Firehead

As a recruiter, I see skill-based CVs every day. I’ve never really given them a second thought. I look at them and I scroll down through three paragraphs of skills to find the actual experience (if I’m lucky).

You know the kind of CV I’m talking about. They’re often only one page long, beginning with a category like ‘Skills’ or ‘Qualifications’. Under this category, everything the applicant has done in their entire life that can be named is listed. It’s a salad of keywords meant to get picked up by your search engine. Near the bottom of the page, you will find the employment history, complete with company, title, date… and nothing else.

The problem is that a skills-based CV often raises more questions than it answers because there is no meat or substance accredited to the claimed skills.

So why do applicants write CVs like this? I figure there are a couple of reasons:

First, I think they were taught to through some new trend where the important thing is to hit the keyword lottery in limited space. (I could go on about beliefs on length of CVs, but that’s a rant for another time and post.) Second, you can cram a lot more keywords in if you write vaguely and don’t substantiate anything too carefully.

It’s no secret that recruiters use a series of keywords to track potential candidates in their database. When it comes to databases, that’s how things are done. We look for certain tools and skills and we often move on if we don’t find them.

I’m not saying don’t put the keywords in. You do need to put that section of skills at the top for the key word bit. But two or three lines before moving into the experience please. This benefits everyone. It highlights the keywords to find you in a search, but then continues into the relevant information: your actual experience.

I want some meat! Your experience MUST substantiate the skills you quote.

It’s simple: if you don’t (or can’t) substantiate your skills with how and when you applied them, the information is pretty much useless decoration in limited space. For example:

• It looks especially silly when you list tons of skills like a long list of poetic words. Where did you learn them? In school, in a book, through hands-on experience or on a TV programme? You probably don’t have a diploma or you would be showing it proudly.
• Just because I love Wired magazine doesn’t mean I can add ‘technical advisor’ to my qualifications (although many do).
• That’s great that you have sales experience. Where did you get it? Selling coffees at the local café? What were you selling when you exceeded your sales goal?
• So you worked at your local department store. Was it in the store or in the corporate office? Is this where you learned your ‘organisation’ and ‘customer service’ skills for the software-testing job you’re applying for?

As a recruiter, the only way to answer these questions is for me to pick up the phone.

I might just do this. Or… I might be busy and rushed and feel that my time is better spent calling this next person whose CV is clearer and detailed. Why take on the extra investigative work?

So, please, you really need to stop doing this and change your CV template if you want to be taken seriously. I don’t know who started the trend, but I question if they were a recruiter (or a very good one).

I want to know what you’ve done, and when and where you’ve done it. Decoration is for fiction. Slippery statements and blurring the facts just say “No, thank you” to me. The hiring manager and I will decide if your skills translate for a specific position.

Creative commons images courtesy of: meat © Ernesto Andrade; CV © The CV Inn

Other posts you might like:

• Interview No-Nos
• Old or overqualified? Here’s how NOT to sell yourself
• Brand Your CV to Get Noticed