See who is already coming to #socialrecruiting summit in November!

Blog Network

Invested, innovative, brilliant: Improving the recruiting experience

Great recruitment brands start with great candidate experiences

7 Great Ways to Ensure No Recruiter Ever Reads Your Resume follow this blog post

posted by on June 2, 2009

I don't know what the heck's happened in the past couple of weeks, but the flow of Egregiously Bad Candidates has increased considerably.

The thing is, after I finish laughing at some of the emails we receive, I do feel kind of sorry for these dingbats, because they seem determined to ensure that no recruiter gets past the subject line of their email, let alone ever takes them seriously as a candidate.

So to these job-seekers, I offer the following:   The 7 things most guaranteed to ensure a recruiter never looks at your resume, let alone calls you.  Please, read this before you send out your next job-hunting-related email:

  1. Send a blind email to a recruiting company that doesn't recruit for your profession.
    Today I got a really well-written - if really, really long - cover letter from a guy who really wants a position as a senior chef in a 5-star hotel, preferably in Halifax.

    Well...we don't recruit for the hospitality industry (a quick check of our job board would tell you we specialize in recruiting recruiters,  and HR, Supply Chain and IT professionals), and while we are located in Canada, we don't have offices in Halifax. 

    So I know this guy just Googled 'recruiting companies' and sent emails to every company that turned up.  Whatever.

  2. CC a whole lot of people without hiding their names or email addresses.
    You know the people who do this - the CC field is jam-packed with like 50 names and email addresses - would be the first to complain if you revealed their email address to a zillion other people.  Not sure how un-email-literate you have to be to fail to use the BCC field, but you're clearly too email-illiterate for our clients. 
  3. Send your resume to 'info' @therecruitingcompany.com instead of to a real person or the 'proper' job application address.
    At our office, I'm the person who receives all the emails that go to info@head2head.ca - in other words, I'm the one who gets basically all the junk mail.  If you're sending an email to 'info' at our address, I know you haven't taken two seconds to visit our website, which brings us to...
  4. Don't visit our website before you send your resume.
    I don't get this one.  Every single 'job search tips'-type list always says "Visit the company website before you send your application!  You will learn valuable information which will will tell the recruiter/potential employer you care enough to do your homework!". 

    Is it that some candidates still feel that it's nothing but a numbers game - that if they just blast every recruiting company with random emails, they'll eventually hit employment gold?

    Because nothing could be further from the truth.
  5. Don't refer to what you do or what kind of job you're looking for in your cover email.
    This week alone I've received 14 emails that consist of a resume attachment.  No subject line, so 'Dear Ms Welstead', nothing to indicate what these emails are about.  Guess what?  If you're too busy to write one sentence about what kind of job you want, I'm too busy to open your attachment. 
  6. Include a sentence like "I've been looking for over 12 months but no one will hire me..." in your cover email.
    Sure, I'm not going to delete your email quite as quickly as I do in #5, above, but here's what happens:  I immediately think "What the heck is wrong with this person that no one wants to hire them?" - and then I delete the email, because I'm not putting Debbie Downer in front of our clients.
  7. Attach your resume in WordPerfect.
    I'm sure you can't believe this happens, but it does.  More often than you think.  Even if I can use my document converter to open your WordPerfect resume, all I'm thinking is:  Are you making an anti-Microsoft statement, or are you telling me that your computer skills stopped circa that 486 you had in 1994?  Either way, we've got a problem (not least because Microsoft is a client of ours - but then, you'd know that if you hadn't done #4, wouldn't you?).
| 27 comments | flag

27 comments

Log in or register to post a reply.

  • 1 point 3 months ago

    As a candidate I would like to address reasoning behind #1.

    Some companies have onsite company owned restaurants i.e. Coca-Cola and Total Systems (TSYS)...

    Reasoning why an IT recruiter at Coca-Cola may receive a chief's resume, and feel the same way you do.

    The candidate could only find the IT recruiters email because current openings are only for IT positions and therefore sent the resume to you. Yes, an explanation by the chief as to why the resume was sent to you along with a request to forward to the correct recruiter.

    The candidate is skilled in one area and would like to work with you toward securing an out of field position requiring minimal or no skills.

  • 1 point 3 months ago

    I read an article the other day about the tactic whereby disgruntled consumers track down the email naming convention of the company they feel 'screwed' them, comb media releases and other sources for the names of senior management, and then send a mass email to all of them.  (There's actually a name for doing this, but I can't remember it now.)

    I understand why someone would do the same sort of thing if they really wanted to work for a particular company, but at the end of the day, does that kind of gimmick really work? 

    Every week, the blogosphere features some story about some guy who did some crazy stunt to try to get a job at some company.  Sure, they may generate great buzz (though often the buzz is more about the company they're targeting than about the candidate themselves), but if you check back 2 months later, 99% of the time they still haven't been hired - by anyone.

  • 1 point 3 months ago

    But what has changed?  If the candidate is still yielding 0 benefit by trying to get through a screening admin (aka the Recruiter of Yesteryear), their potential benefit/payout has to be equal or greater by going direct.

    In huge companies, there is too much red tape for a candidate to "have the audacity" to contact their potential Hiring Manager or team members, but in small-to-mid size firms, this happens with great success every day.

    In a small company, line recruiters are less likely to block hiring a great candidate because their feathers were ruffled. 

    Nope, it's not about the screening admin anymore.  It's about hiring the best person for the job (but wasn't that what the Hiring Manager wanted anyway?)  You bet.

  • 1 point 3 months ago

    What a great post, Sarah. As someone who works for (and is paid by) the candidate, it also causes me mixed emotions. I think some (perhaps even 50%) of the onus is on the job seeker to understand how recruiters work AND what they need to do to position themselves with a clear and compelling value proposition within a targeted market. 

    It is sad that organizations specifically "preach" writing your own resume, when it is very clear that is not everyone's area of expertise. The organization and the self-help books that evangelize "doing it yourself" are part of the problem.

    If you haven't had to look for a job recently, why would you attempt to do it alone? Would you go blind into any other major venture, especially one that funds everything else in your life?

    I know my finance exec clients get very frustrated with recruiters who don't respond to them ... AND they also understand how recruiters work and what they can reasonably expect from initiating a cold call.

    Cindy Kraft, the CFO-Coach

  • 1 point 3 months ago

    to me, the whole 'who should write your resume?' question is just another version of the old marketing conundrum:  Some people think that marketing is 'easy' and anyone can do it; other people think it's worth paying an ad agency $10 million for a single campaign.  Neither are right 100% of the time.

  • 1 point 4 months ago

    I believe that these are often "desperation" situations for many candidates.  Just because YOU know how it should be done that doesn't translate into any kind of knowledge for the potential candidate.   Do you counsel them? Do you take a minute of your precious time to educate them?  Or do you just laugh at their mistakes to make yourself feel better or more powerful? 

     We are in the HUMAN RESOURCES community yet we tend to treat those wanting and needing our help with little or no regard to their value as HUMANS. 

  • 1 point 4 months ago

    Jim,

    It goes both ways. I agree 100% with you, don't get me wrong. Like I said below, as annoying as it may get I still look at all resumes and give everyone an equal shot. However, I'm not going to feel bad for letting out a giggle or auto-deleting a resume that's been sent 10 times.

    Also, to answer your question: No, I don't take a minute of my precious time to counsel 475 out of 500 candidates that send me their resume for 1 position. I'm understanding, but also realize my job is to produce great employees for my firm (I'm internal). On the other hand, if there is a great candidate that needs to improve his/her resume... yes, I will counsel them. But we are speaking in generic/general terms here.

  • 1 point 4 months ago

    After reading Jim's comments, I spoke to a couple of very senior recruiters who've worked in a variety of recruiting environments (agency, corporate and RPO-type services) and said, "Am I actually being too harsh here?   Are we as recruiters in fact deserving of our bad reputation as 'headhunters' who don't give a flying fig about candidates except insofar as they can make us money/improve our  placement ratios?"

    The answer was a resounding "No." 

    I think what frustrates me personally the most - and what seems to drive even the most compassionate recruiters nuts - is the sheer laziness of some of these candidates. 

    Yes, job-hunting is tough; yes, it almost always involves sending a lot of emails and making a lot of phone calls that don't get returned promptly, if at all; yes, having to try and sell yourself to recruiters who often don't much about your profession in the first place is both frustrating and demoralizing.

    But we all have to do it.

    What's more, today's job-seekers have a distinct advantage:  The internet fairly teems with resources for job-seekers.  There are hundreds of thousands of 'job-seeking tips', blogs, articles, YouTube how-to videos, interview prep presentations, personal branding guides, case studies, resume templates, niche job boards and god knows what else out there.  Job-seekers don't have to look farther than a quick Google search to find out how to put their best foot forward and increase their chances of success.

    What's more, the internet makes it possible to find and connect almost instantly to anyone - for free, and with very little effort.  It's easy to get a list of all the recruiting companies in your area/field, go to the corporate job boards of companies you'd like to work for, and even track down the names and contact information for decision-makers.

    And it's very easy to become very knowledgeable about an organization or industry before you even apply or get an interview.

    So when candidates send out these egregiously bad resumes, awful emails, or wear flipflops to an interview, it's not because no one has ever 'counseled' them - it's because they're too lazy to spend a couple of hours to do some research.

    [And if you're about to say, "What about these poor 50+ people who haven't had to look for a job in 10-20 years?", my response is this:  Every study in the past 3+ years reveals that the 50+ group is the fastest-growing in terms of internet use, and social media tools like Facebook are growing faster among the 40+ crowd than the under-25s.  So there's no reason why they can't access all these job-search tips, too.]

  • 1 point 4 months ago

    I agree that the internet has increased the availability of knowledge and that many job seekers do not take full advantage of resources available.  

    I just had a candidate do a phone interview with a food company and he didn't take the time to even visit their web site (he did not get past that screening interview).  I had told him to do that in my interview prep, so I have no sympathy for him - but he won't do it again, I imagine, since I did tell him that his failure to do even the very basic research on the company cost him a chance to interview at my client for a position that he was technically well qualified.

    You can lead a horse to water......

    So, I do agree with the "laziness" of the candidates - but sometimes it is hard to determine if they are just lazy or uninformed.  I try to give the benefit of doubt in most cases. 

    Some of the best candidates I have worked with were "new to the recruiting game" and once I helped them understand what was needed they readily went the extra mile to get the right information on the resume and into well written cover letters (and earned me fees I may not have had if I had been too callous).

    As for Scott, I think that in your case, as an internal recruiter, I would be less inclined to give them tips and advice - more from a time perspective than anything else.  But I will venture a guess that your company has hired someone that falls into one or more of the "7" listed above, since you mention that you at least look at everything.  Kudos for that!

    Believe me I am not the nicest person in the recruiting profesion either.  I will surely send a slam email (or send all futures to my junk/delete mail) to the individual I have received a resume from 10+ times in 2 days.

    I also allow myself a laugh or two for the Fresh graduate that applys for the senior manager positions.  (but he/she still gets a note or a call back letting them know they don't qualify).

    Since I am a third party recruiter I feel that every individual can potentially lead to a referral for my next tough opening - I try to be at least courteous to everyone.  Especially since statistics prove that 3rd party recruiters only place about 1-2% of the "candidates" with whom we speak.  And even in these recessionary times, the quality talent is still very tough to find. (See Joshua's post below)

     

  • 1 point 4 months ago

    Um, have you read my blog posts about how I think we SHOULD do a better job counselling people?  

  • 1 point 4 months ago

    Sarah, I'm with you that it can be frustrating - trust me.  I wouldn't say I'm nicer than anyone, but I do acknowledge that it's the worst economy since the Great Depression.  Every day I drive by Atlantic Station in Atlanta, I am appalled by the growing numbers of homeless, and believe me when I say that the homeless today include a high number of children.  It's a daily reality check, and I consider myself lucky.

    At the end of the day, I go back to 3 central points:

    1. WE, as a Recruiting Industry, have taught candidates to that blind mass emailing is ok.  If we do it, why can't they, right?  It's just that in our case, we have a gun and a badge . . . so we can flex on them.  Translation: Until our industry elevates the level of our profession, we will continue to live in glass houses.

    2. As an Executive Recruiter, we are in the WRONG NICHE if we can be so selective as to screen out on the basis of petty issues.  In my humble opinion, how we view and treat the candidate market during a depression is as powerful an indicator as any.

    3. Just because we are in a position of 'power' (i.e. we can screen in or screen out on our personal discretion), doesn't mean we should abuse our power.  I agree with Acton that "Absolute power corrupts absolutely."  It is a fine line that we walk.

    Anyway, I'm just providing a counterpoint to your notion of Egregiously Bad Candidates.  Let us not forget the number of Egregiously Bad Recruiters as well.

    P.S. I enjoy your writing, so keep up the good work :)

  • 1 point 4 months ago
    I think several of you - Scott, Joshua, Julie - are way nicer than I am, and I applaud you for it. I think, as Scott says, it is important sometimes to realize that we're all of us only one disastrous layoff away from desperation ourselves, so it's important to be compassionate. However. (you knew that was coming) So on Friday I get Identical Email #6 from the guy who sent me emails 1 through 5 that provoked this blog post in the first place. I'm tempted to send him a link to this post, but I refrain, and instead say, "You know, I've received this email 6 times in the past few days. It's not a numbers game. I think you'll find you'd do better if, instead of email bombardments, you created a profile on our jobs site." The response? "Sorry. I thought you'd want my updated resume. You'll never hear from me again." Why didn't he just create a profile on our site as I suggested? I think it's these people - the ones who have all the right information in their hands, but who are determined not to use it - who drive me most nuts. As for people who haven't applied for a job in a whole bunch of years and are finding the game has changed: Well, as the Managing Partner of RetiredWorker.ca, I certainly see a lot of these. But I'm finding I have less patience than I used to. A quick Google of 'how to apply for a job if you haven't in a while' turns up zillions of tips, blogs, articles, handy hints, resources, blah blah blah. I dunno - I think today's job-seekers have SO much more information at their fingertips than anyone has ever had before, so it's getting harder to feel sorry for them.
  • 1 point 4 months ago

    I am in the choir and you are preaching to me!! Ha! I've been thinking about writing a very similar blog in the past few months... "The Responsibility of the Candidate". If you look around job postings these days, many of them say "Do not reply to this post unless you meet ALL of the requirements". Clearly, many recruiters are getting annoyed. I've always prided myself on looking at EVERY single resume that comes across my desk, but when I get 500 resumes for a very specific, high-end need... it just gets ridiculous.

    With that, I'll say one thing. There are alot of people out there looking for a job for the first time in 10-20+ yrs... they don't know what's acceptable. The last time they looked for a new gig, they would look in the newspaper. Therefore, I continue to look at EVERY resume in hopes I find 'the one'. Besides, if I'm out of a job for 6+ months and the box on the streetcorner is looking more and more like a viable option... I might just reply to every single posting 5 times in hopes that something sticks.

    Thanks - Scott

  • 1 point 4 months ago

    Sarah, one other quick note: Isn't some of the onus on us here?  I mean, it's us that have taught the candidate market that blind spam is acceptable.  They're just following suit with our own behavior ...

    I don't mean to take the high road with this comment, but candidates often see us as people who walk around with a gun and a badge.  And often, they're right.  Many are taught to "screen out" instead of "screen in".  We turn down candidacies on the basis of petty issues.

    I'm not saying "we're bad" or "they're bad", but what I am suggesting is that we need to lower this wall of "us versus them".  Ultimately, it accomplishes nothing . . . and who loses is the shareholder at the end of the day.  Know what I mean?

  • 1 point 4 months ago

    I wish I could be so selective! :)  However your sentiments are consistent with a down economy and oversupply of talent on the market.  During every recession, many of the same complaints surface within the HR Departments of large companies, as well as larger staffing firms that operate on a high-volume model.

    Personally, I'm too niched to be turning away talent on the basis of a cover letter or attachment file . . . however, I do understand where you're coming from.

    I have a theory that you know you're in the right niche (i.e. it's tight enough), when you can't be so selective in a recession or down economy.  Our attitudes toward the candidate pool during these times are a true indicator of whether we've hit a sweet spot as an Executive Recruiter.

    P.S. Maybe it's just me, but I'm not receiving an influx of resumes . . . likely because unemployment is extremely low within my focus.  I still have to headhunt every day, which I believe is a positive sign.  Well, let's hope so, anyway! :)

    P.S.S. Well-written. I like your style.

  • 1 point 4 months ago

    I guess it's different for my industry (healthcare). I don't care about a cover letter - if you're RN w/great experience, you don't need one. Same goes for fax - I don't care HOW I get a good resume, just send it in any way you like. Again, might be my specific industry. Back in the days when I recruited for Finance, it sure was different. Long gone are those days, though.

  • 1 point 4 months ago

    Jennye:  Thanks!  We were laughing at this end, too - that's how this blog happened in the first place.  When I first started the Egregiously Bad Candidates series of blog posts, I didn't realize they'd strike a chord with so many people.  However, I haven't yet mustered the courage to respond to some of the people who commit these offenses with a link to this post...

    Joann:  I think that recruiters - agency and corporate - do some of these candidates a disservice, because we often don't explain to a candidate why they weren't hired.  We had one fellow who had a decent resume and was a half-decent interview, but we couldn't put him in front of clients because he had such awful personal hygiene - 10 minutes in a room with him and you were gasping for air. 

    But no one wanted to tell him that the #1 obstacle in the way of his getting a job was simply that he needed to (a) have a shower, preferably with Zest; (b) wash his clothes, preferably with a lot of Febreze; and (c) invest in some Axe spray.  So this poor guy is probably still going through the world wondering why he never gets hired.  (sigh)

     

  • 1 point 4 months ago

    Thanks for your reply, Sarah.  Honestly, I'd have to say that if an applicant has applied for a position, interviews and is not selected, and then proceeds to apply for any job within the organization - whether or not they are qualified (and the qualifications are clearly listed in the job postin), I don't spend my time picking up the phone to ask them if they read the qualifications.  It's clear that they haven't.  If they can't read a posting and recognize that they are not at all qualified, I just don't have time to contact them to tell them it is because they didn't bother to read the posting and determine whether they are qualified before applying.

     

    And I would say in many cases agency recruiters are in a much better position to provide their clients with some of this information rather than corporate recruiters.  I've dealt with hygiene issues including employees who didn't bother to take showers regularly, wore the same shoes all of the time to the point that their feet was the offending body part, and even picking their nose during a counseling session.  But I don't get into these issues with applicants nor would I want my hiring managers to get into this with an applicant.

  • 1 point 5 months ago

    Sarah- You need to write a book! You had my entire team laughing out loud. I might also add-

    8. Sending your resume from your work email address.  If you are dumb enough in this day and age to believe that someone isn't watching what you are doing, and you don't have enough respect for your current employer... then you lack both the intelligence and the integrity that I demand in the candidates that I represent.

  • 1 point 5 months ago

    How about the applicant that has been interviewed, does not get hired, and continues to apply for every job that you have - regardless of whether they are qualified.  At some point, you have to "get" that you are not going to get a job with XYZ Company.

    Tiffany, I empathize.  I get Mr. too but usually from individuals from other countries who think that Joann is John in another language (Joan in Spain for example).  BTW, did you know that Richard Gere's middle name is Tiffany? although I don't think I've ever heard him called that!

    Joann

     

  • 1 point 5 months ago

    Today's update:  I received the same email from the same candidate with the same resume and cover email to the info@ address 4 times within a 90-minute period.  Don't know whether he was having an email glitch and didn't know if it went out the first 3 times he hit 'send', or whether he needs to clean up his database list, but I really, really wanted to send him a link to this blog post.

    Part of me thinks sending it would be a bad candidate experience (it might seem snarky); another part of me thinks that he might actually benefit from the advice...

  • 1 point 5 months ago

    I agree with everything!  I would also add to #3.  I can't stand it when people address an email to me with Dear Sir.  If they took a minute to read my ad or our website they would know that I am not a "sir".  I always include my name on each and everyone of my ads and I have yet to meet a male Tiffany :)

    - Tiffany Appleton
    Managing Recruiter, PSSI

  • 1 point 5 months ago

    Great post, Sarah!

    CC:'ing the world is probably my biggest pet peeve, but as Gary pointed out the non-updated template is a close second. 

    I also enjoy job applications for positions "posted" on boards I don't use and especially like when they call me the wrong name (Yes, I know "Greg" and "Gary" both start with G and have 4 letters... VERY confusing!!).

     

  • 1 point 5 months ago

    Lets not forget faxing in a resume, just a resume.

    Does anyone check their fax machine?

    -Jared Gatti

    Sr Technical Recruiter

    ConsultNet

  • 1 point 5 months ago

    Agreed Gary - Don't DARE send me an email with the job and company name you just applied for ten minutes ago. I'm not going to read the resume at all. I couldn't care how good the person is. Attention to detail is a must have in every role.

    Also, let us remember the person who feels it necessary (and this is most prevalent in the technical world) to bold every third word on the resume.  Love that.

    Great article!

  • 1 point 5 months ago

    I haven't had the ZIP file attachment yet, but I'd forgotten about the people who copy and paste emails from other jobs! 

    Good lord.

  • 1 point 5 months ago

    Sarah,

    Bravo!  You were spot on.  I can add to the list (as I am sure others will).

    8. Use a templated (or copied and pasted) cover email that uses the job title or company name from a previous job you applied to.

    9. I agree about those that do not refer to the job in the cover email.  How about those that leave the body of the email blank/empty!

    10.  Attach your resume as a zip file

     

    Gary Kaufman

    Sr. Recruiting Manager

    Office Depot