styles and the “normal.dot” template are used, and styles are not updated from the desired “template” (.dot) file unless: 1) the desired “template” is copied to the correct directory path (a user set parameter), 2) there is a style example in the “.dot” file, 3) the “.dot” file is ADDED (check box under “Templates and add-ins”), and 4) the “.dot” file is ATTACHED (Click “attach”, select “.dot” file, OK).
Are there other Parts to this?
I wonder what is there left to say in a Part II? Hasn't this subject been beaten to death?
If your article would've been a narrative (well, I had these detailed job requirements … and I chucked away some of the applicants because of these reasons … draw your own conclusion) then it would’ve been acceptable, although not very original! But the preaching is a bit annoying.
Before you dismiss me with “as far as I can tell, you're not adding any value to this conversation” (“add”? … maybe the readers should decide if there is something to add to) … let me answer to your specific RFC: “Thoughts? If you've screened resumes, what do you look for?”:
1. “Thoughts”?
Please don’t write Part II or III … or compile a book out of these. If anything it points back to you in a non-flattering way (see the 2b bellow) … although you’re probably a nice guy and everything.
2. “If you've screened resumes, what do you look for?”
Well, I’m looking for the best candidate for the position = skill + compensation (see 2a) … kind of obvious (and subjective).
To make it worthwhile let me answer this one though “If you've screened resumes, what did you do (apart from the obvious)?”
a. Recognize that compensation is, in the vast majority of cases, a major factor. Hence, I measure the candidate in the context of the budget I’m prepared or I’m allowed to spend. The bigger the compensation the more precise I get with adherence to the original job requirements.
b. Recognize that the decision maker in this human interaction has the Power … hence there is no need to become overly aggravated (to the extent that I feel I should take it upon myself to explain it to the world) by all the applicants who “don’t know the rules”. What rules? … MY rules … hence, unless I specify them, the applicants have to guess … and if they are put in a position to make assumptions like “to Word or not to Word?”, why should I become aggravated when someone didn’t guess right? In other words, when you do get to play God, you have to decide whether to try to be like God or be an asshole about it. As an example, too many spelling errors … is bad in my books … but one? Maybe the kid sat on the lap and knocked the Backspace after the parent spell-checked the document … Am I to reject the perfectly qualified candidate on a petty excuse? … No. I’m going the get that person in, quickly point out the spelling error in the resume, and get on with the job (see 3c).
c. Try to break through the Presentation and get to the Content. Since Cover Letters, highlighted words, etc. is mostly about Presentation, I tend to ignore or go through them quickly. In other words, I’m not concentrating on how the applicant is selling (“is she/he selling well?”) … I look at what I’m buying (is she/he OK for what I need). I think is only fair to judge the applicant against something other than my ego (“How dare you show in front of me with a spelling error in your resume?”-kind-of-thing).
This got rather long … well, you asked for it … and now I did.
Don't worry: no book
This posting (and the subsequent ones) grew out of questions that people were asking me. I have friends who are unemployed, and they asked me "how do people screen resumes."
The intent was not to act like a deity or be arrogant. It was to document how a reasonable person, interested in filling a position, handles going through 150 resumes.
Documenting this stuff, while it seemed innocuous (and even a community service) to me, seems to have pushed a lot of buttons.
Applying...Part I
While this is all information that I am aware of through job search training, it is clear that there are many people who are not.
I found all the points of your passage to be reasonable. As for the naysayers, what harm can it do to submit options for how to view one's resume? If nothing else, it shows you are willing to do a little extra. Cover letters are are the best form of introduction and targeting.
Thank You for the article.