I don't have any templates off hand, but I bet some of you folks do...

I started this thread because it was brought up that a recruiter who is posting positions also offers resume help for a fee. I thought it might be a good idea to ask you folks to donate your thoughts, ideas and any templates you might have to help people out who are in need of resume advice.

I did do a Google Search and found free resume templates in many places, including:

http://www.collegegrad.com/resumes/quickstart.shtml

I also found companies which will 'broadcast' your resume. There are all kinds of services. I found resume 'programs' - enter the data and it 'does th rest' (if you can believe that...).

I think even MS Word has resume templates built in.

My own personal opinion is - Considering computer capabilities one should be able to produce a number of different resumes and tailor each to each position applied for.

Broadcasting resumes - Not my idea of the way to go, but I think today Monster.com and related job sites serve the same function in today's world.

Just some thoughts...

I agree with Mark. I have always tailored my resume to fit the company it was being applied to highlighting the talents that company is interested in. I never lie but change data around. Same applies when a cover letter is used. I also would suggest good paper stock that copies well for mailed or delivered resumes. My husband has always had a service create his resume and it has not seemed to make much difference when we have compared our responses.

As an FYI, my version of WORD has 4 resume templates built in.

I also would suggest good paper stock that copies well for mailed or delivered resumes. My husband has always had a service create his resume and it has not seemed to make much difference when we have compared our responses.
Does anyone but a HR person is a LARGE firm really care what stock paper you use? (Or how expensive your clothes are etc...). Its a piece of paper with words on it. Maybe I'm just to nieve, but if its clean and legible, thats all that should truely matter. *shrug* :bonk:

Fancy paper did not mean a great deal to me -- but it did say a little something to me -- that the person was trying another way to impress me. It was a minor plus. Much more important to me was the content. You would not believe (or maybe you would) the misspellings, poor grammar, etc. I got in some resume's, and THAT was a major issue to me.

BTW -- FWIW I think MS Works has better resume templates than WORD -- at least in the versions I have.

Good stock meaning higher quality than copy paper and the stock should look clean when copied. I used paper once that was very shaded when copied and difficult to read. I had noticed that when during an interview the President of the company had a copy of my resume not the original.

Mike you are correct about the spelling and grammar. Your written resume is your first appearance and can make the difference between receiving the call for an interview or not.

Personally, I never use a standard format for my resumes, I make my own format. I want my resume to stand out and not look like everyone else.

Cindy

My own personal opinion is - Considering computer capabilities one should be able to produce a number of different resumes and tailor each to each position applied for.When I wrote the above I must have been dreaming. At the time I may have had 'database' with different layouts for the fields floating in my mind.

I spoke with a recruiter recently about an unusual position in a small company. The issue of a resume came up and I sent a copy of my 'standard' resume. The response was that the company would never even look at it because it wasn't in a format they like. The recruiter sent me a copy of a resume the client company 'bit' on before. My mind wandered back quite a few years. I remember all the different 'kinds (formats) of resumes and I remember reading years ago that it was a toss up - What one company (HR person or whoever) liked another would not.

I decided that if resume format was that important right off that I probably wouldn't want to work there. On the other hand, if I was hungry and really needed a job I'm sure I would have looked at this differently.

Have any of you run into this? What did you do and why? Do you tailor each resume you submit?

How many different 'formats' do you have your resume in?

I only ever used one resume format for each time I was job-hunting, but I would tweek the cover letter for each employer -- and sometimes the resume got minor tweeks as well. My major concentration was on highlighting my skills and experience and making sure it was flawless as far as accuracy, spelling, grammar, punctuation, etc.

I kinda aagree -- if they are that picky about what kind of resumes they will look at, they might not be somewhere I'd want to work. Will they also be specifying what color shoelaces are allowed for employees? I guess if the resumes are gonna be computer-scanned there are some tricks you can use to optimize your chances, though.

Excellent post Mike. That's exactly what I do with my resume (same one for the last 20 years with "minor tweaks" and updates).

Same here. I tweak and update the Resume and customize the cover letter highlighting interests to the specific company it is being submitted to.

I see the resume as almost worthless but a necessary item. The cover letter should get them interested. I was called once for a position I did not submit a resume for nor was I qualified for but they liked my cover letter so much, they were ready to offer me the position based solely on the cover letter.

Cindy

I went to a job hunting panel discussion where all "experts" agreed that instead of "references available upon request" or some such line you should just put the name of a reference RIGHT ON YOUR RESUME to make it easy for the reviewer...Is this true??? Has anyone seen this? Like it or dislike it?

Condy -- Maybe I could pay you to write my next cover letter??? :D

cee -- If a reference I had was known to the reviewer (like a friend or fellow employee of the reviewer) I would definitely mention it prominently -- probably in the cover letter.

Otherwise, I'm not sure giving references before an interview is too valuable -- but I'd accept proof to the contrary.

That being said, my personal philosophy is to give 'em everything I can in one swoop because they only have that to decide if they bring me in for an interview, so I send references with my resume and cover letter.

I always have 2 or 3 references on my resume. On my first interview with my last company, my future boss told me he called one of those referenced, received very favorable comments (I guess I paid him enough :naughty: ), and told me that call specifically was the reason I was called in for the interview.

No right answer or wrong answer about references on a resume, but let me pose a few questions:

If you are the interviewer (not a gatekeeper), why do you waste your time talking to references before you talk to the applicant? At least a phone interview? Didn't you believe what the applicant wrote that you had to check it?

If you are the applicant, what do you know about the job and the working conditions? Do you want to risk burning out your references by letting every potential employer call them up? Is your resume so unbelievable that people have to call and check the veracity?

Think of a kind of "mythology" at work here.

Applicant A gets called in for an interview. He happened to have references on his resume with contact info.

Applicant B gets called in for an interview. He had creamy white deluxe bond paper for his resume sent in a beautiful 9 X 12 envelope to avoid creases.

Applicant C does NOT get called in for an interview. He had references with contact info and beautiful creamy white deluxe bond paper.

Applicant D sent in a handwritten resume on notebook paper. No references. He gets called in for an interview and hired.

Subsequently, each applicant has a different "myth" to pass on.

This myth making is similar to my dad who once got a TV to bounce into focus by giving it a whack in the side with the palm of his hand. For 20 years thereafter, my dad ALWAYS whacked the TV first when it got out of focus.

What we have described is anecdotal information about resumes which has absolutely no "repeatabillity" factor and no systematic data we can point to for evidence. If this were a root cause investigation, we'd all be embarrassed.

Wes, I have no idea where you were going with your last post. Please explain what point you are trying to make.

As an interviewer, I look at a lot of resumes. I see them as the price of admission. It gives me an overall idea of their qualifications, strictly from a "can they do the job" perspective. But it tells me little about their work ethic, which I think is just as important.

I like to occasionally call a past business reference (if they provide one) to get a feel for how well the employee "fit in", e.g. regularly came in on time, got along with others, was energetic, etc. Even personal references saying the candidate is a good friend, always there to help out when needed, has a good sense of humor, etc. Sometimes what they don't say is telling as well.

I have sometimes called them personally before an interview. Anything to filter the stack and narrow the list to the best choices.

As an interviewee (a hopeful new employee), I WANT my prospective employer to find out as much as possible about me from people other than myself. I think I present myself OK on interviews, but I have had some bad experiences with people I have hired with great presentation skills, but that showed themselves to be horrible employees.

More information is better.

Wes, I have no idea where you were going with your last post. Please explain what point you are trying to make.

As an interviewer, I look at a lot of resumes. I see them as the price of admission. It gives me an overall idea of their qualifications, strictly from a "can they do the job" perspective. But it tells me little about their work ethic, which I think is just as important.

I like to occasionally call a past business reference (if they provide one) to get a feel for how well the employee "fit in", e.g. regularly came in on time, got along with others, was energetic, etc. Even personal references saying the candidate is a good friend, always there to help out when needed, has a good sense of humor, etc. Sometimes what they don't say is telling as well.

I have sometimes called them personally before an interview. Anything to filter the stack and narrow the list to the best choices.

As an interviewee (a hopeful new employee), I WANT my prospective employer to find out as much as possible about me from people other than myself. I think I present myself OK on interviews, but I have had some bad experiences with people I have hired with great presentation skills, but that showed themselves to be horrible employees.

More information is better.Good question, Rob.

Here are my points:
Like it or not, during the "application phase" the candidate is always at a disadvantage with the employer.

Unless it is a government or union job with the wages posted in advance, the candidate has no clue of what the REAL wage range is (regardless of the notations some ads have of "up to $50,000, depending on experience") The real value of perks and benefits is also pretty cloudy at the application phase. The EMPLOYER, however, knows what he is willing to pay and has a vested interest in getting a higher value individual for less pay.
The candidate has no clue and few ways of finding out what the real work situation will be like, even AFTER an interview. However, an employer who is skillful can elicit a lot of information about the candidate before even offering him an interview by cross-examining references. I have known references (among acquaintances, myself included) who tell candidates not to disclose their names until after an interview because we have been annoyed by clerks calling us as part of the screening process to "verify references" versus a person who will make the hiring decision calling us in a collegial manner as peers, say, "I interviewed John Smith today for a job as _________. He gave your name as reference. What do you know about Mr. Smith that would make him a good fit for this job?"
Sad to say, many candidates do not really think through their choice of references and give the names of people who have little personal knowledge and even less incentive to give the candidate a good sendoff. The common resume format gives little room for explaining the relationship between candidate and reference. This kind of information can be gleaned in the employer-candidate interview process so the interviewer can have a more meaningful dialog with the reference or even ignore the reference entirely if it was some supervisor who barely knew the candidate among 2 dozen other employees.
Some references may have very meaningful information about a candidate, but they are terrible in phone interviews. A poor interview with a reference could knock out a worthy candidate before he gets a chance to impress the employer.
How well the candidate fit in somewhere else is ABSOLUTELY NO PREDICTOR of how the candidate will fit in with your organization unless the cultures are absolutely the same (a statistical improbability.) Similarly for on-time, absenteeism, etc.
The most telling thing in your letter, Rob, is the thing I am writing about in another thread:
I have sometimes called them personally before an interview. Anything to filter the stack and narrow the list to the best choices.
Essentially, what you say here is that you are looking for reasons to eliminate candidates, not for reasons to hire them. You still need to interview the candidate before you make the final hiring decision.
Let me suggest that you at least give a phone interview to the candidate prior to calling any references to give yourself a higher efficiency ratio in the hiring process.

How well the candidate fit in somewhere else is ABSOLUTELY NO PREDICTOR of how the candidate will fit in with your organization unless the cultures are absolutely the same (a statistical improbability.) Similarly for on-time, absenteeism, etc.


I respectfully, but strongly, disagree. This goes against both common sense and personal experience. Why interview at all? You're saying, essentially, that the same must apply to productivity, ability to do a certain job/task, etc. The past is of no use in predicting the future? If a guy was able to drive a truck in acceptable manner for a million miles a year for the last 3 years for company X, is this not a predictor (an imperfect predictor, but better than randon chance) as to whether he will be able to do the same for company Y? If a guy showed up for work every day, on-time, for the last 3 years for company X, you think he isn't more likely to have a similar record for a new company? :confused:

My resume is broken down into the following fields:


Objective
What I Can Do For You
Accomplishments and Responsibilties
Education
Additional Activities (fyi, things like volunteer work, committees, etc.)


I make no list of or reference to the my references. I figure, if they want they list, they can ask me after they have spoken with me.

My information is all in bullet form with italics, etc. to help break up the contents. I am also a firm believer in white space and an avid follower of "the old font and margin spacing trick" to help keep my resume to a manageable size.

The bullets, however, are rearranged and reworded as necessary for applications. I focus on the words that are important to the company from their ad in the paper and from their website (if known). Same goes for my cover letter which states the source of the job ad (e.g., the postion of XXX placed in Workopolis dated 16-Aug-04) - I also will respond to ad within 3 days of it being placed. Any more and I have missed the boat in my mind.

But the resume and cover letter are simply an introduction to Roxane Beyette. It gets my foot in the door. The resume is my chance to really prove who I am and why I'd make an excellent addition to their Team! :applause:

I respectfully, but strongly, disagree. This goes against both common sense and personal experience. Why interview at all? You're saying, essentially, that the same must apply to productivity, ability to do a certain job/task, etc. The past is of no use in predicting the future? If a guy was able to drive a truck in acceptable manner for a million miles a year for the last 3 years for company X, is this not a predictor (an imperfect predictor, but better than randon chance) as to whether he will be able to do the same for company Y? If a guy showed up for work every day, on-time, for the last 3 years for company X, you think he isn't more likely to have a similar record for a new company? http://elsmar.com/Forums/images/smilies/confused.gifI apologize to everyone who got the same understanding to my post as Mike S did. My point is the reference from someone with whom the candidate was employed is NOT limited to "If a guy was able to drive a truck in acceptable manner for a million miles a year for the last 3 years for company X," kind of stuff. If the candidate didn't put that in his resume, shame on him, but I would think less of a candidate if I had to cross-examine his references to get FACTUAL information which should have been in the resume (if it was going to be pertinent to the job opening under my control.)

If the guy had perfect attendance, was it because he lived within walking distance in a land of eternal sun, but what if he comes to your company and has to commute forty miles through snow and ice PLUS now has two small children and a working wife? Or vice-versa (bad attendance at last job in snow and ice with small kids, snow days, and working wife - now kids are grown and your company is in the Sunbelt - will his attendance improve?) This is what I mean about the perils of inferring future behavior from past behavior. If the candidate was well loved at his past employment, but someone at your company sees him as a threat and bad mouths him once he comes to work, what's your first thought? That the reference lied? or that maybe, just maybe, conditions between the two workplaces may be different? If the latter, why is my theory so hard to understand? If the former, no further response is necessary.

My point was, and remains: For the hiring company, it is more efficient to sort resumes, then do phone interviews with candidates (POSSIBLY IN PERSON, IF NO MAJOR TRAVEL IS INVOLVED), then make a decision about checking references (tell the candidate, "I'm pretty impressed with our interview, but I want to check some of your references.")

If the candidate hasn't given any references in his resume, does that automatically remove him/her from consideration? If so, that means you'd miss out on an excellent prospect like Roxane (who certainly shows her mettle in her posts here at the Cove.)

The danger here is to say, "I do it this way. Therefore it is the only correct way. Any other way is wrong." I am not saying you cannot get a good candidate by doing everything the opposite of the way I suggest in recruiting and interviewing. I am saying there is less wasted motion and less likelihood of eliminating good candidates if you make your own assessment of a candidate prior to checking references. I would be surprised if anyone gave references who would say the candidate was not the ideal employee for anyone lucky enough to have him, especially in light of so many successful lawsuits by candidates against former employers who gave bad references. I have frequently offered my services to folks in the job hunt as a potential employer to check their references and how the reference deals with a potential employer. No lawsuits yet, but I have counseled a few job hunters to eliminate certain people from their reference list.

We'll cover this concept of choosing and coaching references in the thread about gatekeepers.

Thanks for staying with the thread, Mike.

My resume is broken down into the following fields:

Objective
What I Can Do For You
Accomplishments and Responsibilties
Education
Additional Activities (fyi, things like volunteer work, committees, etc.)


Excellent, RC! Bulleted Lists! Yes, yes!
Objective gets tweaked for every job and jives with the cover letter. I can be employed as a manufacturing engineer, plant manager, or quality manager. Three different objectives, one purpose: salary.

What I Can Do For You/Accomplishments & Responsibilities (I combine these and use real numbers). E.g. mfg. eng. resume the plant modification and savings accomplishments go first. QM resume the successful ISO9k registration goes first.

I would add a list of PERTINENT job history here and WHY it is pertinent. If you've held 18 jobs since your 16th birthday (and you're 40!) don't list the lawn mowing and McDonald's, just list the jobs that support your interest/qualification for the specific position.

Education. Again, list only what's pertinent. The person hiring you as Quality Manager doesn't need to know you have a PhD in Renaissance Art. They are interested in all those sanctioned TS auditing classes.

I leave off the Activities Stuff unless it's pertinent. If applying for a job in Salt Lake City, enjoying snow skiing is good, enjoying beach volleyball is not.

Finally, leave just enough white space to set off your lists, use small margins, don't give anyone room to write a book on your paper and photocopy it.

Never, ever put references on a resume. If your interviewer wants them, and is a professional, they will ask. Give your self a chance to tailor your references to the interviewer/position. I consider it a sign of professionalism and courtesy to call your reference (verifying the number) and give them a heads up BEFORE giving their name to an interviewer. Have a nice chat then tell them the name of the person that will be calling, company name, and the position you're after. Give a little coaching and prep (remind them how great you are at that thing the interviewer kept coming back to).

One reference I called had worked with the interviewer and THEY HATED EACH OTHER (what a bonehead move it would have been to give that name to the interviewer). Another quite frankly said that they would not recommend me for the specific job, then talked me out of it. They were right!

Wow, I'm channeling Wes! -Icy

Wow, I'm channeling Wes! -IcyWow! If a can channel now while I'm still alive, imagine the power I'll have when I die!:D

Ok. We contributed to this thread about writing resumes.

Did anyone rewrite and send a resume after reading this thread?
Did it get any response?
Do you think this thread was helpful?
If not, what more would you like to see?

Ok. We contributed to this thread about writing resumes.

Did anyone rewrite and send a resume after reading this thread?
Did it get any response?
Do you think this thread was helpful?
If not, what more would you like to see?
Most especially, I'd like to know if any of the info in this thread was helpful to anyone.

As I am a recent college graduate always looking for ways to increase my chances in the competive market of today, I eagerly read through the thread today. Previously, I had never considered including references within my resume, for I feel that they should be used as a follow up from an interview. I agree with whoever said a reference shouldn't be the deciding factor prior to personal discussions with the employer...they should be supplementary...included to support information elicited in the interview.
As for beneficial, I would say yes, although I was hoping for "meat." throughout the thread. Perhaps some do's and don't's. What about interview suggestions and helpful hints? :)

Perhaps some do's and don't's. What about interview suggestions and helpful hints?

How about we start off with the negatives and wrap up with the positives? :)

Don't...be late! (even if the interviewer is late, that is no excuse for you!)
Don't...fiddle with pencils, papers and/or other inanimate objects during the interview (can be interpreted as a sign of nervousness, tension or lying).
Don't...lie and say you have skills in an area you don't. If you don't know, that's okay...but focus rather on your ability to learn quickly!
Don't...talk about other interviews (especially with competitors) in detail.
Don't...slouch, drag your feet or in any other way resemble Quasimodo!
Don't...speak with "umm's", 'ahh's" and other delaying speech patterns. If you need to stall for time, indicate that a very good question was asked and that you are attempting to highlight a particular good example that will address it.
Don't...blame former employers or sound bitter.
Don't...ask if you "got the job" at the end of the interview.
Don't...wear open toe'd shoes or fancy dress shoes if applying for a job in manufacturing. Be prepared with your own steel-toes (some of them are even rather fancy looking nowadays!) and your own PPE (e.g., safety glasses, hard hat, etc.)
Don't...ask for a pen and paper to take notes.
Don't...run up and have a conversation with a friend who works there (this can embarass both of you!).

Do...arrive on time (taking into consideration a potential wait period with Reception).
Do...plan a route on arriving at the final destination (including an alternate or two in case of construction or an accident).
Do...ensure you have a solid and confident handshake (I really hate wimpy handshakes...I'll tone it down, however, if I get an initial wimpy handshake first).
Do...check up on the Organization prior to the interview. This will allow to form some good questions as well as be some what knowledgeable about the company, their products/services, their philosophies, their hiring practices, etc.
Do...look at yourself in the mirror before walking into the building. Tie skewed? Hair all windblown? Lipstick smudged?
Do...bring extra copies of your resume. This is in case your resume was lost, has be updated and/or there are additional people in the room who do not have a copy.
Do...sound positive about the company and its potential and how much you would love to be a part of their winning team!
Do...turn your cell phone/pager/handheld device off.
Do...ask what the next stage or step is at the end of the interview.
Do...be prepared! Bring all supplies you may need (e.g., stationary, writing tools, PPE, etc.)
Do...ask relevent questions to the job. Not just what are the current job responsibilities, but where does the interviewer (assuming person is related to the vacant position in a manner) see the position evolving to? Questions on work environment and culture are important.
Do...know your resume off by heart and be ready to back it up. Think of examples to provide evidence that the resume is right.
Do...be unique with your answers to the standard questions of "What are your strengths?", "What is your weakest characteristic?", "What do feel you can bring to this Organization?"

All good points, Roxane.
To elaborate:
The employer is convinced you look good on paper, or else you would not have gotten to the interview stage. He really wants to know if you'll fit in if he hires you and if you'll be productive for the organization.

Depending on the skill of the interviewer (some have absolutely NO SKILL and even less manners), you have several options throughout the interview:
If the interviewer seems skillful, go with the flow, answer questions in complete sentences. Give a concrete example to emphasize a skill, such as ("I am skilled in organization. I created a computer filing and retrieving system which cut the average time to find and retrieve any document or record from two hours to five minutes, freeing one full-time clerk to take on other duties.")

If the interviewer is NOT skillful, you have to determine whether it is an individual quirk or an organization-wide malaise, which will color your decision whether you want to work there. If you make that decision and still want the job, you have to keep the interviewer on track and continually lead him into question topics where you will shine merely by telling the truth. If he digresses to asking off topic questions, you can use those as a segue to lead into one of your strengths. If he asks something stupid like, "How did you like your boss?" and you and your boss were ready to kill each other, you might respond, "One of the things I liked most about that job was dealing with a wide variety or personalities. I really enjoy being part of a team working together toward continually improving our system."

There is a fine line about the kinds of questions you can ask during an interview. You can ask about the number of people who might be in the team you'd work with. You shouldn't be asking general questions about the company and what they do - you should know that from research prior to the interview. You can, however, ask if your position is a replacement position or a new one due to expansion. If expansion (probably not public info), you can ask if they plan to hire a lot of new folks or just a few - i.e. stuff that will affect the work situation of the position you apply for.

The idea of a separate thread about interviewing strikes me as a good idea. I'll think about it for a day or two before starting one.