3 ms·

Search for "should I use first person on resume", the articles will explain a bit. One reason is brevity - we want to use as few words as possible. The other i

by fecak 5y ago

Search for "should I use first person on resume", the articles will explain a bit. One reason is brevity - we want to use as few words as possible. The other is redundancy - if we use "I", chances are almost every sentence will begin with "I". I did this, I did that.

thom 5y ago
I'm caught between thinking you'd have to be a loon to make hiring decisions on this basis, and wanting to punish the fewer than 10% of people in my inbox that actually follow this advice for having no critical thinking skills of their own.
- fecak 5y ago
  If you're saying less than 10% of the resumes you get are written in implied first person, I find that incredibly hard to believe. I work with easily 1000 clients a year (most in tech), and the 'before' resumes sent to me by clients are at least 95%+ in implied first person.
  - thom 5y ago
    Going to walk back my 10% here, that's just the number that don't use 'I' somewhere in their CV. There are many that just do it in an intro or elsewhere, but list projects or contributions in implied first person. Some are an ungodly amalgamation of both (I know my LinkedIn profile certainly is, but that was created under duress). I am fine with either, I just don't understand the idea that a recruiter is going to clutch their pearls at this. Anyway, my original question was genuine, I'd be fascinated to see some controlled study into this, which I understand would be hard to engineer.
    - volta83 5y ago
      I still fail to see the value in filtering out candidates by whether they know this rule that still nobody has given any actual arguments for. "If you Google this string, you'll find the arguments" is a logical fallacy. You are claiming that there are arguments for why this rule is true, but not providing any. If anything, the only thing this statement proofs is that you are not able to explain why doing this is even a good idea. And FWIW, I actually google this and none of the first 5 results actually explained why this rule makes sense. They were all posts of the form "20 rules to blindly follow when writing a resumee".
      - fecak 5y ago
        Where do you see anyone suggesting that we actually "filter out" candidates because they use "I"? Nowhere in this thread have I suggested that in any way. In other parts of this thread, I've explained why we don't use I. Let me gather them for you. 1 - Redundancy. Imagine a list of bullets that start with the word "I". - I wrote a playbook for product implementations. - I managed the project... - I oversaw a team that... Hopefully by now you see this wouldn't be a fun read. 2 - Necessity - The resume is about you, not others, so we don't need to say that you (I) did the things on the resume. That is understood, and why 'implied' first person fulfills our needs while also reducing the content. If I ask you what you did today, you can just say "Watched TV, mowed the lawn, ..." - you don't need to say "I watched TV, and then I mowed the lawn." I hope this helps, and maybe we can put this to bed.
        thom 5y ago
        If they don't filter it out... why should anyone care? Kinda feels like you sent off for a "become a resume writer in 24 hours" kit and segued from there into being an internet bore who thinks he's a brand. Literally all your comments on HN are "RESUME WRITER HERE!" as if that's anything other than a recruiter who found an easier scam. I've no doubt there's money in it, but realistically you could just be the identity function and still place almost all your customers.
        fecak 5y ago
        You've decided to get personal. Will top candidates be filtered out based on some issues related to breaking resume norms? Probably not. Bill Gates could write a resume on a napkin in ketchup and get an interview. It mainly makes a difference for candidates in more competitive situations - give a recruiter two resumes with somewhat parallel experience, and the better resume (based on writing style, obeying stylistic norms, etc.) is probably more likely to get the interview. As for a "scam", my results are hard to argue with, and most clients seem to think the investment was a good one. Many of my clients come to me after having failed to get interviews for their dream jobs, and after working with me their fortunes often change. Many of my clients approach me trying to get jobs at places like FAANG companies, while many others just are looking to work at places most people have never heard of. Would you like to be done now? We both have better things to do.

by fecak 5y ago

thom 5y ago

I'm caught between thinking you'd have to be a loon to make hiring decisions on this basis, and wanting to punish the fewer than 10% of people in my inbox that actually follow this advice for having no critical thinking skills of their own.

fecak 5y ago
If you're saying less than 10% of the resumes you get are written in implied first person, I find that incredibly hard to believe. I work with easily 1000 clients a year (most in tech), and the 'before' resumes sent to me by clients are at least 95%+ in implied first person.
- thom 5y ago
  Going to walk back my 10% here, that's just the number that don't use 'I' somewhere in their CV. There are many that just do it in an intro or elsewhere, but list projects or contributions in implied first person. Some are an ungodly amalgamation of both (I know my LinkedIn profile certainly is, but that was created under duress). I am fine with either, I just don't understand the idea that a recruiter is going to clutch their pearls at this. Anyway, my original question was genuine, I'd be fascinated to see some controlled study into this, which I understand would be hard to engineer.
  - volta83 5y ago
    I still fail to see the value in filtering out candidates by whether they know this rule that still nobody has given any actual arguments for. "If you Google this string, you'll find the arguments" is a logical fallacy. You are claiming that there are arguments for why this rule is true, but not providing any. If anything, the only thing this statement proofs is that you are not able to explain why doing this is even a good idea. And FWIW, I actually google this and none of the first 5 results actually explained why this rule makes sense. They were all posts of the form "20 rules to blindly follow when writing a resumee".
    - fecak 5y ago
      Where do you see anyone suggesting that we actually "filter out" candidates because they use "I"? Nowhere in this thread have I suggested that in any way. In other parts of this thread, I've explained why we don't use I. Let me gather them for you. 1 - Redundancy. Imagine a list of bullets that start with the word "I". - I wrote a playbook for product implementations. - I managed the project... - I oversaw a team that... Hopefully by now you see this wouldn't be a fun read. 2 - Necessity - The resume is about you, not others, so we don't need to say that you (I) did the things on the resume. That is understood, and why 'implied' first person fulfills our needs while also reducing the content. If I ask you what you did today, you can just say "Watched TV, mowed the lawn, ..." - you don't need to say "I watched TV, and then I mowed the lawn." I hope this helps, and maybe we can put this to bed.
      - thom 5y ago
        If they don't filter it out... why should anyone care? Kinda feels like you sent off for a "become a resume writer in 24 hours" kit and segued from there into being an internet bore who thinks he's a brand. Literally all your comments on HN are "RESUME WRITER HERE!" as if that's anything other than a recruiter who found an easier scam. I've no doubt there's money in it, but realistically you could just be the identity function and still place almost all your customers.
        fecak 5y ago
        You've decided to get personal. Will top candidates be filtered out based on some issues related to breaking resume norms? Probably not. Bill Gates could write a resume on a napkin in ketchup and get an interview. It mainly makes a difference for candidates in more competitive situations - give a recruiter two resumes with somewhat parallel experience, and the better resume (based on writing style, obeying stylistic norms, etc.) is probably more likely to get the interview. As for a "scam", my results are hard to argue with, and most clients seem to think the investment was a good one. Many of my clients come to me after having failed to get interviews for their dream jobs, and after working with me their fortunes often change. Many of my clients approach me trying to get jobs at places like FAANG companies, while many others just are looking to work at places most people have never heard of. Would you like to be done now? We both have better things to do.