But a photograph would make me immediately pass. There's no way for me to be sure I can avoid prejudice. I already hate that resumes include names/addresses in such a prominent place. Those should be off to the side, so they can easily be removed before the resume even gets to me.
> The flashy résumés are colliding with efforts by employers to strip down CVs to their most basic elements—coding skills, college degrees, work histories—to reduce bias in hiring. Many companies run résumés through tools called applicant tracking systems that remove photos and other design embellishments. Others are looking for ways to blind out even names and addresses, which could reveal gender, race or socioeconomic status.
Exactly! We should be trying to reduce bias in hiring, not add to it. This is exactly what is meant by "privilege". Either they're hoping to get hired based on how they look, or they don't realize or care that they're creating more work for someone else to strip out all this junk before anyone can read it.
Germany has these problems too.
Great write up in either the first or second Freakonomics book about how adversely impacting being called Jasmin is in the the US.
There's also white people names that will get your resume trashed for implying low class but they tend to lack the aural flare that stereo-typically low class black people names have.
Lower class names are going to be the cliche'd, trying-to-be-different names like Corbin, Jameson, McKenna, Liam, Elijah, Aiden, Kaydon, Grayson, Mason, etc.
I still think CVs with _pie charts_ are pretty weird, tho...
Really? That's funny. Did they just throw up a text box for you to fill in?
I occasionally write rude things into it like "stop asking me, you idiots". Not very professional, I suppose. Of either of us.
(source: graduated there)
I don't like it though, I don't see how a picture is relevant to a resume.
Perhaps we should do phone only interviews with voice changing tech.
Out of interest I searched and read a guide and lo and behold, it is no longer recommended for anyone - except for applying for apprenticeships.
Soo, you're fighting discrimination by being discriminatory? That's bonkers to me!
I really don't want anything to do with the recruiting and hiring process.
What is going on here is discrimination on a (presumptively) legal basis to avoid risk of discrimination on an illegal basis.
 there is some possibility of inadvertent illegal “adverse impact” discrimination here.
These resumes certainly "look good", but they aren't useful. Obviously, it doesn't matter what your resume looks like if you're Elon Musk - you're getting the interview anyway.
With visualized resumes, the user is sacrificing the ability to provide a more robust list of accomplishments, or perhaps to provide additional details and context for the accomplishments they have listed.
If you are junior level and don't have many accomplishments to mention, a visualized resume might get their attention. For senior level candidates or even mid-career folks who have already done a thing or two, these resumes look like an ill-fitting suit.
Don't distract your reader with fancy formatting. Using a simple format allows the reader to focus entirely on what is important (your body of work) without being distracted.
This argument never seemed to hold any water for me. Ok, most cases of "discrimination lawsuit" were because people were discriminated negatively, not positively. Wouldn't discarding the resume _because it has a picture_ have the exact result that the person discriminated person complained of? If that is so, it seems NOT accepting the resume would open you to lawsuits, not accepting it. Yet, I don't see a lot of fuss being made about job-seekers claiming discrimination because of CV pictures out there.
Of course, it's probably easier if you can prove that you discard _all_ CV's with pictures anyways. But have some exceptions go through and you might get screwed.
Regardless, if you don't have a clearly stated policy of dismissing CV's with pictures, it just feels like an asshole move, frankly.
That's exactly why it's done.
(with a recommendation to check whether it is allowed in the specific destination country):
>Add your photo only if required. Check local provisions in the country where you intend to send your CV.
As a mid level developer with 3 years of experience in catalog design / AdobeIndesign, I can fit way more technical content on a PDF than I could on a traditional word doc. I have full control over the font type, kerning, whitespacing, layout, etc. You have to use design to enhance the technical presentation, it should never be the centerpoint. Most design resumes I've seen don't do it right.
I usually use 2 resumes, a ATS friendly parsed one via Google docs and another one pager minimalistic colored PDF.
That said, still not as much of an impression as a good cover letter written to demonstrate how their strengths match the vacancy.
- I hired one of the best technical professional writers to help me write a better google doc resume. This took about one month of iterative question/answer comments. Said person is actually the comment above my original comment
- I went and found the best resume designs online, normally from UI/UX designers working at FAANG companies (bestfolios.com/resume). I studied these extensively and took the best elements from various resumes.
- I also have a lot of experience in outsourcing work. I found a designer with similar skills as mine. We did a 10-15 hour design cycle essentially reinventing the resume, this came out to about 100 design iterations. Font-sizes, font-types, white-spacing, font ratio-sizes, greyscale support, layout, were all considerations done.
- I took resume, over another a month and asked developer friends for blind feedback. I think I asked at least 20 or 30 developers. They dumped dropbox comments on the version-controlled PDF, I took every suggestion to heart and considered whether it made sense. Sometimes I would load my resume with bad typos, errors, and sometimes bad designs intentionally as a control to vet the best reviewers. If they didn't catch those errors, I wouldn't take the feedback as seriously.
- I asked my friend who is a senior instructor at LinkedIn/Lynda.com for feedback. Usually this feedback was more tailored toward content.
- I have a background in HR as well. I know what gets read and what doesn't. That being said, while I did job hunt I also asked for feedback from my recruiter friends. I learned how ATS parsing worked after applying to many jobs, most ATS parsers show you previews of what gets uploaded. Some recruiters use word doc resumes, I got to see how they modified my files and present it to prospective employers. This gave me more benchmarks on what content employers actually like to see. My good friend is a recruiter too so I get insights all the time.
- Potential employers told me what they liked best about the resume. I kept those and amplified it. These were generally svg skill-icons
- Sometimes, I noticed recruiters would struggle to find content, usually this was skills tied for specific projects. I decided to use a key-legend style approach found in geographic maps, people overall liked it.
- I decided to clickmine the resume. I wanted to do actual data analytics in how often my resume's links actually got clicked. I used bit.ly to track how different user groups would click on different parts of resume, this was done in different user testing cycles. I noticed trends in what people clicked who knew me, vs employers who did not.
So... to see what feedback works. Just ask your friends, employers, recruiters, etc what improvements you can make. Look at what recruiters are actually doing to your word doc resumes. Is your resume self-explanatory (are employers asking you to explain it)? If it's not ... then it's not doing a good job.
That being said, you should really tailor your resume to each job. I still do via a google doc or quickly one-off mod my PDF. But sometimes you don't have too, especially for one-click apply sites / services.
For the record I never use cover letters unless a company explicitly wants it. I don't recommend anyone going down this path of making your own resume, it takes a lot of time and effort.
I only did it because I didn't like any of the resume designs out there. Having a designer resume as a frontend developer is a complimentary skillset anyhow. Also during an interview, I never talk about the resume design process whatsoever. It speaks for itself.
If your curious this is what it looks like:
30 seconds is about the time you have to grab someone's attention. If they don't see something that ticks a few boxes in that time, they'll move on to the next resume.
I've had to sort through a lot of resumes over the years and when you have a stack to go
through and project deadlines approaching - you need to go through them fairly fast.
Basically, I'm not going to try and read a long description of achievements and skills gained. Not even dot points. I'm looking for where you've worked and for how long to gauge overall experience, how long you stayed in roles and the kinds of companies worked at. Knowing someone worked at a particular company gives a lot of info about their potential exposure to tools and technologies.
So, if your resume can get that across in those first 30 seconds, it will get read in full later once you're down to a handful of potential candidates.
Those info-graphic style resumes are appalling and not what you want to try and parse unless the person's job role will be creating info-graphics.
I have two resumes, my master long form document which covers everything I've ever done, and my "working" resume, which is what I tend to send out, and might get lightly massaged for positions.
It shows additionally effort, creativity, and style.
But if your hiring is based solely on what you can input into a computer, crunch the numbers and spit out the top candidates, then you might as well just have your candidates fill out an online form. Maybe even make it multiple choice to avoid any possible individualism.
A resumé is advertising. A more comprehensive document should follow after the initial culling.
If they send their resume somewhere that likes that, then good for them.
In this field a design with something like familiar grey/white fixed-width type on a matte black background, ascii table outlines, and “syntax” highlighting, etc, etc, would probably get some more attention (good or bad)
Peer pressure for the win! Just keep correcting out of touch people
> “That was to show they hustle like no one else,” says John Lowe, the company’s chief executive. “That is an important attribute that we prize.”
That has to be one of the most ridiculous things I've heard
* Cover letter
* Resume: one and a half pages
* Writing sample: eight pages
* A glamour shot of Vayner
* Seven-minute video that features the following feats by Vayner:
* Interview: gives advice for achieving life goals
* Bench press: 495 pounds (225 kilograms)
* Downhill skiing with jumps
* Tennis serve: 140 miles per hour (225 km/h or 63 m/s)
* Ballroom dancing with a female dancer
* Karate chop: seven bricks broken
Just checked, that is a 2009 episode, thus/possible created in 2008, so the aforementioned CV predated that of the HIMYM TV series
Thanks for the link.
Unfortunately if you don't, you'll get people asking you "what were you doing in 2009??"
Because apparently the thought of giving someone a job who might have once not had one, regardless of their relevant skills, is the worst thing a recruiter can think of.
Is that not right though? If you had a gap you might decide to have another. Regular employees get offers from competitors and use that to get salary upgrades. Gap-enabled employees do not need the offers and can just leave your company whenever they want.
I have a 10 month gap between graduating college and my first permanent full time software job. Nobody's ever asked me about it and I don't have trouble getting interviews.
I have a lot of work experience though.
And then of course never contacting or following up with those candidates.
So there is obviously little effort put into the review process, so it makes sense that candidates don't make effort to customize their application for each potential company.
The reality is people with these kind of resumes are trying to game the word search systems, which look for specific experience. It’s a sound strategy for automated systems, not so much for humans.
I personally think 2 pages is enough to get you in the door. So I expect 2 pages or less, but don’t penalize too much for large resumes. I just won’t read past the first page.
I have yet to encounter a case where people applied and they weren’t even remotely a fit. When that happens I may consider changing this strategy.
In the UK I used to use monster etal as a way to hit my required quota of job applications - in the UK you have to in theory spend x hours a week and submit n job applications or you may lose your JSA (unemployment pay)
I was told to interview him anyway since someone working there vouched for him and he turned out to be a great hire.
If the problem is you don't want to read everything by everyone then just read the first three and make your decision. You don't have to physically scroll if you feel you learned enough.
Try asking for a summary of the important information in the job ad. How many years - ruby. last three jobs, school. It will be easier to filter them that way.
Is this unreasonable?
Figure out what experience is useful for the job and write a cover letter. Most of the experience a seasoned employee has probably isn't relevant on the surface level to a hiring manager.
"It sounds like from the job description you're looking to do <X>. I've done <Y> which is very similar to <X> in most respects."
When applying for jobs out of school, I was told:
1. I needed to "tell stories" about myself (doesn't matter if they're true)
2. I needed to boast in my resume about my "accomplishments" using buzzwords
3. I needed to have some kind of catchy elevator pitch describing myself
4. I needed at least one "playful" descriptor (e.g. "semicolon enthusiast" or something like that)
5. Lying on your resume is expected and totally fine
6. I needed to apply for ~10 positions a week
All of these things made me deeply uncomfortable. I don't think self-description is possible. We reveal ourselves through our actions and nothing matters less than "how you view yourself". When people attempt to describe themselves they tend to list things that they want other people to believe about them but have no correspondence in reality.
I disregarded all of this advice and worked really hard on my projects. I didn't do any "coding interview prep" and during my interviews I admitted when I didn't know something and explained what I thought I knew about it. This worked well for me; I didn't have any trouble finding a job.
I don't know about marketing, but if I received a CV with this I'd most likely throw it straight in the trash. I don't want CVs to be unique, I judge people based on merit. The more basic the CV the better in my opinion. Just the other day I was slightly upset when someone showed me a candidates LinkedIn profile containing quite a non-professional picture because it immediately put me off a bit.
Hiring is a two-way negotiation, and while I'm sure the grandparent doesn't see it that way, assertive declarations like "I don't want CVs to be unique, I judge people based on merit." are a workplace smell that some people don't want in exactly the same way that photos in a CV are.
It makes the boss sound like someone who values conformance and hates diversity. Maybe unfairly, but impressions are everything at this stage of a relationship.
To wit: if you really want to hire good people "based on merit", you need to stop being so judgy about the oddballs.
Personally, I'd prefer to just be valued based on my skills and work product. The alternatives risk being possibly very bad in my experience: possibly valuing politics, nepotism, etc., which obviously gets toxic and unfair very quickly.
I'm not saying people need to hire based on who's got a better photo on their resume. I'm saying that you shouldn't be surprised when people take your rhetoric about that stuff as a signal that you aren't going to be as fair a boss as you might think you are.
And maybe that's unfair. I've certainly never worked for you. But you need to be willing to market to free spirits if you actually want to hire the best people.
However, I really am a free spirit, having an exceptionally non-traditional path than most, and that is actually a good reason to want to work for someone who values skills and results foremost.
Don't be judgy about irrelevant stuff, is my point. Some people don't want to work for judgy conservatives, basically.
2. it is critical to remove subconscious bias in the hiring process.
3. the only effective means to do so as a society is to handicap those who take advantage of subconscious biases.
marketing in itself is less than a zero-sum game; it's players are parasites on the working class. we should all do our part to reduce it's effects.
"parasites on the working class" indeed.
Likewise, I don’t expect my coworkers to care about my hobbies. Most of them would be horrified to find out.
Bad things don't always come from malice.
Often even education is no longer a useful signal. I've found myself looking away from educational information on resumes for all but the most junior of applicants. A candidate with even a couple of years of experience is lightyears removed from the school that has granted their degree. Likewise, a person with a similar number of years on the job but lacking a degree is similarly removed from their humble beginnings. There's no need to flaunt education.
In that sense, he's right: that system works for both sides.
Technical skills, attitude, work ethic, communication skills, and professionalism are really all you need to work with your colleagues successfully. Hobbies, pet preference, and exercise preference is irrelevant.
How about a love of dance or photography?
We go to work to get paid for our skills, not to go camping together or share our love of bird watching.
What if a hobby included volunteering at a church, mosque, local GOP or DNC fundraising HQ, re-enacting War simulations or practicing at a gun range?
I agree with the posters above who think this is, at best, useless and at worst, a potential for discrimination.
I can imagine tech jobs where most of the hobbies you've listed could be considered relevant. Dance? Biometric sensor tech. Guns? Video games. And so on...
>We go to work to get paid for our skills, not to go camping together or share our love of bird watching.
Some people prefer to work on teams where they're treated more like humans and less like cogs in a machine.
If you hire chess players based on individual performance and regardless of group dynamics, then an argument could be made (not entirely trivially in all cases but it could be) that looking at anything except their ELO is illegitimate bias (and in fact some famous players from Lasker to Korchnoi said themselves that it's this objectivity which attracted them to chess). With programming, or most professions involving something meaningful as opposed to a measurable but pointless (and usually measurable because it is pointless) activity aka sport, it's much murkier.
If you're not going to bother getting to know your colleagues (to make communication more efficient) than what's the added value of going to an office at all?
Am I making wrong assumptions about the use of going to an office?
I do wonder how putting your interests in the CV makes the company care? Where I work there is plenty of care regardless if you put it on your CV or not.
However, I’ve been told that it’s most useful as hook so that interviewers have something to remember beyond “dev from good school” or “consultant living in NYC”, which might describe a huge fraction of the candidate pool.
Another use I've heard mention is that being into team sports could signal that you're trained at communicating and "working" in a team.
Not sure I buy that, but yeah that's what they taught us at school about building a resume.
I'm not so sure about that. I like using unusual words because it adds a bit of color. The words should still be natural, though, not like you were trying too hard.
I guess the tricky part is hitting the balance of writing just enough but not any more.
Sometimes compatibility isn't really based on shared interests or other things that, well, make sense. Sometimes people work out that you can't really rationalize.
It also depends on what type of dating you're interested in - it's way less important for casual dating and hookups. With that you're more likely to filter yourself out than increase the chances of success.
For more serious dating for someone that cares about their partner having shared interests, etc., then yes, being filtered out is a feature and not a bug.
The goal of the dating website is to get a date. You do that by finding someone who seems interesting and who does not have any red flags. Why put out more information than is needed and give more for people to find something wrong with you?
Better to assume that most players on Tinder want Criterion, but pick Netflix.
With those little tidbits of virtue signaling that you choose to put in the resume usually give the opportunity for the reviewer to see you as more the “just a react dev” and depending on how many people your are competing with - gives you the edge.
Experience speaks for itself, and if you have the creds then sure those things can look like pure cruft, but what if you’re just starting out? You need something to stand out, and like it or not most reviewers are humans too, even worse - are not strictly technical, so if you for example like to run, mention that in your resume, and the HR person is also a runner, well he can recommend you based on “gut feeling” and how “runners are more emotionally stable and reliable” or some such.
And if by a chance their resume ends up reviewed and judged negatively base on non technical prejudice or something, well you’re better of not working there anyway, as it will probably be damaging emotionally in the long run.
These days I’d rather hire someone slightly less qualified that’s easy to work with than someone who looks perfect on paper and is going to cause me all sorts of problems. Especially when you run a business and are responsible for HR issues.
I can’t even remember the last time I really read a CV. What someone’s done in the past is only relevant in certain instances.
If you needed more vetting on the inbound, then it's easier to just source candidates another way than to try to read the resume tea leaves.
People do this sort of thing to test hiring biases all the time. Ideally you'd be doing it from a university and have an ethics board and people experienced with experiment design overseeing what you're doing to help ensure you're doing it right.
A resumé is not a biography.
It' a pitch.
When was the last time anyone tried to sell you a product or service with a white sheet of paper and black ink? Exactly.
The six page--or ten page--credentials document is for the interview.
For a recent project management position, Facebook received 10,000 resumés. That's too many for the HR department ro review. FB, like many others, use automated systems to weed through these. Graphic and marketing details, innovations, are lost.
You can try to game the system: post the job requirements in a white font on white so all the keywords are there. But this is an inexact science.
For a small to medium size business, the "new" c.v. has as good or better chance than the traditional c.v.
As mentioned elsewhere in the comments here, hiring is a two-way street. Certain industries and professions don't appreciate this creative approach, however young folks entering the workforce are fighting to be seen above the crowds. If your company is particular about specific information and formatting, use an applicant tracking system and/or job board that forces your applicants to apply your way. But if you ask for resumes to an email account, or if colleges are still requesting "resume drops" for firms looking to hire on-campus, then folks are going to try grab attention to move the process forward in any way they can.
I do not envy the cohorts surviving in this market/model. I feel we screwed things up, allowing HR to drive to this, and I feel we overplay "selling" in hiring, instead of letting people reach out and find like minds. I realize its a highly competitive market, but I think we've allowed the distortions to overtake the real intent.
I do not believe this is a good model. I do not want to participate or facilitate this model of resume/CV and hiring.
Maybe 25% of resumes that I see hit all of these criteria. If you can't pay attention to detail on a one-page resume that you update every year or two and send out to every job that you apply to, then how can I possibly expect that you are going to pay attention to detail in the code that you write?
20/20 episode on "lookism":
TL;DR of the video: Good looks will get you hired, make you more money, and make people think you're smarter.
It's a thing I've reckoned with my entire life, though I only really realized what it was in the last 5 years.
I also do this as an EE (Europe area). It just seems very intuitive to me that people would be more likely to remember a face than just a name on a card after whatever brief meeting (especially in a market where this is not a common thing to do). I sure do. I'm horrible with names anyway.
to be totally fair: I have read quite a few business, marketing and sales books. My favorite is probably the classic "Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion" by Robert B. Cialdini. Second would be "Predictably irrational" by Dan Ariely.
Main take away: influencing / selling and getting hired have surprisingly little to do with knowledge, education and IQ. It is more (all?) about human social dynamics and "predictably irrational" human psychology. Case in point: Trump. Think about it.
Isn't this a super open door though? I mean: Tinder? LinkedIN? Instagram? Sales? Marketing?
This isn't exactly a new discovery in the sales and marketing world is it? And since getting a job = sales...
One other plus is that it makes the automatic resume importers work much better.
> “We’re not a lot of crotchety old people who don’t understand how bitmojis work,” says Ms. Posthuma, who is 41. “It looked very juvenile.”
Seems juvenile to overlook the substance of a resume just because the person also shows their personality. It's unfortunate more people don't care about the actual skills needed for the job and instead make hiring decisions on the weirdest possible criteria. My favorite, very common, example: throwing out a resume because it has a typo for positions where typos don't really matter (most positions).
An approach where you stand out seems to make a lot of sense, nevertheless. You can be an "average" candidate and literally never get the job because they're only hiring one person for the position. An approach that turns some off but gets the attention of a few makes sense in many scenarios.
I can understand not caring for it or it not contributing to the resume but it seems strange to see something like that so negatively.
The whole job application system seems like a meta game where the most absurd things get focused on.
It's bizarre that for most employers in the U.S., if you don't dress professionally enough in your interview you won't get a job. Even in jobs where you have a uniform and can't choose your own clothing if you were chosen for the position!
This can cut both ways for folks who gather on Hacker News I think, where for some positions the way to signal you're the type of person who just cares about results is to INTENTIONALLY dress less professionally, weirdly enough. Dressing professionally shouldn't be seen as a negative, either.
And don't get me started on the "firm handshake" people...
If you're applying somewhere big and you haven't established any prior connection then chances are you're going to be screened by some sort of automated system as a first step, so you need to provide sufficient information in sufficiently recognisable terms to clear that hurdle. Sometimes this is little better than a tedious keyword-matching exercise, but it's a necessary first step if you're not in a position to reach a real person at your potential employer from the start.
In any case, the first human being to read your CV/resume and make a real decision on progressing your application or not is probably going to be spending seconds, not minutes, reviewing it. Chances are they'll be looking for your general area(s) of competence and approximate level of experience to see if you fit the required profile, and any obvious red flags that would disqualify you immediately. Anything else is a potentially damaging distraction at this stage.
Subsequent human beings to read your CV/resume will hopefully be involved in the in-person recruiting process, i.e., phone screens, on-site interviews, etc. These people are probably going to spend a bit longer reading now you're on a short(er) list, but they're probably looking for the opposite: what particular qualities or specific accomplishments make you stand out from the crowd as a better candidate?
It follows from the above that an effective CV/resume should probably include just enough filler and buzzwords to get past an automated filter, just enough overview material to show you're the right sort of candidate, and then a few carefully selected highlights to intrigue the people making the real decisions in the later stages and provide interesting interview topics. Anything else, particularly a complete life history including the LOGO program you wrote at age 10 to draw a circle, is wasting everyone's time and just gives more opportunities to get rejected.
If you can't fit that on a single page at any stage in your career then improving your CV/resume writing skills will probably improve your chances of landing that next job (barring certain fields like academia, where expectations are often quite different to most recruitment processes).
I like a well designed resume and I like beautifully written and formatted code.
I've actually considered asking candidates to send me a screenshot of their IDE.
Obviously not at the top of the list of most important data points, but a data point nonetheless.
Some might say that constraints force a pithy communication, but I’ll take a tasteful GIF over a static diagram or dense prose any day.
I could recall the first time I saw one about a decade ago.
Not sure what I would do if I saw an info graphic on a resume.
e.g. Valentino Bogliacino Bueno's highlights on his resume: recruiters are going to skim through his resume and he's catering to that behavior by putting the highlights of his resume prominently up front and center
Resumes have seen a trend towards more and more design because early adopters of excess design had resumes that stood out, leading to greater success in their job search. However, as more and more people do the same, the effects quickly diminish.