On 07/06/2012 16:16, George Herbert wrote:
On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 4:07 PM, Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> wrote:
On 06/07/2012 23:25, valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
The Friday afternoon cynic in me says it's because it's a move with positive paybacks. There's 3 basic possibilities:
1) You send the puffed resume to a company with clue, it gets recognized as puffed, and you don't get the job. Zero loss, you weren't going to get that job anyhow.
2) You send a boring unpuffed resume to a company sans clue. They recognize it as boring because there's only 3 buzzwords on 2 pages, and you don't get the job. Loss.
3) You send a puffed resume, and the guy doing the hiring doesn't know what the 3-packet mating call of the Internet is *either*. Win.
or:
4) you get caught out in the interview as being puffed up, but the company hires you anyway despite strongly worded objections from the interviewer, causing the interviewer's eyes to spin in their sockets at the inanity of the decision. You then spend your entire employment at the company proving your ineptitude beyond all possible doubt.
I think this is a win, is it?
There's also
5) Didn't have enough clue about the real world to know you were puffing your resume up.
6) Puffed it up a little (worked with Cisco routers, but in the 7200 era, and hasn't categorized skills as recent / older), but hasn't outright lied.
7) Were the beneficiary of some professional resume service/headhunter. "You know how to spell 'aych-tee-tee-pee'? Let's list that!" -- If you're never wrong, you're not trying hard enough