Partager via

Sorry, folks, you still need a resume

  • Article

Seth Godin says: I think if you're remarkable, amazing or just plain spectacular, you probably shouldn't have a resume at all.

Unfortunately, I think Seth is leading people astray. I could count on one hand the people that I would hire without a resume. For everyone else, spectacular or not, I want to see everything I can about their background. It's a matter of efficiency.

Also, consider that the resume is the ticket to the interview. The interview is where you prove your spectacularness. Without the resume, you aren't going to get the chance.

Seth also may not be aware of compliance issues for government contractors (which includes more companies than you would think). Resume required. Period.

And good luck to all those folks that just read Seth's article and decided that they are spectacular enough not to have a resume. What's the bar for spectacular and is anyone really objective enough to decide that they are or aren't? The hubris of the prospect that tells me they are unwilling to forward a resume is enough of a red flag for me. Donald Trump doesn't need a resume, Seth Godin doesn't need a resume. You? You need a resume. The fact that you have time to read my blog means you need a resume. Don't worry, I do too.

I think I understand what Seth was trying to get at (though I don't think it's an either/or proposition). Unfortunately, he wrote it for such an incredibly small fraction of the population and many more people read his blog. And many of those people will remember his point as "you don't need a resume" and that's just plain old bad advice.

Comments

  • Anonymous
    April 04, 2008
    I see the resume as an outline or a table of contents to a person and their work history. The more I have interviewed for specific niche jobs (sorry I dont have a common background as a dr or lawyer or CPA), the more I find myself talking with hiring managers conversation style about my achievements and skills. They use the resume to see where I worked and the path I took, but want to hear about projects, budgets, managing people, etc backed up by specific examples or experiences. One can only highlight those things on a resume. Simply put, a resume can be used to pique someones interest, but you need to be able to back up what you did and  be able to show achievement and success when asked about it.

  • Anonymous
    April 04, 2008
    Hey heather, it was nice seeing you last week.

  • Anonymous
    April 04, 2008
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    April 04, 2008
    Wine-Oh, agreed. Jason - likewise JRS - exactly!

  • Anonymous
    April 04, 2008
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    April 05, 2008
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    April 05, 2008
    Resume are a good start of presenting your talent/value to a perspective employer. However, EVERYONE submits a resume, so what level of uniqueness should I reach in order to attract interest??   Sure degrees are fine..but most people in my field have degrees (MBA and JD), so this is not unique.  Networking is also not unique but is helpful. Just need some way to add spice/uniqueness to my resume.

  • Anonymous
    April 05, 2008
    I agree with the conversation here EXCEPT the one (and mind you, only one) time I was called on by a recruiter.  We spoke by phone for a good hour.  I'd been referred by a professional contact and they had seen my profile on LinkedIn  (which is completely filled out).  They wanted me to interview on site, but insisted in me producing a resume.  It struck me as quite "old school."  There should have been enough material to move forward without testing my ability to compose an updated resume.

  • Anonymous
    April 05, 2008
    Yeah, I just don't know that Ray Ozzie read your blog post, Seth :) A lot of people that aren't at the level of Ray Ozzie, reputation-wise, will believe that they don't have to have a resume based on your words. Oh, and "getting picked" isn't random. It's based on the resume and the extend to which the skills on the resume match the requirements of the job. We reach out to people outside of those that are posting their resumes online or sending them in. But for us to get serious about them as a prospect (and invest time in interviews(, they generally have to have a resume. Maybe that is where there's a disconnect; the difference between "having" a resume and posting it online. We call people all the time based on recommendations, reputations, etc. As for our competitors, some of them have GPA requirements and I think that's a load of bunk too. Anyway, just my .02 ;)

  • Anonymous
    April 05, 2008
    Argh.  It's evident from Seth's comment above that he not only misunderstood Heather's argument but he's talking about something entirely different from what he conveyed to his readers. Sure ... a great word of mouth reputation (via blogs, industry presence, etc) is a fantastic way to lead you to your next job.  It can be even more powerful than a resume.  No one is arguing that.  But once you are plucked for that dream job, most companies (yes, even Microsoft's competitors :) will need your resume to seal the deal. I know Seth (and many others before and after him) write this kind of stuff to spark debate, but it's completely inaccurate - and potentially harmful - advice, and it really irks me. Good response, Heather! -gretchen

  • Anonymous
    April 05, 2008
    Heather you raise a good point about competition. Each company has its own process for hiring. I know Microsoft has its loop interview and another large company has GPA requirements. I've been through both (and a few others at some large companies I am not going to name). The company I work at now conducts behavioral interviewing. However I was always bothered with the GPA requirement. Its used as a discriminating factor and I don't like that. The person I was at 18, is not the same person at 34. If I can do the job and am the right person, why does my GPA from undergrad matter? I got into grad school and have an MBA. Yet this place wouldnt get past the undergrad GPA being below their requirement. I told them it was because of my freshman year and having to miss alot of school due to an illness. They didn't care. Looking back, I am ok it didn't work out. If it was meant to be it would have happened.  /End rant.

  • Anonymous
    April 05, 2008
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    April 06, 2008
    Native - uniqueness isn't the key, it's the degree to which your skills match the position requirements. How about writing your resume specifically for the position you are interested in? You could even mention the position by title in your objective statement if you have one. btu - a LinkedIn profile can be close to a resume, but would look a little unprofessional when it was passed around to the interview team on interview day. The recruiter did you a favor. If they forwarded your LinkedIn profile, nobody would have thought you were serious about the job. Samson - nope, just because I disagree does not mean that I am misreading (or "intentionally misreading"....which is an odd thing to say since we don't know each other).

  • Anonymous
    April 08, 2008
    Has anyone gotten tired of Seth yet besides me?  Please say yes. Let's face it, we can't all be spectacular now can we.....

  • Anonymous
    April 08, 2008
    Thanks for this post.  There's lots of talk about the demise of the traditional resume and the "next generation" resume (linkedin profiles instead of resumes, video resumes, online documents with lots of links, etc.). It seems to me that a great traditional resume can still stand out in the crowd.  Maybe Seth just got a lot of bad resumes applying for his internship.  Anyone applying should have realized that he would have welcomed something unique and gone for it.  However, as you note, most people are still looking for a resume that they can easily scan in 7 seconds, use for compliance, etc. and move on.   I think the demise of the traditional resume is greatly exaggerated :-) Miriam Salpeter Keppie Careers

  • Anonymous
    April 08, 2008
    Insane - I think there's a lot of pressure at his level of notoriety to come up with things that are interesting/challenging/controversial. I try to keep in mind that he is a marketing person, not a recruiting person and he probably wasn't thinking about the effect that his words would have on people who erroneously considered themselves "spectacular" : ) I don't want to make excuses for him though. Miriam - agree. People can find other ways to get attention in addition to the resume. Doesn't mean they still shouldn't have one.

  • Anonymous
    April 09, 2008
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    April 09, 2008
    Insane - I have no doubt! No resume for you! Hee!

  • Anonymous
    May 04, 2008
    There's another way to interpret Seth's blog, I think.  I took it not so much as a literal objection to simply having a resume if it's required as a paperwork formality during the hiring process, but as a statement that there are better ways to get noticed than by sending out resumes.  And those ways are the very things Seth mentioned:  having a reputation that proceeds you (Ray Ozzie, Linus Torvalds, Guido von Rossum, etc.), having an awesome project you're involved with (again, examples like Linux, Guido, and oodles more), a great blog, etc. So what's the take-way from that suggestion? I took it as something like this: IF you don't already have the reputation, project, blog, etc. that gets you noticed for great jobs, start establishing it.  Start an interesting project, start volunteering to speak on your topic(s) of expertise, start writing on your subject of expertise, etc.   The goal, I think, should be to be in a position where you never have to look for a job, because people are actively seeking you out. Or failing that, to be in a position where you can call a contact at Company X and say "get me a job with you guys" and feel pretty confident that they'll be falling over themselves to hire you once they know you're interested. And even if you fall a little short of that ideal situation; taking those steps will still be good for your career and job prospects.

  • Anonymous
    March 15, 2009
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    March 16, 2009
    Greg - employers will never stop wanting to know what a prospect has done in their past. The interview is when prospects can show what they can do. It's not an either/or thing. You need both and the resume is what gets you the interview. And I am not trying to be contrary just for the fun of it, but a VC is not going to give an entrepreneur money without knowing their background. I graduated from the Entrepreneur Program at USC and I know this. You have a lot more time to interview unqualified applicants than I do! I'm sorry but I can't believe that you don't care at all what a person has done in their past and rely on a document about what they think they can do. Why not just post a sign outside that says "free job to anyone that thinks they can do it." Sorry, but I just don't buy that as an effective way for companies to hire people.

  • Anonymous
    March 18, 2009
    Thanks for the level-headed response to Seth's post. "Hubris" is right on. In the “old days,” the image of an accountant under fluorescent lights was shorthand for "cog" and "soulless corporate sad sack sellout." I guess that's been upped to anyone who sends out a resume. Of course, that's ridiculous. There is no “everyone else” and “ordinary people.”  I'd like to watch all these fabulous people wield their fabulousness to never land any job whatsoever, because that's not how it works. No one likes a 21-year-old snothead, period. My advice? Augment the resume. Duh. But curb that sense of entitlement.

  • Anonymous
    March 18, 2009
    sfpoppy, right on!

  • Anonymous
    May 28, 2009
    Focusing on the present is indeed an effective way to hire because it gets both employer and candidate to concentrate on the one thing that matters:  the job! Many candidates tell me they're sick and tired of going to behavioral interview after behavioral interview where all they talk about is what they did for somebody else.  Then little time is spent on what they'll actually be doing if hired. Have you ever asked people from the false world of resumes and interviews why they really want to change jobs?  Many people are sick of doing the same old, same old.  Their past employers have pigeonholed them and they refuse to let others do that to them too. No, I don't have "a lot more time to interview unqualified applicants,"  Heather. I never see the unqualified because what I hold paramount is competence.  If you, the candidate, want to see us, you must demonstrate competence from the start.  Whether or not you've actually done the job before doesn't matter; we all have to start somewhere, and some of us employers are over our fear of making hiring mistakes.  If you'd like to show us in terms of what you've done before, that's okay.  If none of your employers gave you the chance to succeed and you can do so with us to your benefit, it's to our benefit. If you demonstrate competence in terms of what I need done now, I'll make time for you.  If you haven't even taken time to understand the job, understand our company, and understand your role in it, I gladly release you to waste time with our competitors. And for all this to happen, the employer must know what it takes to do the job.  Reality is many employers don't know what they want.

  • Anonymous
    May 28, 2009
    Incidentally, is today's system that great?  Why must machine or man wade through countless resumes? Today's resume system doesn't separate the really great candidates from the wannabees.  The Internet has made it worse, where any job hunter can mindlessly submit 100's with mere copy-and-paste.  At least with snail mail, you had to really think where to invest your postage. An employment proposal, however, can't be duplicated across 100's of employers and 100's of positions.  An employment proposal is used for a specific company and a specific opening.  It need be only 2 pages at most, beginning with an explanation of how you will do the job.  If I as the manager know what it takes to do the job, a candidate can't use halo effects, mirroring and other persuasive techniques to pull one on me.  (Employment proposals were once suggested by John Crystal.) I've given this to applicants, and it's interesting how more than 80% eliminate themselves.  They either don't really know how to do the job, or they see it's not the job for them, or they don't want to bother.  Less work for me, then, because I then only have to schedule time for the truly committed.

  • Anonymous
    May 28, 2009
    I think what you are missing, Greg, is that employers pick behavioral interview questions that are relevant to the job opening. They aren't just picked randomly for fun. They are derived from a deep understanding of the relevant competencies associated with the job. Anyway, it sounds to me like you are arguing both sides of the fence (I'm still not sure whether you like th resume or not) without really articulating what the solution is. Am I missing something? What should the process look like in your ideal situation?

  • Anonymous
    May 28, 2009
    And I gotta say, that it's amazing that I am posting this comment 3 hours in the future. Blog control dude, where's my blog settings?