Re: Resumes/Interviewing

[John Olds <Jolds -at- sprynet -dot- com>]

Be careful you don't throw out the baby with the bath water!

It's easy to look at only one side of the issue.   True, resumes need to
be
better, however, recruiters and hiring managers need to assess their
needs
better.   What you see on a so-called well written resume is not always
what you
will get.

This is the age of the mobile, connected candidate, with all the tools
for
instant communications.   Some of your best people have just as much a
need to
assess you as you have to assess them.  In today's environment you must
keep it
simple  and use your mobile, connected, communications tools to fill in
the
blanks.  Anything worth having is worth building on.  Don't expect
quantity to
replace quality.  I could say more but, let's build on this for now.

Regards,
John



"Murrell, Thomas" wrote:

> Regarding Resumes, I sympathize with those who want longer resumes
with lots
> of information to help with the screening process.  I know from my own

> experience that when you have a lot of interest in a position, it is a

> challenging and difficult task to weed out those who aren't worth
> interviewing so you can concentrate on those who look worthwhile.  I
would
> like to offer a different perspective.
>
> My objective, as a prospective candidate, is to be "screened in," if
you
> will.  I know that no matter how good my resume appears, I will not be

> offered the job (which I may not want once I've finished the interview

> process anyway).