As an applicant screener, I HATE functional resumes.

I just sent this email to our trainer, who does resume classes for the public. I was warned against using functional resumes when I was a job seeker, but I never knew until I began this position how truly annoying they are when you have a high volume of resumes to deal with in a day.



I hope that this input might help someone who is using or considering using a functional resume. If you really prefer it, I highly recommend including details to help the screeners/recruiters/managers quantify your experience.

something? What's a functional resume? I need all the help I can get. Just to fill you in, I have a B.S. in physics, graduating magna cum laude, and a master's in education, but I work in a factory for $9.50/hr. I'm as bad as they come at getting jobs.

are when you focus on the types of experience you have, but either entirely leave off the chronology of jobs or barely mention the titles and dates at the bottom. It makes it impossible to match up what your actual amounts of experience in each skill set are.

example:
http://www.quintcareers.com/resume_sample_2.html

See how there is no way for me to actually tell how much experience at any of the skills the person has?

As opposed to a chronological resume, in which I can add up the years and can also tell which experience was most recent.

example:
http://www.resumesandcoverletters.com/Chrono_Compare_Resume.pdf

I have seen some people combine the styles by putting a functional-style description of experience on page one and then a detailed chronology on page 2. Not really necessary for most people, but I can see where that could be useful in certain circumstances.

What kind of job do you want? Teaching?

I always put the dates in.

job coaches and professional resume writers are teaching people to NEVER submit a chrono-resume. I've been to dozens in my career. (There is a industry conceit by my estimation that if they pursue such a position long enough they can force hirers out of being able to seek time-based qualifications.) That is IMO a very-good thing. Time is in no way an indicator of talent or skill in almost any field.

It's just a misguided "best practice" pushed by HR. Length of experience is thus overrated.

...functional resumes make it less easy for people like you to screen applicants out after only a quick glance.

you can see that if I have 100 applicants per week for each of 20 jobs I am trying to fill, it is in your own best interest to make sure I can tell you are qualified in case I don't have time to call you to fill in the gaps.

Go ahead and consider me the enemy if it makes you feel better about things. I was really trying to be helpful, since I have experience as a counselor advocating for the applicant and as a recruiter trying to find the right candidate.

not HR. The system is ass-backwards to me. The hiring manager knows what skill set they're looking for in a job better than anyone else would.

"Applicant screener." It sounds like their job is to keep the undesirables out.

I'm sure the vast majority of applicants are good people, even if they aren't expert resume writers, or even if they have something in between their teeth during an interview. How about "hiring manager" or something?

I'm not currently looking for a job, but when I was, it was frustrating putting hours into creating a resume, only to have the recipient look at it for 10 seconds. If nobody is willing to read a resume with care, no wonder people stop putting time into writing them. It's also why I avoided applying at corporations.

I also found out that I am better off self employed.

When a position gets 200+ applications, it is just not practical to think that every department has enough extra time to have someone review every single application for them. When I was a screener, my job was to look at each application and forward only those that met the MINIMUM qualifications. That is why being able to quantify experience mattered. The min quals for a position may be HS/GED plus 2 years of experience. The experience could be subbed for higher related education. It was my job to just make sure those minimums were met. Generally speaking about 1/2 to 1/3 of the 200-plus apps would meet the minimums. Then the HR Recruiter (which I am now), who was given specific preferences by the department's hiring authority, would then review that set of 100 apps who met the minimums, and look for the more specific qualifications. This may be something like "must have experience with Adobe Photoshop" or "2 or more years with database management." At that point, I would likely be able to limit the applicant pool down to 20 to 50 apps, which is a more manageable set for a hiring manager to review.

Now, in addition to providing a SERVICE to the hiring manager, my job also involves making sure everyone is treated fairly. I don't look just for dynamic resumes. No matter what resume books or trainers tell you, no spiffy format will impress me (with the exception of possibly looking for creative positions like graphic artists). I want the facts, in a readable format and that should be COMFORTING to qualified applicants! Would you rather be judged solely on how fancy a resume you can create, or on the basis of having met the minimum objective qualifications, then having met any preferred criteria (such as specific software or other experience) in order for your application to be sent to a manager?

We take great pains to be as objective as possible, so that everyone is judged on a level playing field. I am rather amazed that I feel like I have to justify that here. I take great pride in providing a service both to the department and to the applicant, and I have very good skills at pulling details out of what are often jumbled and cluttered or sparse resumes so that I can often pre-qualify applicants who didn't at first appear to meet the minimums. My complaint about functional resumes is that they tell me practically NOTHING quantitative, making it next to impossible to compare applicants objectively. You'd be amazed that most people actually short-sell themselves, leaving out critical info rather than elaborating too much, and I flesh that out for them by phone or email, because my goal is to match the best candidate to the job, not to keep anyone OUT.

HR is not the enemy. We do our best work when we are able to make the best match for all parties. Your job is to get me all the relevant info so that I will be able to RECOGNIZE that in you. If your resume does you a disservice by leaving important details out, then I try to make the extra effort to investigate that. Your best shot, however, is not relying on HR to make that extra effort, as we are often overburdened with applicants, and may not have time to talk to everyone.

I have a suggestion for you HR types:

When I read the necessary qualifications for a job, and then see the money being offered, I really have to chuckle. I see so many that require a BS in Computer Science, which is not exactly appropriate for being a desktop support monkey, server dude or dudetta or average web weenie. I see a raft of required certs that no human I know, in IT(and I know more than a few) has or has enough lifetime to ever get. And the money being offered, in too many cases, is simply risable. Benefits? BWAHAHAHA. Besides, they are all contractor jobs, which even this Department of Labor has stated misuse the rules and intent of contractor job laws: you go in, get treated like an employee, with none of the benefits of full employment. Then you get chucked out the door. Rinse and repeat, ad nauseum.

I am not alone when I look at these listings and think "H1-B dodge". It's pretty much considered that a large percentage of IT job listings are just that, and thus, unethical and even skirting the spirit and intent of the law.

There is a lot of resentment out there because of this and I thought you guys need to know it.

One other thing: I signed an agreement, with an employment agency, the other day, for drug testing. Since I use neither ETOH or recreational drugs, just those prescribed to me by a doctor, I am not worried about it. But in there, they stated I was allowing them to take a tissue sample. WTF? Is cutting tissue out of people the new "labor/management relations"?

And yes, it made me angry. Things that go way too far tend to get me exercised. As is appropriate, methinks.

I am wondering if it is meant to cover them if they decide to start doing hair testing?

As far as H1-B's go, I agree with you about them.

because we don't want the fact that we spent twenty-five years at home raising kids to be the first thing that leaps out at the screener, because of the huge gap in employment dates.

And we don't want the fact that we've recently turned 60 to be the second thing they notice.

I have no trouble getting interviews based on my resume. If I then don't get the job, I figure that it's not age discrimination against me but because someone else really did have better relevant experience. My charming personality :) has been known to win over the interviewer and get me job offers, even after they've seen my gray hair, and learned that my best and most relevant job experience occurred three decades ago.

pure functional resumes with no chronology make it very difficult for us to tell if you meet the basic requirements. I recently saw a question from a job seeker on a LinkedIn.com group, and EVERYONE in recruiting had the same answer... you must include some kind of quantification. If you are resolute that you must use a functional style resume, incorporate some kind of quantifying, such as:

Experience includes:
5+ years in office management
10+ years with MS Office
6 years of sales support

If we have no way of quantifying your experience and 100 resumes to look at, and not enough time to call everyone for the first cut, you may miss out when you should NOT miss out.

Keep in mind that if the one thing in your resume that piques my interest most (because it directly relates to the job) is something that I can't tell if you did for a month or 10 years, it is not selling you well enough. I am not saying I would NOT call you, but it is a risk if there are 10 other people with that skill and I know up front that they all have 5+ years of it.

what type of resume presentation do you suggest for someone with a broad educational and work background?

I know you want something that makes your job easier. Unfortunately, that chronological presentation does not always serve to highlight the skills of an applicant. If the resume is brief and contains the information you require then you have no reason to complain. Especially if your preferred manner of presentation is not specified in advance.

My functional resume has a section for education (5 lines of text), work experience, and skills (3 lines of text). The work experience section is functionally subdivided into three sections: (1) business and financial; (2) consulting and legal; and (3) creative and communications. Major job responsibilities are detailed with corresponding dates. The resume is one page in length. In my case, a chronological resume does not serve to feature significant responsibilites and experience in varied fields of endeavor.

I have worked in multiple industries and some of my past job responsibilities - one in particular - have been very broad. That is often what happens when one works in a small corporation (less than 100 employees). Especially when one does that over nearly a decade. I was a department head (property and casualty claims), did the reinsurance reconcilliations (an accounting function), dealt with all auditors and inspectors (a compliance function), responded to all regulatory inquiries and complaints from customers, regulators, and the public (a legal function), and reported on all aspects of company operation to the men who owned the business. I fulfilled all those responsibilities concurrently during my tenure at that company. Concurrently fulfilling such a broad range of responsibilites isn't something that can readily be quantified into rigid requirements of X amount of experience in a particular function. There's nothing I can do about that. And, no, I cannot easily divide those responsibilities into anything remotely representing an accurante representation of the percentage of time devoted to each function. Why? Because it was highly variable depending on the needs and demands at the time. That experience cannot be made to fit neatly into one of your little boxes.

I don't think the problem is with resume presentation. Most corporate job descriptions are designed to reward folks who have followed traditional career paths and whose skills are primarily related to a particular job function. It is often a detriment to bring a broader base of skills to a posiiton. Somebody might find you a threat or think you too independent or too unsettled on a career path. That is especially true if one has a professional degree or has ever been self-employed. The problem isn't the resume presentation - rather it is one of fit. Unconventional and nontraditional backgrounds are not well received in the corporate world.

I have worked for some large multinational corporations. I was a cog in an assembly line. I was not challenged and my skills and ability to cotribute were not fully utilized. That is the nature of the beast. And it is why I hope never to return.

I will never fit neatly into one of your little boxes.

really is the best choice, you need to at least include some way to let me quantify the skills you have that are relevant to my job.

The best thing for anyone to start a resume with, function or chronological, is a "Professional Summary," which would be 3-5 sentences that give the high points of your career that are directly related to the job you are applying for. Following my summary, I have a small table (no borders) with two columns and 4 bullet points of my top accomplishments. In the first 2 inches of my resume, you can see my best points (which amazingly enough directly correspond to your job! ;) )

If you choose not to include even a brief chronology (I have seen folks kind of combine the two styles and that can work), at least quantify it as I explained above, showing how many years of those relevant skills you have.

Sorry I didn't come back to this topic in so long, but I felt like I was much negativity for bringing up something I thought was going to be helpful. I never knew until my job was to read volumes and volumes of resumes, how hard it is to pull enough info out of functional resumes. That doesn't mean I didn't try, but sometimes time is a limiting factor, and I want to prevent my fellow DUers from getting counted out on a technicality when they are qualified.

and he said I should change it to be a functional resume. For many in the technical arena this is what we are told.

From your post I'm wondering why?

On edit the "Functional" resume I created looks nothing like yours. Included is a chronology of jobs and duties for each. What gives?

Scuba

the problem lies. Maybe there is a differing use of the term in this case? In my opinion, you can group your skills in whatever way you want, but in some way, please include a way for me to quantify them, and very often, functional resumes do not include that. You can get creative with that if you want, but just don't leave out important info that might end up short changing you.

I hope you'll continue to offer your insights into resume/job-hunt strategies. It's pretty brutal out here in Unemployed World, and seems to be getting worse by the day.

I was laid off last Wednesday myself. Not much need for recruiters when there is no recruiting going on!LOL! I feel fortunate to have insight from both sides of the rat race though... as an employment counselor and as a screener, so I feel pretty good when I am thrust back into the job search. I don't always remember to check in here, but if anyone ever has any questions for me, please feel free to PM me. I would never mind one bit!

We evilDUers gotta stick together! :evilgrin:

I haven't had work since January--was doing contract work for a local company that got taken over by a Soros group of "genius" MBAs who promptly ran it into the ground. There's precious little recruiting going on here in Rochester, NY, unless it's for low-paying customer service jobs or super-high-tech stuff.

Thank you for the kind offer; I might take you up on it. Here's a question: What's your take on attitudes to hiring the over-50 set?

Maybe you could start a resume-writing/job-coaching biz?

In fact, the last two people I hired before I was laid off were 54 and 62.

At the hospital I worked at before this job, we actually had someone report to us about a recruiting seminar dealing with attracting older workers and keeping your own. The gist of it was that with the baby boomer generation beginning to retire, the proportions are changing, and it may become harder to recruit the best candidates. They wanted to know how to retain their experienced workers, recruit the best regardless of age, and also get our retirees back as part-timers.

I know not all companies are that great about this, but I was glad those two were. One thing.... I know one excuse companies use to shy away from older workers is higher insurance premiums and more sick time. Large companies may not have an issue with that as much as they would have a large enough pool that the risk was still spread out and coverage during sick time would be easier.

Plus, discriminating on the basis of age for being over 50 is becoming less of an issue now because everyone knows that people are living longer, being productive longer, and putting off retiring. Many my age and younger (40) don't really expect to ever retire, but just go to fewer hours or lighter duty. So I think some employers are getting used to the idea that 50 is younger than what 60 was 20 years ago.

I have actually heard more complaints from new grads about not finding work lately than from people over 50.

I'd love to hear from other job hunters and recruiters about this issue, though. I wonder if it's different, regionally? I read a DUer's post somewhere here that he/she'd knew of recruiters who'd been told not to even bother forwarding resumes of 50+ job seekers.

As someone who has *generally* not had major problems getting responses to resumes, the current silence makes me wonder if my age is now a factor. Understand I haven't sent out hundreds; I try to look for jobs I really want and am qualified for, and target my resume to them, but the silence is deafening and has me worried. I met an Adecco recruiter at a job fair recently who told me to send her my resume; she didn't even acknowledge it when I did so. Ditto the online apps I've done where I felt I was really qualified--but nothing, not even a "thanks for submitting" generic email.

in the US. How can you get your resume considered when you know from lots of experience that lots of experience is a detriment?

In every technical field I know of, there are thousands and often millions of fully qualified or over-qualified people looking for work, yet no one can get past you if they're over 40.

Nothing personal, but your profession just sucks. You are the gatekeepers that keep the qualified from being seen by the hiring mangers that are looking for them. You never understand what is really needed and operate entirely from meaningless buzzwords.

I'm sure it is frustrating to you, but it is far worse than you can imagine from the other side.

As a professional with extensive number of work entries - contractor for short periods of time and multiple layoffs due to downsizing or corporate bankruptcy, I find it difficult or impossible to put a time element to specific professional activities or tasks. The difficulty is that most of my crucial stills and talents have been used at multiple positions for an indefinite amount of time each; mixed with many others.

As a project oriented professional, I am involved in anywhere from four to a dozen projects at a time. Multiply this times ten job entries and you have an impossible matrix of time vs. skill/talent. How is it you can possibly expect a candidate to divide such a career into pieces having any sort of time accuracy?

To get around this I have a fairly lengthy resume with an addendum. It details crucial skills and talents with a rating on a one through ten scale; for example:

• Developed and taught Security Awareness training. Assisted the employees in understanding their involvement in the Audit, Password and Acceptable Use polices. Offered simple, easy to remember methods of creating strong, easy to remember passwords. Skill level 8 - 9 of 10

The resume entries and cover letter highlight prominent and mission critical accomplishments.

Would you please lend a bit of insight into your needs as a reviewer and advice to formats that make your life easier?

thanks
HaknWak

Could you please lend me some advice in making