RE: resume fondling -- am I being too picky?

Subject: RE: resume fondling -- am I being too picky?
From: "Rob Domaschuk" <rdomaschuk -at- printable -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 13:10:04 -0500

As always, it depends...

First, I agree that poorly written sentences and grammar usage are red flags.

If I am comparing two resumes and one is riddled with errors and the other is not, I'll certainly give greater weight to the edited resume. For me, I believe that the resume/interview is where I will (or should) see the "best" that each person can offer. They have time to edit the resume, put together a portfolio of work they think is their best, etc. If a poorly constructed or written resume is their "best", then I will have issues with it.

Yes, I know that my approach may eliminate some good candidates but, in my experience, it also allows excellent candidates to shine and I've never felt "stuck" with a small group of people from which to choose.

That being said, I don't agree with everything that was written.

> 3) Everything tagged Normal. Or, a hodge-podge of style use. (Which is
> why I prefer to receive Word files; I look at the structure of the
> content in the resume and style use and evaluate the author based on
> the sample.)

Is Word expertise required in these positions? If it is, or if the candidate has listed Word as a strong skill, then this is a fair check. If, however, the candidate lists FrameMaker as the primary tool used and Word is something that (s)he uses once in a while, then I DON'T think it's a fair check.

> 4) Failure to indicate which tools were used at which jobs.
> 5) Failure to indicate size of documentation projects at various jobs;

I agree with John P. on this. Why does it matter? UNLESS the description states that you want people who have extensive experience with long documents (400+ pages), then it would be appropriate. If/when I apply for a position and it states a specific requirement, I ensure that that requirement is listed in both resume.

> 8) Poor font choice, manual kerning changes, that combined with
> run-ons (1.) makes the resume hard to read.

Excellent, we've not had a full-on "Font Fiddling" discussion (oops, I mean 'polarized, emotion-filled, ranting and screaming) on this list for a while. GO ARIAL!!!!! DOWN WITH GARAMOND!!!!

> 10) Document properties that list an author other than the candidate.

Again, it goes back to whether or not the person is claiming a high level of expertise in the tool used to create the resume.

Rob Domaschuk,
Training and Communications Developer
Printable Technologies, Inc. * 312.853.8337

"The compelling force of all times has
been the force of originality and creation."
- Ansel Adams


Accelerate the document lifecycle with full online discussions and unique feedback-management capabilities. Unlimited, efficient reviews for Word
and FrameMaker authors. Live, online demo:

You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archiver -at- techwr-l -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Send administrative questions to lisa -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.

Previous by Author: Re: how do you make drop-down triangles ...
Next by Author: RE: resume fondling -- am I being too picky?
Previous by Thread: Re: resume fondling -- am I being too picky?
Next by Thread: Re: resume fondling -- am I being too picky?

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads