What’s wrong with being a do-er?
I’m coming to the point where I tell myself, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Being a do-er means that shit gets done. And I get things done.
I’ve had this rant rattling around in my head for almost two weeks. The biggest critique that they came up with is that I am do-er and not an achiever. And that’s apparently a bad thing. Who the FRAK else is going to get shit done?!? You need do-ers. People who are conscientious and hard-workers and not just out for their own ambition and climbing over and on the backs of others. People that make things happen in the background so those so-called achievers shine. People with a work ethic and humility and who don’t mind just getting the work done so they can pay their bills and maybe have some mental and physical energy left over for their hobbies.
Where is this rant coming from? I sent my resume into one of those places that is supposed to help you write it better, well, they tell you everything wrong with it so you will pay them to write it and make it better.
For the record, I do appreciate constructive criticism, when it makes sense. I have read the review three or four times now, trying to wrap my head around it, swallow some pride, etc., so that it makes sense. Still doesn't make sense to me.
For better or for worse, I have been following Liz Ryan’s advice to deviate from the bullet-list to the storytelling method. Because everyone's resume is a bullet-list if you have to submit to an ATS. Typically, I tend to send mine into agencies and let them do the heavy lifting and recommend where I need changes based on the clients they are submitting to. They haven't told me to change my format, so there's that. I pack A LOT of information into two pages.
In my eyes, the least consistent thing about my resume is the mixing of the two formats (might show you how enthusiastic and proud of the work I was), but that wasn't even touched upon.
This particular resume reviewer didn’t appreciate any storytelling/showing in complete sentences what I had accomplished (💡lightbulb moment while writing this, I show my accomplishments in a story and job duties for jobs that didn't require anything extra nor innovative in a bulleted list!).
They said I was too wordy and recruiters and hiring managers don’t want to/have time to read. They want a regurgitation of the job post I am applying for in bullet points (mind you, this is my general purpose resume that covers a selection of my currently relevant skill sets). Ok... how does that show achievement exactly? I totally get showing a quantitative analysis. A few recruiters have told me to add more numbers and percentages, which I would gladly do if I had the actual job-related data to quantify. But I generally don't, and I hate bullshitting. I'm hired to go in, do a job, and move on. 95% of the time, my contract is extended because I do good work.
Um, my summary (at the top of my resume, right after my name and contact information) states "With over 20 years' experience..." and goes on to show how I have parlayed being a Jane-of-all-trades into 20 years' of experience in web technologies. And that may be another problem (again, not touched upon in the review, even though my LI is in my contact info). My current functional resume covers the last decade (again, where the heck do they get "early stage of your career" from?) and shows progression. For the full 20+, I refer recruiters and hiring managers to my LinkedIn profile. The only way to shorten it would be
Anyway, I needed to get that off my chest.
Where is this rant coming from? I sent my resume into one of those places that is supposed to help you write it better, well, they tell you everything wrong with it so you will pay them to write it and make it better.
For the record, I do appreciate constructive criticism, when it makes sense. I have read the review three or four times now, trying to wrap my head around it, swallow some pride, etc., so that it makes sense. Still doesn't make sense to me.
For better or for worse, I have been following Liz Ryan’s advice to deviate from the bullet-list to the storytelling method. Because everyone's resume is a bullet-list if you have to submit to an ATS. Typically, I tend to send mine into agencies and let them do the heavy lifting and recommend where I need changes based on the clients they are submitting to. They haven't told me to change my format, so there's that. I pack A LOT of information into two pages.
In my eyes, the least consistent thing about my resume is the mixing of the two formats (might show you how enthusiastic and proud of the work I was), but that wasn't even touched upon.
This particular resume reviewer didn’t appreciate any storytelling/showing in complete sentences what I had accomplished (💡lightbulb moment while writing this, I show my accomplishments in a story and job duties for jobs that didn't require anything extra nor innovative in a bulleted list!).
They said I was too wordy and recruiters and hiring managers don’t want to/have time to read. They want a regurgitation of the job post I am applying for in bullet points (mind you, this is my general purpose resume that covers a selection of my currently relevant skill sets). Ok... how does that show achievement exactly? I totally get showing a quantitative analysis. A few recruiters have told me to add more numbers and percentages, which I would gladly do if I had the actual job-related data to quantify. But I generally don't, and I hate bullshitting. I'm hired to go in, do a job, and move on. 95% of the time, my contract is extended because I do good work.
You should consider using a few more bullet points to increase the impact to the employer. If employers see too many long sections of text, they might find it difficult to zero in on the most crucial information.
A career summary is a key component to a good resume, however yours is too lengthy. Shorten your career summary to concisely define you as a professional and cover those areas most relevant to your career level and job target.
From the way the resume is worded, you come across as a "doer," as opposed to an "achiever."The first line really threw me off:
The appearance is not polished, and aesthetics matter more at the relatively early stage of your career.
Um, my summary (at the top of my resume, right after my name and contact information) states "With over 20 years' experience..." and goes on to show how I have parlayed being a Jane-of-all-trades into 20 years' of experience in web technologies. And that may be another problem (again, not touched upon in the review, even though my LI is in my contact info). My current functional resume covers the last decade (again, where the heck do they get "early stage of your career" from?) and shows progression. For the full 20+, I refer recruiters and hiring managers to my LinkedIn profile. The only way to shorten it would be
"I'm probably the unicorn you didn't know you were looking for".I pride myself on being someone who can navigate/translate both technology and plain English, being able to call engineers and developers on their bullshit, and offer an out-of-the-box point of view and solutions because despite not living and breathing code, I understand it and the principles behind it.
Anyway, I needed to get that off my chest.
