\u00bb<\/span> CV\/career services<\/a> Have you noticed that many CVs include a self-description at the beginning, above the applicant\u2019s current job? These descriptions go by many names, such as Profile, Executive summary or Strengths, and a lot of online CV advice asserts that they\u2019re an essential component of a CV.<\/p>\n If you\u2019ve got one these self-descriptions \u2014 let\u2019s call them profiles \u2014 in your CV, I suggest you seriously consider flagging it down.<\/p>\n Why? Because in many cases it\u2019ll either be ignored or seen as insulting. One recruiter in an executive recruitment agency commented that \u2014 although he saw a place for profiles when they included information that didn\u2019t fit easily in the main body of the CV \u2014 he generally found them an insult to his competence as a recruiter. \u201cYou tell us what you\u2019ve done\u201d, he said, \u201cand it\u2019s our job to figure out your competencies\u201d.<\/p>\n In many cases, profiles will simply be ignored. I once interviewed 100+ clients who were employers in SMEs (small and medium\u2013sized enterprises), and none of them read profiles. First, they looked at the position the applicant held now. Second, they looked at the pattern of the applicant\u2019s career up until his or her current job.<\/p>\n Having said that, I\u2019ve come across recruiters who do read profiles, especially executive recruiters and HR specialists. One of them, an HR director responsible for 700+ staff worldwide, said that he read them to see how original or, more likely, unoriginal the applicant was.<\/p>\n Yet most professional CV writers swear by them, despite a study (W. Evans, Eye Tracking Online Metacognition: Cognitive Complexity and Recruiter Decision Making; TheLadders, 2012) which indicated that they have little or no bearing on the most important recruitment decision.<\/p>\n The study examined recruiters while they were reviewing CVs (called \u201cresumes\u201d in the USA), and it used \u201ceye tracking\u201d \u2014 a high-tech way of determining eye movement \u2014 to find out what they looked at and how long they dwelt on each item of information. The upshot was that \u2014 in the 6 seconds they typically allocated to each CV when they were making in-pile\/out-pile judgements \u2014 the recruiters spent most of their time looking at the applicant\u2019s name, current position, most-recent past position, and qualifications.<\/p>\n The research was conducted by a prominent, US-based CV-writing company that, ironically, continues to write profiles. Why? One reason is that, in the USA, many CVs are filtered through a computer program before a recruiter reads them, and the program searches for keywords \u2014 which can readily be included in a profile. Here in New Zealand, our comparatively small population results in far fewer applicants for any job, and hence there isn\u2019t the same need for computerised CV filtering.<\/p>\n Another reason why profiles are popular is that, after the first in-pile\/out-pile scan, the recruiter will allocate a good deal more than 6 seconds to read each of the CVs in the in-pile. At that point the profile may get read, and may \u2014 just may \u2014 carry positive weight, as long as it doesn\u2019t try to tell the reader how to suck eggs or come across as boastful.<\/p>\n Which leads to another point. Most online CV advice \u2014 and enthusiasm for profiles \u2014 originates in the USA, and US culture is much more tolerant of self-inflated hype than NZ culture. A further point is that, as indicated earlier, there\u2019s certainly a place for profiles if they contain information that doesn\u2019t readily fit in the body of the CV.<\/p>\n But if \u2014 after weighing up the pros and cons \u2014 you figure you\u2019d be better off without a profile, how are you going to sell yourself to a recruiter?<\/p>\n To get through that first cut, make sure your relevant job titles are clearly visible. For the sake of the second reading, if your CV gets that far, make sure you\u2019ve articulated any accomplishments in these jobs without bragging and without exaggerating them. Imagine a recruiter phoning one of your referees and asking, in a slightly sceptical tone, \u201cJill Applicant reckons she did XYZ. Is that right?\u201d. Don\u2019t forget that unless your referee answers \u201cYes\u201d, your application could end up dead in the water.<\/p>\n The moral is to stick to the facts, and articulate them so clearly that the relevant facts stick in the recruiter\u2019s mind.<\/p>\n
\n\u00bb<\/span> Blog homepage<\/a><\/p>\n