Can a well written CV and cover letter get you to the interview, independently of experience?

Kevin asks: Can a well written CV and cover letter get you to the interview, independently of your experience? Of course, this depends on the position your applying for, and the experience required for it. I am not suggesting writting anything that is not true, just want to know how important these two elements can be, and how to catch the attention of recruiters. Can you help me out on some tips on structuring a very good CV and cover letter? Should these vary from sector to sector (e.g. financial vs. marketing)? Thank you!

In answer:
In summary: if you don't have the minimum skills required for the post, then NO; if you do have the basic skills to do the job, then YES your chances of being interviewed are substantially increased.

You have to think about the job filling process as a horse show jumping event - even before you apply there are a number of decisions made which effect who can apply, because that's where the business and the manager involved define the required skill set mix and location.

Once you enter the process, if you can't jump the first hurdle - that of the basic skill set to do the job - then no matter how great you are, you won't get the job. A CV/Resume can't take a hospital janitor and make them a heart surgeon!

However, let's assume you have the basic skill set, then getting a third party to position your application against the required ideal person to fulfil the job will create better results. That's partly because its a sales and marketing task, and most find it difficult to sell themselves; and secondly because having jumped through a few such processes before, a CV/Resume writer can better understand what the employer is looking for and meet that hurdle with ease - and add a few "unwritten" requirements as well, with added polish. According to the PARW (Professional Association of Resume Writers), a good professionally written CV/Resume results in 750% more interviews and 79% higher salary offers than those people write themselves.

The key to the initial stages of successful application process - getting the interview - is always firstly defined by meeting the minimum job skills requirement. Once you meet that, focusing your skills and personality/approach against those required by the employer are where the sales and marketing task comes in. When 7/10 applications will end up in the waste bin, most often the focused Cover Letter and the first half page of your CV/Resume will determine of you get a phone call for an initial chat.

There are many internet based resources to do this for you, but the difference a professional CV/Resume writer will bring are shown statistically in getting to interview - after that, its up to you! If in doubt, and you really want a job - employ a professional; that's always what the employer is trying to do.

Good Luck!

Would you put a link to one of your online profiles on your CV/Resume?

Ben asks: Would you put a link to one of your online professional profiles (eg - LinkedIn), on your CV/Resume? If so how would you do it, if not why not?

In answer:
There are hundreds if not thousands of things to put in your CV/Resume before links to off paper items.

The purpose of a CV/Resume is to get you the interview - period. Hence, once you have created enough interest and momentum for the potential employer to pick up the phone for a chat, THEN and only then is it worth to you adding additional elements like your LinkedIn profile to the discussion to further substantiate claims in a CV/Resume that you take issues like professional development, knowledge and networking seriously, and can show that with real evidence that makes a positive difference.

A LinkedIn profile is not a CV/Resume - it is a professional career summary at best focused on networking with like minded people, and not an initial document to get you an interview.

Here's a thought - what happens if you do make space to put it in? You probably have to leave something else out or use a smaller font. If you leave it out, and focus on answering the "get the interview" skills questions, and hence your CV/Resume makes it past the paper shift - then if they are a member of LinkedIn, they can easily find you, right? Then and only then does it add value.

It is your decision at the end of the day, because its your job application - but the balance of opinion professionally at present is no!

Good Luck!

Discrimination or restriction? Five years experience actually required to apply for a job?

Jenny asks: OK, call me a pessimist if you will but a manager position with 5 years experience doing X? I don’t understand – help me understand. I have a couple of friends that have been looking for positions and keep bouncing up against the “…at least 5 years experience….for manager (supervisor of others)…” Is this a way to keep cost down? Are they really looking to hire someone with 5 years experience? If you expect managerial excellence can that be obtained with 5 years experience? I am sorry for the repeat but I can’t get that number out of my head. Let me give it some context. A manager position, senior to project managers with anywhere from 1 to 15 years work experience; not only managing but accountable for results, “…develop and execute strategies, driving analysis and facilitation of well defined requirements as part of product development process, in support of strategic methodology. The Manager will also provide alignment and integration across multiple disciplines (Product Development, Merchants, Product Engineering, TRU Asia …) …” Seriously? 5 years experience? Does anyone else find this strange? Just from a salary perspective, I can see where a 5 year experience base would be preferable to a 15 to 20 year base but do they really expect to attain the results that the position description is requiring? Please, don’t get me wrong, I am NOT belittling anyone’s experience or experience level. I just think that expectations are unrealistic for the required experience level. In my very humble personal experience, I do not think that a 5 year experience base is ENOUGH experience to accomplish and excel at the above requirements of the position. I think it is a salary play. At 5 years experience, I sure thought I had enough and could excel but looking back, there was so much I had not experienced and did not know it could have been career crippling to have had that much responsibility at that early a time frame.

In answer:
I can hear your frustration and I tend to be sympathetic. But this "experience" criteria is being wiped away, particularly in the European Union and now in many other countries, by discriminatory legislation - ie: if you want that amount of experience, the employer has to justify why

Hence there is a slow but rapidly gathering pace by employers away from citing years of experience for positions (where you could get sued for discrimination), and a corresponding move to define the competencies and standards that are needed. The other driver behind this from Governments allowing the legislation through is the falling birth rate, so getting young people through the system quicker is a way of filling the people gaps.

There are certain skills and trades where either without X amount of experience you can not gain the necessary qualifications to undertake that skill; or the company would not get Health and Safety approval to undertake it. In the EU now, these are the only criteria under which sugest "years of experience" criteria can be used in selection.

Previously in the EU countries, and still in many parts of the world, employers asked for a certain number of years of experience as part of the qualifications for a job is designed to insure that an applicant has a certain level of experience that matches what the job requires. The problem is that most hiring managers and HR folks are not real adept at estimating this.

It is not their fault, however. Years of experience do NOT equal competency, no matter how you slice it. Some individuals will pack an immense amount of excellent experience into that five years and someone else will simply pick up a paycheck during the same period.

Here's a thought: if you think you can do the job, and have the necessary and stated qualifications BUT NOT the required years of experience, apply anyway. What have you or your friends got to lose - at minimum you won't get a job you don't have, and at maximum you will get a job you could have been excluded from. Most likely, you will get a job offer as a trainee or direct report to the position, and an agreed training scheme to get the job you applied for.

Good Luck!

Measuring the desirability of a job applicant by salary history

Ron, an educator, asks: I would like to know why it's done.

I can think of several very good reasons for salary history to be among the most unreliable measures of employee desirability. Here are a few:

- I worked for a start-up and sacrificed salary for a piece of the action. The company went belly up.
- Some people take time off to raise a family.
- Some people take time off to join the Peace Corps, or work on the mission field.
- Some people try a different career, perhaps a lower-paying one, just to see how it is, or to learn something different.

All that tells me that to use salary history as a measurement of increasing employee responsibility, or competence, or whatever, is bordering on the absurd. I liken it to deciding whether someone is ready for college on the basis of SAT scores alone. I can only see salary history working when taken holistically, and I have never before met anyone who reviews potential employees holistically. LOL

So tell me: why is it done? What is to be gained from it?

In answer:
Salary is one item by which employers reward employees for giving them their time and effort. And much present research shows that employee's consider it less of a reason to stay than other more human reward factors - recognition and development, for instance.

Reward and particularly salary hence in its present research view is more inline with Hertzberg's theory, in that its level indicates an "acceptable" level on behalf of the individual, for undertaking a particular job or piece of work. Hence, the examples you give - start-ups, peace corp's, raising a family, etc - can be seen in concept of a whole rewards system to the individual, over a pure salary reward focus.

With regards to a more standard work progression - from one similar job to another, possibly higher or related - then understanding the reasons for a candidates application/moving are important factors in assessing fit. Package reward is one of those factors - that's in both base salary, as well as benefits. For instance, older applicants are often more focused on the pension system and contributions; some applicants having had recent family or close to them health scares are more focused on healthcare.

However, as every Recruiter and HR professional will tell you - often its the base salary which creates the greatest problems in candidate contract signature, and most likely in sales recruits. Those who see themselves as "progressing" will initially look at OTE, but when it comes down to signing the contract most focus and question base salary. Often, the most motivated candidates are those have left their employers within the first three months of employment, having not assessed their own needs. Recruitment is an expensive process, so hence why recruiters and HR professionals will ask and ascertain salary levels before making an offer - plus, why not try and get best value for your company?

Salary is not and should not be seen as a whole solution/test of progression - its better positioned as part of a whole reward and recognition system. Good recruiters and HR professionals will always ask that question, and good candidates will be clear throughout the recruitment process why they are moving, what they seek and what that whole rewards package looks like.

...............................................................................
Good work, man. Thank You Ian!

Ron

The five point "why was I rejected" job application test

Are you getting a bit confused as to why you are continually rejected in your job applications?

Do the words “Thank you for your application for the post of…..” now strike a dark cloud across your entire world, let alone the day?

Are you feeling very rejected and upset, and wondering what you can do to change this?

Well, here’s a little and free five point test to understand why:

1. Print out the first page of your CV/Resume – no need for the rest of it
2. Fold it in half along the long side of the A4 sheet of paper. Now tear it in half, so you have two separate pieces of paper for the top and bottom halves
3. Take the advert for the job you are applying for, and using a highlighter pen mark out the key skill requirements – no more than five, if in doubt the first five they list
4. Take the top half of the first page of your CV/Resume (much like the rest of it – no need for the bottom half) and using the advert as a template, find the same five skills in the top half page of your CV/Resume
5. Now see if you can find your name, telephone number and eMail address on the same marked top half

Hint: if you can’t find the skill requirements from the advert, and can’t find your contact details – then that’s why you are being rejected! The fact you also have a cover letter which doesn’t address these points may mean even that half sheet of paper is never seen by anything more than a temp secretary tasked with reviewing a whole pile of similar applicants, to “find those who meet the job’s basic criteria.” Even if the review process is undertaken by me/any other recruiter or a professional HR manager, then if it doesn't pass that test in our minds - rejected.

When as a professional recruiter I point this out to people, they ask why? They think that the more effort they put into page2, highlighting how skilled they are, will always get them the job. NO – sorry! The person who placed the advert has spent at least 50 times as much time completing the process to the point where the advert was published, and a CV/Resume is only there to get you a job interview – no more, no less. It simply answers the questions:

A. Do you have the basic job description skills requirements? Hence the above test – if not, why read the rest of it…..
B. If you do meet the basic job description requirements, then is there something more to make you part of our team?

Think I am being a bit too tough here? There's an old adage from Madison Avenue which pretty much sums this up:

"If I see the world through John Smith's eyes, I can sell John Smith what John Smith buys."

So, next time BEFORE you write an application out for a job – apply the above test, and reduce the number of “Thank you for your application for the post of…..” letters and dark days of unemployment. You are good enough to do the job, you now know how to get the interview for it to prove that!

Good Luck!

One semester - worth adding to your CV/Resume?

Bob asks: What's the best way to add one semester of first-year Java programming to a résumé so it sounds impressive?

In answer:
How long ago was this? And at best, that's say two lectures a week for a 12week semester, so 24hours of study maximum?

The first thing on any CV/Resume is not to lie. Putting it on your CV/Resume with any more weight than can be verified - in your own words: "one semester of first-year" - is lying. And remember, most companies now employ checking services, which can delve into almost everything from High School onwards.

Hence, at the foot of the second page of your CV/Resume where you can summarise skills you have covered, its at best a listing there alongside your one semester of Cobol and a couple of years as a youngster on a Sinclair Spectrum or original Apple!

If you go further and insert this "skill" in an embellished style on your Application Form, then its technically a sacking offence at any point during your working for that company.

Good Luck!

Lying on your CV/Resume - is it illegal?

John asks: 1) is it illegal or merely unethical to lie on your resume? (2) Is it an absolute grounds for firing or is does the lie have to be related to the job (e.g. pretend you lied about which high school you attended) (3) Does an employer have to pay the person for the time worked, or is a lie enough for an employer to refuse compensation? Or does it depend on how big the lie was?

In answer:
(1) No, it is not illegal - but its highly unethical, and very stupid considering most corporates now use checking services. Plus, if you attach it to an Application Form, and sign the form - then its illegal, and grounds for firing at any point throughout your working for that company. Hence why all companies use an Application Form to make the act of lying illegal

2) See the answer to (1) above. Best practise would also suggest that you should also investigate the person that hired them: because if the lie was important enough to fire the employee, then it should have been important enough to check before the person was hired.

3) Generally, you have to pay them - although check local law first. As the employer has been duped as much as the employee has lied, most will not seek recompense as long as the employee leaves quickly and quietly!