Tuesday, August 17, 2004
Short Rant About Resumes
I have never been a fan of resume paper. You know, the nice bond paper with the little flecks in it that make it look really expensive. I simply can't imagine a potential employer looking at a resume and saying either of the following things:
A. "Wow! Look at the paper his resume is printed on! Those are some pretty impressive flecks! And a watermark, too! Well, he doesn't really have any experience in the field, and it seems he's been hopping from job to job, but I want to call him in for an interview because this paper makes him seem like a really with-it type of guy."
B. "Ph.D., 25 years of relevant experience, published author, all-around ideal candidate. Yeah, but this resume is on plain white copy paper. I could pull that out of the Xerox machine right now. Doesn't he care enough to give me flecks? Toss it."
The wonderful thing about this debate is that now most resumes are sent electronically, on no paper whatsoever. Tee hee.
A. "Wow! Look at the paper his resume is printed on! Those are some pretty impressive flecks! And a watermark, too! Well, he doesn't really have any experience in the field, and it seems he's been hopping from job to job, but I want to call him in for an interview because this paper makes him seem like a really with-it type of guy."
B. "Ph.D., 25 years of relevant experience, published author, all-around ideal candidate. Yeah, but this resume is on plain white copy paper. I could pull that out of the Xerox machine right now. Doesn't he care enough to give me flecks? Toss it."
The wonderful thing about this debate is that now most resumes are sent electronically, on no paper whatsoever. Tee hee.
Comments: Post a Comment
