"Do You Still Need a Resume?" Experts Weigh In.

In a recent post "Do You Still Need a Resume?" I opined that the resume, although still useful, is fading in importance in the new world of on-line tools that provide companies and recruiters an array of information about potential candidates. I requested that readers share their opinions, and received some compelling comments -- from a job seeker, a career professional, and a recruiter.

Jeffrey Ishmael shared his success with building an on-line presence to enhance his job search...

...As I found myself in the first "forced" search in my Finance career, I found myself toe-to-toe with some very talented people and needed a way to distinguish myself from the pack...and pursued the development of a website dedicated to corporate finance...while meant to hit the technicalities of Finance, it was also intended to give potential employers and recruiters additional insight into my approach to managing the Finance function of a company...I know that at least one offer I received was the direct result of what they had seen on my site.

Barbara Safani, a New York City personal brand strategist, resume professional, career coach, and author talked about the evolution of the resume into new forms...

...the resume is simply evolving from a piece of paper to a three-dimensional, multi-media presentation of a candidate's value proposition. Hiring authorities still want to know how candidates will help their organizations grow and prosper, but they want to receive that information in more flexible formats. And the "cut to the chase" approach is really taking hold with tools like Twitter...candidates need to be able to communicate a compelling message that screams "pick me" quickly and succinctly to hiring managers in order to get noticed in today's crowded job search space.

Push-back came from "Recruiting Animal" (known for his strong views and cool recruiting radio show)...

...What's your final recommendation? It sounds like you're promoting a good resume to me. Or a good LinkedIn profile which is pretty much the same thing.

Like me, you believe that it's a really good idea to put a detailed profile/resume online. But, then why do you spend half your time saying that you don't believe in resumes?

I'm a headhunter. And I often work with other recruiters. And when we recruit someone, we want a resume.

A LinkedIn profile could very well become the next resume but in the meantime, not enough people understand it. But...none of the other online profile sites are as good as LinkedIn...That's why LI is heavily used by recruiters. If you go on Twitter and follow some recruiters you'll see them whining every time LinkedIn has a problem.

You claim that traditional resumes are too focused on the past? That's how people are hired. On the basis of past experience.You think the focus should be on a brand. But what's your brand based on? My friend Laurence Haughton wrote a book called, "It's not what you say, it's what you do." And your brand is based on what you've done.

Recruiting Animal's comments reflect a certain confusion about points in my post. And that's understandable. The ambiguity Recruiting Animal addressed in his comments about resumes vs LinkedIn; past performance vs potential; brand vs performance, etc. reflects the flux in the job search space right now.

Here's why: There is no "one good way" to get out a clear career-building or job search message -- and there probably never will be. Of course recruiters and decision makers need to know job history. But that's just a part of the process, and the ways to discover that history are quickly changing.

What works best now may be archaic in another year, and something that's a blip on the horizon might be the next new sourcing tool in a year.

Recruiting Animal mentioned "branding" almost as a bad word. I think that's because the way some people use personal branding (if they use it at all) is to showcase "soft skills" without deliver a value message tied to those skills.

Identifying a personal brand is a good place for a job seeker to start, but it's just a piece of the foundation. It certainly helps with the elusive "chemistry and fit" component needed when a candidate hits the short list, but it's not going to help get anyone on that short list. Only value tied to the brand does that. 

As a Certified Personal Brand Strategist, I am not just working a brand message when I assist a senior executive in job search and career management. VALUE that is proven (and predicted) by accomplishments is the thing that we focus upon, because it works.

I like to use the phrase "executive brand" or "branded value proposition" -- both are basically ways to show what your brand looks like when you take it to work and use it to deliver value that hits the bottom line.

Branded value is what needs to be projected across all on- and off-line communication including a resume and LinkedIn.

A good resume (one with an executive brand, short-term and strategic impact shown for each job held, and accomplishments tied to ROI value) is still needed, but I hold fast to my assertion that it is not required as often as one would think.

In regard to Recruiting Animal's comment about people being hired for their past performance, well, sure, that's partly true. Past performance is something we look at, but without a real sense of what that candidate will do moving forward there will be no short list in his future.

That's one of the places executive branding shines -- because value-based branding strips the accomplishment history bare and shows what is beneath it -- what raw ability the candidate delivers from job to job, challenge to challenge. That pure ability is (or should be) a huge differentiator that helps determine the right hire (and fit, too).

LinkedIn (if done right) is a fabulous (albeit static) way to project branded executive value as well as job history, and to be found because of that. Twitter is a interactive way to engage in real-time relationship- and visibility-building. Combining the two is a winning combination.

If someone finds you on Twitter, gets interested in you, and checks you out on LinkedIn (possibly printing out your LinkedIn profile by using the PDF "looks like a resume" option), then you may never need a resume. Then again, you might need to bring one to the interview.

So, do you still need a resume? The answer is still "maybe."

Jeffrey, Barbara, and Recruiting Animal, thanks for giving us lots to think about.

Posted by Deb Dib, the CEO Coach

Comments

[Louise Fletcher]

Great post - I love LinkedIn, Twitter and web portfolios. I recommend them all to my clients - but in the end, I do have to side with Recruiting Animal in that HR folks and recruiters are not going to stop needing resumes any time soon.

I've yet to see anyone come up with a better way of giving the basic information a recruiter or hiring manager needs to see.

[Deb Dib]

Hi Louise!

I agree that resumes in some shape will always be around; I just think in many circumstances they are fading in importance. They have a place in job search, sure, but not always in the traditional ways they've been used in the past. However, recruiters and HR are pretty traditional, and likely they will still require them, but they'll also use lots of newer ways to glean more info. That's my point :-)

I think one of the biggest problems with a resume is that job seekers use it as a crutch, trying to get it to be as perfect as possible, (even sometimes stalling their search until they do), but not doing the other things needed to raise visibility, network, and prep for interviews. Just my opinion :-)

[Recruiting Animal]

Hi Debbie,

You know what they say about kids being bad just so they get the attention? Well, it's not often that someone spends a lot of air time taking me apart and I must admit that I like it. I wish it happened everyday.

I have to confess, however, that you've lost me. I like the sound of value-based branding stripping the accomplishment history bare and putting the pure, raw ability out on public display. It sounds pretty sexy.

But once we start talking about flaunting general abilities or talents on a resume we usually get into the "results-oriented, effective and efficient" puff stuff and you appear to say that this hackneyed lingo from a million overviews is not what you mean.

As for ambiguity, is a resume on Word different from a resume on paper just because it has embedded links? Not fundamentally. And the same applies to the difference between Word and LinkedIn.

And, regarding Twitter, no ambiguity there; it builds your brand but it's not a resume. It's networking.

Seth Godin says your network should be so good that you don't need a resume. But, not everyone who can hire you is going to know you and they'll have to see a summary of your experience in the context of a work history.

And that makes a text resume, even if it's supported by all kinds of multi-media, fundamental to me.

[Chandlee Bryan]

Great post, Deb!

While resumes are still the de-facto standard for applying for jobs (and are generally required both for the application process and so that the employer can meet Federal standards on record keeping) , I agree with Barbara Safani: the resume is increasingly viewed as one component of the application process--with online information playing a greater role in the overall search process.

The Google search on a candidate has become another standard practice--your online presence from LinkedIn to "digital dirt" can reveal just as much about you and your work as your resume. As early as 2006--an ExecuNet survey reported that 77% of executive recruiters admitted checking out candidates online during the employment process. In my opinion, building and maintaining your online presence has become a critical component of the job search process: In my private practice as a resume writer and career coach, I work with clients on "web-based" presence as much as I do on "paper."

Beyond the "Google" and online factor, Web 2.0 has also heavily influenced how resumes are evaluated: when you apply online for a position through a company or job board portal, your resume is frequently ranked based on "relevance" for this position. Elements affecting relevance include level of experience and key words (look at position descriptions and ads to identify potential key words, then use them in your resume).

In sum, technology is changing the role of the resume in the overall process, but resumes are still essential in the employment process. As such, it's no less important to have a clear, concise resume today than it was previously.

[Deb Dib]

Hi again, Recruiting Animal,

Thanks for so thoroughly dissecting my posts! This is fun! I am really enjoying our point/counterpoint discussion.

Your comments (and recruiting-side perspective) are helping me further articulate my thoughts on a subject upon which we obviously hold passionate opinions. I say we've covered "Do you still need a resume" and should move the discussion to "What's in a good resume?" (We both know it's not meaningless superlatives backed up by empty "responsible for" job descriptions.)

Stand by for a blog post on that in a few days. I'll eagerly await your contrarian response!

Deb

[Deb Dib]

Hi Chandlee,

Thanks for your thoughtful response. The discussion that is emerging from this post, and the previous "parent post" is exactly what I wanted to see happen.

It's so helpful to people when experts start exchanging experiences and differing points of view...it all gets stirred in the pot and useful "what you need to do now" strategies emerge.

Your feedback is on-target and very useful. As one of the experts on social media as a career tool for emerging professionals and beyond, your comments are especially valuable Thanks!

Deb

[Recruiting Animal]

Hey Debbie, I know you're dying to come on my show and have a fight with me. It doesn't have to be now. Let's think our thoughts in advance(I have an on-air rule: No Thinking!)and in the meantime, here's a sample so you can see if it's for you

http://is.gd/e0R

[Deb Dib]

Hey, Recruiting Animal... and that clip would persuade me, how? Not so much that I can't take the heat, just don't know if I can listen and talk that fast! Let me think about it (off-air, of course) and then practice the art of talking/yelling even faster/louder than a New Yorker (my city of birth) while defending a strong POV in the face of unremitting questioning. Need to train hard for this! Not saying no, am saying maybe. Thanks for the invite, and please know I do find you refreshing!

Deb

[Miriam Salpeter, Keppie Careers]

Deb,

Thanks for the discussion. It's always interesting to see what people have to say about this hot topic.

If all job seekers fully engaged in the type of networking that enhances their ability to use the "pull, not push" job search methodology, it is true that the resume would become less important as a first-line contact point.

I advise my clients to participate in Web 2.0 strategies to "pull" interest from potential employers. LinkedIn has become the absolute "must have" online presence and Twitter is a terrific way to share information, network and yes, promote your "brand." Facebook, when managed well, has a lot to offer as a third-line strategy.

For strong writers, I suggest (1) authoring a blog and/or (2) leaving smart comments on blogs related to your industry. These are terrific ways to showcase your knowledge and expertise.

Then, of course, there are all of the in-person networking strategies professionals should use to enhance their profiles in their fields.

So, if you are good enough at using these strategies (or, as Seth Godin has said - if you are exceptional), you may be invited to apply for or interview for a job before you've provided a resume. However, as noted above, most organizations will request a resume at some point in the process. The likelihood is that it will be at the same time they ask for you to apply. (As in - "We are very interested in learning more about how you can contribute to our organization. Please forward your resume to....") As noted above, recruiters clearly need to see a resume.

Does all of this mean that the resume is less important? Ultimately, I don't think so. While it may not always serve as the employer's first impression, it is still key to support the positive view a job seeker needs to promote.

[Deb Dib]

Hi Miriam:

I agree that at some point organizations will want a resume in the interview process, and that is likely at the beginning. Yet because of on-line resume builders, application forms, etc. It seems that in certain instances a resume is not as critical to provide as it used to be.

My main concern is that people become complacent and think the resume will be the one great thing that gets them interviews, when you and I know it isn't (your strategies above are...).

Anyway, if we train our clients to know that a resume is just one of many strategies and tools that, as a collective, work to capture interviews, then we're doing a service!

Deb

[Charles J. Timmins]

Deb:

You've created a necessary dialogue. As career professionals, our role is to provide clients with best practices and leading-edge techniques that move their candidacies forward. Career success depends upon the effectiveness of their search methodology.

Effective candidates, especially at the senior-level, are compelled to move beyond a solely resume-centric campaign. As you and your colleagues at Career Hub have mentioned numerous times, candidates are seeking a portfolio of marketing materials to convey the richness of the depth and breadth that their personal brand portrays.

In its purest sense, a resume holds the promise of being the end product of a carefully rendered examination of a candidate's career history. Past performance is a critical indicator of future success. However, candidates today are challenged to portray their potential to provide solutions to specific challenges, as well as to catalyze growth and lead change in the future. Many digital tools exist to address this requirement.

As a complementary resource, LinkedIn is an absolute must for serious careerists "to be found" by those seeking Talent (recruiters especially). However, candidates in transition are usually the least qualified individuals to develop the imagery necessary to create the "pull" of the "pull-push" strategy.

Enterprising organizations will fashion new and exciting "digital tools" that extend the limits of existing technology to further showcase an individual's personal brand and elevate their candidacy.

The career game is about demonstrating the candidate's preeminence, so that others become comfortable enough to champion their candidacy to the targeted audience. It is apparent to many that the resume tends to constrain this objective.

Hopefully, this moves the mindshare forward.

[Deb Dib]

Charles, thank you for your thoughtful commentary. Well and truly said!

Deb