Log in

No account? Create an account
advice call: chronological resume versus something else: - The inexplicable charisma of the rival [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Just me.

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

advice call: chronological resume versus something else: [Feb. 7th, 2010|12:57 am]
Just me.

I graduated with my MLIS in 1994 and have pretty much been doing library work since then. My current resume is in the tried-and-true chronological format and goes back to 1996. I have the date of both my BA and MLS in my resume.

I am just about 40 and so possibly at the age where I want my resume to say "I have 15 years of experience in this field but I'm still young enough that I won't be retiring in 3 years". I have had it suggested to me that having dates that go back so far could make the HR person think, wow, you're old, even though I'm not really. If you presume that most people get their BA within 4-6 years of graduating high school, having the dates of my degrees lets employees guess my age to some accuracy (if they want to).

Is that even important these days? are employers scared of hiring people that might be about to go have kids or retire, or do they realize most people will only work at a job for 5 years tops anyway, so it doesn't matter? Is it important to show stability (ie 5 years at this job, 4 years at the next?) if you're mentioning 12 years worth of jobs? I have no "unexplained gaps' in my work history, FWIW.

Right now my resume goes education: ("I haz these degreez!") skills: ("I know the following programs, interfaces, and skill sets") and then work history (position name, employer, list of typical responsibilities). should I be rethinking this?

I understand that in the tech industry, it's more common to see the skill set resume that doesn't emphasize past employers as much. how is it in YOUR line of work?

[User Picture]From: alanna_cooper
2010-02-07 06:45 pm (UTC)

not helpful, but

Your situation is really interesting to me. It's not relevant to your question, but since you asked, in MY line of work we rarely apply for jobs. However, when we get new jobs or are up for promotions, everyone has a standard form that lists all their previous jobs, deployments, awards, schools, and language experience including a picture so everyone can judge you. It's called an Officer Record Brief and the format is the same for every officer in the Army. It's only one page.

In the rare times we get to apply for jobs, like the congressional staff position I'll be applying for soon, the Army uses this form as well as every evaluation I've ever had. Evaluations are also standard forms, and we have to get one at least every year.

Hearing about job searches always makes me glad I'm in the Army. Good luck with yours!
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: mcfnord
2010-02-08 01:29 pm (UTC)
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: mad_eponine
2010-02-09 02:55 am (UTC)
I like this one. It lists things chronologically, and the dates are there for anal HR types, but they are somewhat overshadowed by Impressive Job Titles. I've been told that some HR types, depending on the industry, like to see how long you've been at jobs.

For $My_Current_Job, I followed the standard that you described. But I don't think the resume got me in as much as me calling them and talking to the recruiter. I would not have made the initial cut without calling because I was short on some one dinky criterion on their stupid little supplemental survey. In the end, I think I was hired somewhat on personality... which augmented my mad skills, I guess.

HR is so varied and weird. Even within one "industry" I suspect there's quite a bit of variability. This is why getting the inside scoop from someone on the inside is so indispensable. I dislike HR; they are gatekeepers, sure, but in many cases they are like the Keystone Kops of gatekeepers.

Having sprinkled this bit of positivity, I wish you the best!
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: drexle
2010-02-15 12:40 am (UTC)
The age thing I think, is less about whether you're a flight risk and more about whether you're still sharp enough to learn new tricks.
(Reply) (Thread)