I'm trying to find a way to make sense of what I am thinking. But I have had a lot of wine tonight.
(What a terrible introduction!)
I've been more or less pondering what the ultimate usefulness of standardized resume format would be in the architecture, engineering and construction industry.
I like the idea of the Europass. If you don't know, the Europass is basically a standardized application package where two documents (CV, language qualifications) are written by the application and three additional documents (citizenship details, certificates, diploma) are provided through their respective institutions.
The idea was suppose to make the job application process transparent and easy for both parties.
I think the idea of a standard resume might be demeaning or a little unappealing. But with resume parsing, hundreds of job applicants and no formal system... it complicates things for everyone.
Since the US lacks the legal entities to make something like this de facto... it would be up to employers and associations to put it into practice.
I guess the obvious questions are:
Would you prefer a standardized resume?
Would you make an attempt to institutionalize a practice?
What would you prefer to see more of and less of?
Should all of us at Archinect take a stab at perhaps creating such an example?
a standardized resume would probably be a terrible thing for this field, since you want to see someone's ability (or lack thereof) to follow simple instructions from a posting and see how they present themselves in general...i've actually seen resumes from people who spelled their own names wrong, so individualized resumes are an easy way to weed out the weak/undesirable ones...
if you were hiring someone for some brainless task like data entry, then a standard resume would probably work since any warm body would likely do...
it only reinforces my point though, as individualized resumes can also be a reflection on an applicant's lack of judgment if they go overboard...
main point is still that a standard format would likely leave little room for interpretation of who the person is...
when hiring someone, i like to see how an applicant's information is organized, what they choose to emphasize, what font they choose, some element of creative expression that communicates who they are, and any number of intangibles that can say a lot...
you don't want to have 100 identically formatted resumes do you? how will you know who to select for interviews if all you know is cold hard facts?
There still exist companies like monsters.com that take big name companies’ resumes and input all the data entries into a database so employers can filter thousands of resumes and find 10 or so potential hires in a matter of seconds. Sun Microsystems, Google and other big names do that so they don’t waste any of their precious T-time. But in our field, it’s not worth it. We just hired word of mouth and later fired the person who brought them into the company for a lousy recommendation or promote them for having a good eye. That’s why I don’t recommend anyone into the company I work for, for the risk of getting the boot.
Mar 4, 10 4:30 pm ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
Standardized resume format
I'm trying to find a way to make sense of what I am thinking. But I have had a lot of wine tonight.
(What a terrible introduction!)
I've been more or less pondering what the ultimate usefulness of standardized resume format would be in the architecture, engineering and construction industry.
I like the idea of the Europass. If you don't know, the Europass is basically a standardized application package where two documents (CV, language qualifications) are written by the application and three additional documents (citizenship details, certificates, diploma) are provided through their respective institutions.
The idea was suppose to make the job application process transparent and easy for both parties.
I think the idea of a standard resume might be demeaning or a little unappealing. But with resume parsing, hundreds of job applicants and no formal system... it complicates things for everyone.
Since the US lacks the legal entities to make something like this de facto... it would be up to employers and associations to put it into practice.
I guess the obvious questions are:
Would you prefer a standardized resume?
Would you make an attempt to institutionalize a practice?
What would you prefer to see more of and less of?
Should all of us at Archinect take a stab at perhaps creating such an example?
a standardized resume would probably be a terrible thing for this field, since you want to see someone's ability (or lack thereof) to follow simple instructions from a posting and see how they present themselves in general...i've actually seen resumes from people who spelled their own names wrong, so individualized resumes are an easy way to weed out the weak/undesirable ones...
if you were hiring someone for some brainless task like data entry, then a standard resume would probably work since any warm body would likely do...
The comments on that blog entry, randomized, are my basic rebuttal to spaceman spiff.
Not sure if that's what you were hinting at.
it only reinforces my point though, as individualized resumes can also be a reflection on an applicant's lack of judgment if they go overboard...
main point is still that a standard format would likely leave little room for interpretation of who the person is...
when hiring someone, i like to see how an applicant's information is organized, what they choose to emphasize, what font they choose, some element of creative expression that communicates who they are, and any number of intangibles that can say a lot...
you don't want to have 100 identically formatted resumes do you? how will you know who to select for interviews if all you know is cold hard facts?
I'd reccommend checking out mckinsey's web site and review their reccommendations for what to put on a resume.
They are a business consulting firm but their suggestions are very applicable to any number of fields.
http://www.mckinsey.com/careers/how_do_i_apply/the_application_process/resume_cv_guidance.aspx?pageIndex=2
There still exist companies like monsters.com that take big name companies’ resumes and input all the data entries into a database so employers can filter thousands of resumes and find 10 or so potential hires in a matter of seconds. Sun Microsystems, Google and other big names do that so they don’t waste any of their precious T-time. But in our field, it’s not worth it. We just hired word of mouth and later fired the person who brought them into the company for a lousy recommendation or promote them for having a good eye. That’s why I don’t recommend anyone into the company I work for, for the risk of getting the boot.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.