AirbagOff t1_j0145aq wrote
My perception is that HR screening software prevents most resumes from ever reaching a real human being unless we stuff it with keywords from the job description. But if we do that, the resulting bloated mess of a resume and cover letter that get past the machine will not be ideal for a human reader, who will want something clean and short.
Any advice on the right balance between the two, that will still get my resume to a real person, without it being word soup?
hrmagnet OP t1_j02slme wrote
It's not necessarily true, but I think it's easy to get jaded when we hear a lot of emphasis on ATS. ATS is mostly used for light screening, and rarely used for "volume" screening. After all, employers want to find good candidates, and not unnecessarily screen people out. I have found that more people get cut out from not following the instructions than ATS.
Make sure that your resume is easy to parse. That means it should be text-based (word or PDF). I have a hard time with JPG and image-based resumes and it doesn't print very well. Make sure your resume has a single-column. The flashy "designer" resumes look cool, but if you're not in design or marketing, it might not screen through as well.
The winning resumes are concise. Word soup won't get very far.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments