5 mistakes you may be making on your resume

iStockphoto

Resumes are marketing documents, so you want yours to portray you in the best light possible. Of course you read it, re-read it, ask your friends and former college roommate, the English major, to read it over. You tweak the format until it's just perfect. But you're still probably making some -- if not all -- of these errors.

1. Your resume reads like a job description. True, there are similarities, but there are also distinct differences. If you write, "Responsible for sales in the Northwest Pennsylvania Territory," that tells me nothing about what you accomplished. It tells me what you should have done, but not what you actually did.

2. There are no numbers on your resume. Numbers bridge corporate cultures. If you write, "Increased revenue," that's nice -- that's a good thing. If you write, "Increased revenue by 25 percent over a three-year period," then that tells me a lot more about what you did. How many people did you supervise? How big was the budget you managed? By what percent did you increase efficiency? How many clients did you have?

3. Your formatting only works on your computer. Not everyone uses the same word processing program that you do, meaning your formatting may not translate. Bullet points disappear. Tabs get shifted. Check how your resume appears in Microsoft Word, Open Office, Google Docs and any other common program before you email it. Formatting problems make you look sloppy even if your resume was perfect when you hit send.

8 simple ways to customize your resume
How to write a resume: 6 steps to take before you start
How to write a resume: Dos and Don'ts

4. It's too long or too short. No, there isn't a secret, perfect length for a resume. But if you're a new college grad with two full pages, you'll look pretentious. And if you're someone with 15 years of experience with everything crammed onto one page, you'll look like you haven't done anything. Scientists and academics need extra pages for their publications. The point is, figure out what is standard for your industry and your time working. The general guideline is one page for new grads, two pages for experienced employees, and extra pages for people with publications.

5. You have an objective statement. I have never -- and I mean this literally -- never seen an "objective statement" help someone get the job. We know what your objective is -- to get a good job with good pay in an environment where you can learn and grow and blah, blah, blah. If you have something unique to say, put it in your cover letter. Take it off your resume. Fire any career coach that tells you to include one.

Have a workplace dilemma?  Send your questions to [e-mail].

[QueenOfRecruiters]

Suzanne, thanks for the points you have made in this article. I agree with many of them, especially when it relates to the "one page myth" and the "unneeded objective statement". I have preached for years that an objective is the death of a resume.

I also agree the candidate's resume should be about the accomplishments, not just a bland list of roles and tasks. When I am reading a candidate's resume, I need to see how effective they were in past positions, not just what duties they were assigned.

However, to cchardwick's point, the candidate needs to be able to articulate HOW they planned, executed and measured those accomplishments.

Angela Roberts

[bobnjersey]

[I have never -- and I mean this literally -- never seen an "objective statement" help someone get the job]
-------------------------------------
i have interviewed hundreds of candidates ... and i would say that there should never be any one thing that decides whether someone gets a job or not ... it's just too complex a process to evaluate a correct match for a candidate w/ the limited exposure you have to them.

i believe that a candidates objective is probably one of the most important things ... since if that objective is not in line w/ what the job can offer ... you're going to have at least one side of that deal that falls short of the expectation.

the 'statement' itself ... as is referenced in the example above is no doubt a boilerplate and therefore fairly useless ... but understanding what a candidate wants from a job ... and whether what's being offered as the position ... is likely the most important point of assessment for deciding on whether someone is right for the job.

[cchardwick]

I don't agree at all with the first three points, in fact this advice will hurt your resume. I've been reviewing resumes for years and have recently seen some really bad ones with advice from websites like this. I'm in the science field and when someone says they increased productivitiy by 25% I ask them in the interview how they measured that, how accurate is it, is that plus or minus ten percent or one hundred percent? It reads like it's all bull that someone just threw out there, not someone I would want to hire for a scientific project that needs precise measurements.

[Faxon100]

Her concise points are well made and for me, well received. I appreciate her noting that the "one page only" rule of thumb is dead, as is the "objective". Those are rules left over from the 1970's how-to-write-a-resume guidebook and it is amazing how resilient such out-dated advice is.

She is correct about format issues. Yes, PDF's are great if you can use them. But as several others pointed out, sometimes this format is not accepted. That is unfortunate; the only solution is a very dumb looking, very ugly non-layout. While I do not know all the whys about requiring a word format, I doubt that major corporations are allowing HR to set national/international recruiting standards based on the fact that they are "lazy".

[mrashid2010]

To effectively avoid formatting issues described in the article, in my personal experience, one can always convert his/her resume into an Adobe document, which preserves the document formats to a great extent. Additionally it also makes document much lighter in size and manageable while sharing them via emails etc.

[Stevefoxy]

Suzanne, contrary to some of her readers, is insanely on target, correct, and congruent. Yes, this is just the tip of the proverbial iceberg, however similar errors are made over and over again to this present second. If you have not been exposed to more than 4,000 job applicants and their draft or actual resume, how would you know what Suzanne is talking about? She limited her article to 5 of virtually 100s of mistakes, omissions, and, kindly, "inaccuracies" committed daily by resume publishers who don't trust anyone to guide them. For those of you who clicked on Suzanne's article seeking advice, I have a list of veteran colleagues who will agree with her including my own coach and resume books (plural) author, Susan Whitcomb...to name one. Yes, resumes still matter. It's up to you to stay current and craft iterations that will read well on all devices.

[A8LOOONG]

Bravo on #5 Suzanne!! I wondered about that one. I hear recruiters emphasize putting that portion in a resume all too often.

[RevenantOne]

Opinions are like a-holes, right?
The commenters here trash an article that is right because its not a 100 page, all inclusive guide to everything resume. Screw that. I like quick and short tips and found the article to be quick, infomative, thought provocing, and mostly accurate.

I say mostly because I agree and disagree with the last point about the objective statement. I always include and objective statement in my resume and never would dream of removing it. Why? Because it is the part of the resume that, if you are 100% honest about your real objective and intentions, allows you to interview the company to make sure they are right for you. If you lose the interviewer at your objective, then the place is probably not the best fit for you personality, goals, skills educations, or any other part of you. The problem is, people make their objective statements exactly like what the author of this article says, generic crap about growing with a great company all-such ass kissery. My objective statement on my resume reads as such...

I AM SEEKING TO JOIN A PROGRESSIVE ORGANIZATION THAT UNDERSTANDS THE VALUE OF ELECTRONIC MARKETING AND SOCIAL MEDIA AS A CORNERSTONE FOR MODERN DIGITAL BUSINESS.

My objective states my skills, my positions, my qualifications, and my expectations from my employer. If they aren't those things, I usually don't get an interview and that's good for both of us.

[alphaa10000]

Actually, that is not what the "commenters" said about the article, nor did they demand a "100 page, all inclusive guide". Nor did they "trash" the article, but pointed out how it could be improved.

Obviously, the "dumbed-down" version appeals to you a great deal. That may lend support to the editors and their decision to provide an article for those who desperately need "quick and short tips". Certainly, anything is better than nothing, right?

And in defense of Lucas, quite a number of people took issue with her (career) objective criticism, but the fact remains Lucas is an HR veteran, and knows what statements contribute to success.

As for your anatomy lesson, no, everyone's opinion is not the same value, or you would not have posted your own opinion.

BTW, your objective statement about a "progressive organization that understands electronic marketing and social media" cues the interviewer you cannot wait to put their business on Facebook. However, Facebook has its own problems, as businesses have begun to realize.

But worse, you leave the implication that if a business does not want to interview you about your views of "modern digital business", it has no understanding. That is a potentially sharp edge that could deny you an opportunity.

As you say, "screw that" and learn to coexist with people who have more experience and judgment than you. You could learn a lot.

[jsargent100]

I'm not sure which resume article is worse Toni Bowers's from Tech Republic or Suzanne Lucas's here. Atleast both don't like the objective statement which I agree should be on the cover letter. Either way, there's not a lot of information to be had here.

[alphaa10000]

From all appearances, CBS "dumbed-down" the article-- perhaps for fear of losing advertising eye-share. Remember, many in the business world are functional illiterati, by preference. (They. Prefer. Paragraphs. No. Longer than one sentence.)

The Lucas article also demonstrates why actual content is superior to "webese" and empty, marketing pizzaz. Like you, many other readers probably were disappointed in the lack of substance, and the Lucas byline suffers for it, unnecessarily...

Because Lucas, herself, probably knows a great deal more than she indicates, so more the pity. We would like to read of actual cases-- Lucas could substitute the color of anonymous, real-world examples for her somewhat self-absorbed, perky style. She writes (under duress?) as though hers is the audio track of a PowerPoint presentation.

To her credit, however, Lucas may have been told by a CBS editorial assistant or two, "Keep it simple!" Unfortunately, this has predictable results-- CBS standards for both health and business writing commendably emphasize content, but too many writers (and editors) interpret that as something to do with appeal and stylistic flourishes. (Sharyl Attkisson's articles on health, for example, are excellent.)

[BFNZ]

How about the one we had this morning headed "Circulum Vitae" from a 30-something professional. Spell check can only do so much, always have another human proof anything you send.