CV Format/Template

slinxy

slinxy

slinxy

Soldato
Joined
3 Dec 2002
Posts
4,033
Location
Groovin' @ the disco
Hi Guys

I've just been updating my CV, It's the same template I've been using using I've started working over 20 years ago. I guess it's ok as it's landed me a few jobs and it's got all the infomation on it that's required.

Contact Details
Personal Profile
Career History
Qualifactions and Certs
Training Course
References.

It looks a bit boring compared to the new flashly looking ones and some parts like my Q&C is a bit messy as it's arranged by importance/level and not date.

I was just wondering how many people actually use a "Modern" CV template with things like skill leve charts, photos, etc.

Thanks in advance..
 
A good few years back I was a contractor. I've about many, many years of experience.

But I found that a one page CV with a brutally spartan descriptions with zero fluff on it, performed much better than a longer CV.
Because I've a lot of experience, my spartan CV still spills over to two pages. But its designed to be read in 5-10 sec and at a glance.
 
I'd agree with the above, cut down on the fluff/waffle. A 1 page CV can be great (that's what I've gone with at the mo), 2 pages can be fine too though, if there is relevant info to include that then causes it to go to 2 pages, don't feel the need to cram it all in to 1 page if it then ends up in a tiny font and no white space left!

Photos? Like photos of you? Not a good idea in general - often HR in large orgs would like to remove identifying characteristics. In fact worth keeping in mind in general - if you have your contact details at the top say then that can be blanked out.

Skill level charts? Do you mean this sort of thing?

https://resumegenius.com/blog/resume-help/dumbest-resume-trend

o4aVzYA.png r7Ej3wW.png

I'm not sure I'd agree fully with that guy's point when it comes to languages - stating you're a native speaker or that you're fluent as a result of living overseas vs having studied a language for a bit is a reasonable thing to perhaps highlight and isn't exactly comparing apples and oranges as per his criticism re: measuring other skills.

Some of it does look a bit gimmicky, putting little images for hobbies etc...

The rest of the layout in the above shows how you can easily fit a bunch of work experience and quals into 1 page. For example the one on the left had room for presumably 2 degrees and 5 different employers/roles.

You don't need to be quite so terse - if using the full page width maybe you could put a line or two in re: each bit of employment, maybe a tad more for the most recent one.
 
Last edited:
I'm undecided about what I prefer. I've seen a bunch of CVs with different formats and ultimately it's not that much of a deciding factor for me, unless it is terrible.
Things like skill charts, I don't mind it and if nothing else it lets me see how their appraise their skills in relative terms against other skills (i.e. the fact someone has rated themselves 8/10 for skill X and 6/10 for skill Y doesn't mean they are necessarily a normalised 8/10 compared to other candidates, but it does imply they are stronger in X than Y).
Photos are literally a waste a of space in my eyes, it's hard enough trying to squeeze everything onto 1-2 pages as it is.

One thing I'm unsure about is training courses that don't result in a formal / externally recognised qualification. I've seen others mention these on their CV but for me it just seems a bit spurious and doesn't really tell the prospective employer anything about how I've applied that learning. On the flipside, my certifications are mostly in the past (8 out of 9 listed are over 7 years old) so my CV looks a bit like I've taken the foot of the gas by not doing many certs in recent years, so perhaps should pad it out a bit with some of the better training, conferences etc I've attended.
 
iamtheoneneo said:
Click to expand...

That looks interesting, will give it a watch, that first example so far does highlight a difference between a general recruiter and a hiring manager (or recruiter who knows a particular industry well) - they get thrown by his degree even though AI is mentioned... and that's perhaps more because of their lack of knowledge etc... But I guess, it's an important point, especially at that level as plenty of applications will initially be screened by people like them save for direct referrals and/or larger firms with in house people who know their stuff and maybe the odd specialist recruiter who has got a client recruiting for some junior roles in addition to some senior position he/she is trying to fill.

edit - Wait... he's Amazon... oh dear.
 
dowie said:
That looks interesting, will give it a watch, that first example so far does highlight a difference between a general recruiter and a hiring manager (or recruiter who knows a particular industry well) - they get thrown by his degree even though AI is mentioned... and that's perhaps more because of their lack of knowledge etc... But I guess, it's an important point, especially at that level as plenty of applications will initially be screened by people like them save for direct referrals and/or larger firms with in house people who know their stuff and maybe the odd specialist recruiter who has got a client recruiting for some junior roles in addition to some senior position he/she is trying to fill.

edit - Wait... he's Amazon... oh dear.
Click to expand...
The first example isn't the best I'd agree especially as Evan says that at the end of the day a lot of that is filtered out by the testing. But the critique of cv's after definitely give some insightful tips on whats really important.

Honestly though a TLDR of it all would be to detail the outcomes of your work instead of just focusing on what you were working on.
 
Last edited:
iamtheoneneo said:
The first example isn't the best I'd agree especially as Evan says that at the end of the day a lot of that is filtered out by the testing. But the critique of cv's after definitely give some really insightful tips on whats really important.
Click to expand...

For sure, I'm not knocking it. I think what has happened there though (as per their first criticism) the candidate has only mentioned a generic CS internship when his focus is AI/ML and the Amazon guy commenting is a regular Amazon engineering type (and quite senior), interested in people who can solved hard CS/engineering problems... A data science/ML hiring manager might well have a different take albeit the other criticisms they make seem reasonable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom