From: kanamori@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Atsushi Kanamori)
Subject: Re: Advice from a hiring manager on resumes
Keywords: Advice
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 13:16:11 GMT


I'm not a hiring manager, but I did recently complete a successful job
search and my resumes have had a good record of landing interviews. 
Plus, I love a good debate!


In article <1992Nov20.224949.7360@netcom.com> afisher@netcom.com (Alan Fisher) writes:
>(This was originally posted on misc.jobs.offered, but I hear this is the
>right bboard for this one.  With minor modifications to my original
>post in [square brackets] -- based on the ton of replies I received, 
>here it is again on this bboard)
>
>(This advice is my opinion.  Other managers may look at it differently.)
>
>I have seen hundreds of resumes in the past few months and can't believe how
>poor the resumes look like.  I am not talking about the qualifications of a
>person --- just the formatting and the amount of useless stuff on the resumes.
>Here are some very very simple things to do:
>
>1.  Read your resume after you write it.  I can't believe how many incomplete
>sentences or spelling mistakes there are on the resumes.  

Nor can I. People who think spelling mistakes are insignificant ought to
remember that a personnel clerk with a 1000+ resumes on his desk will use
any algorithm he can think of reduce that pile to something managable,
and algorithms will be chosen as much for ease of use as for applicability.
Looking for spelling and grammar errors is a *very* easy algorithm.



>I have seen resumes like: "A position as 
>a hardware or software engineer in design, development or technical support."
>Make up your mind!!  No matter how good, he is not getting an offer from me.

Agreed.


>4. 70% of resumes include hobbies and other outside interests.  Unless you are
>world class material in one or more sports or some other extra-curricular
>activity, this is a waste of space and waste of my time scanning through the
>resumes.

Also agreed.


>5. Every resume contains "References furnished on request".  Again a waste of
>space.  I assume references will be furnished if I ask for them.  
>Why state the obvious?

My position on this is "six loaves one way, half a dozen the other."
It only takes up one line of space at the bottom of the resume; and it's
"traditional" enough that many people feel compelled to include it. Unlike
typos and obvious rambling, it's not a sign of carelessness, ignorance or 
verbosity so IMO, it shouldn't be held against the candidate.

[On a related note, it's always amused me that standard resume protocol
requires putting one's name, address and phone number at the *top* of the
resume rather than the bottom. Personally, I'd rather hook the reader
on my qualifications and experience first -- then, give him the contact
information if he decides to give me a call. The contact information
wastes at least three lines of limited bandwidth, IMO.]



>6. In the software resumes I look at, I always see the lines like the 
>following:
>
>Languages:  C, C++, BASIC, Pascal, Ada, Lisp, CommonLisp, SNOBOL, PL/I, 
> [etc.]
>I can't believe people write every language and system that they have ever
>touched and glanced at in the hopes that somebody somewhere might look at it
>and immediately pick up the phone and call them.  Either you are the Jack of
>all and master of none   or   you just couldn't stick to one thing long
>enough to be proficient in it.
>
>Also, I assume that if you know one or two languages, and you are any good,
>you will be able to pick up anything new that comes along.

Here, I must take exception. You are clearly a rational hiring manager
who understands that new technology is easy for a competent engineer to
pick up. Unfortunately, you are in the minority, in my experience. If your
resume goes through any channel other than a direct referral, chances
are, the lack of the "right" keywords will cause your resume to be weeded
out before you've had a chance to sell your lightning fast learning skills
and your related experience. If your resume is likely to be read first by
H.R. personnel or culled from a huge list of candidates (a likely fate
for any resume posted to USENET), you need every keyword and headline
you can afford.

I often delete this section when sending a resume for a specific position
or to a company requiring a severely limited and well-defined set of
technological skills. But on a resume destined for mass distribution
(even within one company), my instincts tell me not to omit any
reasonably relevant keywords.



>The next two points are related to cover letters.  If there is a cover
>letter, I always read it first.  If I don't like the cover letter, I 
>don't even read the resume.

Good strategy (and useful for a smart job hunter too, since the cover
letter gives me complete freedom to plug only my most *relevant* skills
and experience, with no distractions from anything else.)


>
>[Running your resume through a spell checker is not sufficient.  Just
>look at point #11 -- "will" should really be "with"; or #2 where the
>"he" should be "the" -- but it passed the spell checker test!!!]
>
>[Lots of people asked me what a fresh graduate should do.  You know, there
>are a lot of companies looking for "Indians" and not "Chiefs".  So
>just because you have just a little experience does not necessarily
>exclude you from consideration.  The problem is that every resume
>looks like every other -- i.e. every one has experience with everything --
>so I am faced with calling tens of people to find out who really has
>got some experience and who has heard of something and put it on the
>resume as something he/she knows about]

To expand on that, when you describe a past accomplishment, quantify
what you did (wrote 10,000 lines of code) and the bottom-line results 
(sold 30,000 copies in 1991.) This sends a pretty clear message
that this is real experience and not something you just "know about."
More importantly, it highlights the bottom-line result -- which is
after all, the point.