If you haven’t take the test yet, then click this link to get started, and come back once you’re finished!
We’re going to cover these resumes in the same order they were presented on the test. We begin with William “Thundercat” Jameson.
William “Thundercat” Jameson: TRASH
Despite his obvious enthusiasm, William “Thundercat” Jameson would be a poor candidate choice.
Using pictures is already frowned upon, much less using an unprofessional picture. And no matter how cool your nickname is, don’t include it on your resume.
Pro Tip: When you do get hired, you can slowly convince your new co-workers to use your preferred nomenclature. Until then, keep it under wraps.
He further errs by using the unprofessional email address “firstname.lastname@example.org” — a silly email is a fast way to lose the respect of a hiring manager.
Overall, Mr. Thundercat’s resume is bad. Even if it is also very cool.
Valerie Dominic: TRASH
Was Valerie Dominic drinking when she wrote her resume? Did she give up on life? Or does she simply not know how to use a computer?
None of these questions are good omens for Valerie Dominic’s job prospects. Valerie’s resume could be most generously described as abstract art. Less generously, Kafkaesque.
Notice the uneven columns, the mysteriously morphing bullet points, the phantom spaces, the shifting indentation.
It is a train wreck, and Ms. Dominic is the eternally jobless conductor.
Linda Phillips: KEEP
Linda Phillips is a great candidate for the following reasons:
1. Her resume is sharp and professional looking.
2. Her resume objective is designed to say what she can do for the company, not what the company can do for her.
3. She has had previous customer service experience.
4. She uses numbers to quantify her past achievements.
She is a prime target for an interview callback.
George Ticker: TRASH
By reading his resume, you can guess that George Ticker is the kind of guy who probably just wants to get through the day. He is blunt, serious, positively humorless, and answers your questions exclusively with grunts and one word answers.
George Ticker may have been an exceptional employee at Spekscape and Jerry’s Sub’s. Unfortunately it’s impossible to know, because his resume is so vague.
What can we glean from his resume? We know he’s able to move around and do things. However, hiring managers have higher expectations of potential employees.
To improve his resume, Mr. Ticker needs to be more detailed about his performance and the nature of his previous jobs, preferably using numbers to measure his achievements and describe his responsibilities.
Daniel Richter: TRASH
If you were fooled by any of the resumes, it was probably this one. How can such a great candidate warrant a trashed resume?
Daniel Richter’s resume is the equivalent of cooking an 8 course meal, setting the table cloth, taking out fancy silverware, uncorking an expensive bottle of wine, inviting the guests over, and then realizing that you forgot to turn the oven on once everyone arrives.
Cold turkey for all.
Can’t see what the problem is yet? If you were an actual hiring manager, the problem would become obvious quickly — he has no contact details, except for a home address, which is functionally useless.
Poor Daniel, full of hope, full of fail.
Donovan Long: TRASH
Donovan Long is perhaps best described as a “blah” candidate.
1. His career objective is “blah,” — it explains nothing noteworthy or relevant.
2. His work experience is “blah,” — lifeguarding and construction work could have some transferable skills into customer service, but he failed to emphasize how on his resume.
3. His work history is “blah,” — you’ll notice that he skips jobs frequently and has work gaps, which is never a good sign to a hiring manager.
4. His bullet points are “blah,” — he certainly did some work, but it’s hard to know how well he did it, since he’s failed to quantify his achievements. In addition, each job experience should, at minimum, have three bullet points.
Donovan could create a worthy resume with some creativity and a different resume format. However, in its current state, it’s easy to ignore.
Howard Lai: KEEP
Howard Lai is another excellent candidate.
He has directly relevant work experience in customer service, which he describes in detail with numbers. His resume is crisp, clean, and easy to read.
Any hiring manager could immediately see that he has the necessary skills and drive to perform in an entry-level customer service job.
Robert Bensky: TRASH
There isn’t a single thing wrong with Robert Bensky’s resume in theory. He is quite obviously a powerhouse of a salesman, and a consummate professional. His resume looks bold and aggressive.
Unfortunately, Robert Bensky is absurdly overqualified for an entry-level customer service job. It’s possible that he would have more knowledge, experience, and accomplishments than his own direct boss. This would put both Mr. Bensky and his boss into a rather awkward position, one that would be embarrassing for his boss and irritating for him.
Overqualified candidates like Mr. Bensky tend to be short term, because they’re going to be looking for another job as soon as they get hired — not a situation that is ideal for employers.
Why did Mr. Bensky apply for this job? Welcome to the mystery of being an HR.
Claire Romero: KEEP
Claire Romero is another keeper.
She has relevant professional and educational experience. Even her stint as a Resident Assistant (RA) at her college has been deftly described in terms of providing customer service, demonstrating that she has transferable skills.
Again, her achievements and job duties are described in detail, with numbers, giving the hiring manager a clear idea of her skills and abilities.
Claire is definitely a great choice for an interview callback.
Barbara Staukas: TRASH
Barbara Staukas needs a proof reader.
Right off the bat, from the first sentence in the career objective, you can tell she’s either not a native English speaker, or has issues with grammar. Spelling mistakes litter the resume.
She’s done well at quantifying her past experiences, and is clearly a qualified candidate.
Unfortunately, her lack of attention to detail is a fatal flaw, and sinks her application.
The Final Challenge
Out of these three good candidates, who do you think is the best?
It’s a tough choice. What’s your opinion? Is 6 seconds enough time to judge a resume?
Thanks for participating in our challenge!
Stay tuned for another blog post discussing the statistical results of our challenge. We’re going to reveal if professional HRs are better than the average population at judging a resume within 6 seconds, among other findings.