You need a resume.
And it should be as persuasive as you can possibly make it. Indeed, it should be compelling enough to take on the hardest selling challenge of all: to make "cold calls" on complete strangers...and get results.
That's what a resume has to do as the core of a direct mail campaign. It arrives uninvited and unexpected. And usually it's assisted by nothing more than a brief covering letter. If it can convince someone who's just that...the most thoroughly understood and quantifiably proven of all the marketing techniques.
First, I want to show you exactly how to use proven direct mail copy writing techniques to make your "sales representative"...your resume as compelling as it can possibly be, regardless of how it's delivered. An excellent resume, his assistant will retype it so that it will appear consistent with the papers he presents on his other candidates.
But suppose he's got a really terrific opportunity for you...and five other people. Do you want to rest your case on what he'll write from memory after an hour or so of conversation? If you hand him a highly persuasive resume, he won't make it worse to match the rest. And if he has to write it, chances are he can't make it good enough to match the best.
Some things are more important to you and to your future than they are to anyone else. The document that positions you in the employment world is one of them.
Direct mail selling is the hardest test persuasive writing can be put to. By mailing to large numbers of potential purchasers, it's possible to blanket so many that you'll surely hit a few who have a need at the exact moment your envelope arrives. But grabbing attention, engaging interest, and convincing strongly enough to stimulate action...that's still a lot to ask of mere words on paper. You'd better send something powerful. And the core of your package is your resume.
The only reason that a resume blown in through the window...or abandoned on an airliner...or delivered by the Postal Service...prods any sign up for a "four-months-free, cancel-and-pay-nothing" offer on a new publication.
When you get in touch with a prospective employer, you're always an unknown new publication. You're not Business Week, Forbes, or The Wall Street Journal, and don't you forget it!
There are always, of course, a few "celebrity" executives in any field who...at least during their transitory heyday...could get by with brevity instead of a convincing dose of long copy. Remember when just this sort of note from someone like Lee Iacocca would have produced a flood of inquiries?
John's Fire-in-the-Forest Analogy
I had a very successful career as a consumer products marketing executive before I got into executive recruiting 24 years ago, and I've thought many times about the question of why long copy invariably sells complicated, expensive items by direct mail much better than short copy does.
The experts either say:
"People need a certain amount of convincing to break down their barriers"; or they say:
"Who cares why? Experience proves that long copy works!"
Well, over the years I've come up with a little analogy which has helped satisfy my need for a "why," and it may strike a responsive chord with you, too.
Hitting people "cold" with a written sales pitch and taking them all the way from no-such-thought-anywhere-in-their-heads to the point of picking up the phone or a pen and taking action requires quite a process of change to take place step-by-step in their minds.
Think of the process as a chain reaction analogous to building a fire in the forest when you have just one match. Before you strike that match, you must have the entire makings of your fire all laid out. First you find some tinder...maybe an old Kleenex®, or some dry leaves. Then you add dry twigs and small dry sticks. Then some bigger sticks and branches...as dry as you can find. And on top of everything else some big branches and logs...dry, if possible, but if not, the other stuff burning under them will get them ready to burn. What you've assembled will keep the fire going all night, or at least long enough for you to round up more fuel.
You wouldn't dream of wasting your match by starting the chain reaction with only part of your fuel in place. You'd have everything ready. Otherwise, your fire might get off to a promising start...and then go out.
Something similar, I submit, must happen when a mailing convinces its reader to buy a complicated, expensive, seldom-purchased item. The letter must take him from complete unawareness and indifference...to first spark of interest...to casual but somewhat more interested reading...to avid devouring of all the information provided...to phoning or writing the sender. Since we know for a fact that short, sketchy copy doesn't perform as well as longer, more informative copy, I submit that the reason may be too little fuel.
The reader may have a first flicker of interest...which may grow into casual, and even attentive, reading. He's not yet convinced to make a phone call or write a letter. But he is willing to read further.
Suddenly the fuel runs out. The reader would have considered more information...but it wasn't there! And not deeply involved, he doesn't bother to send out for more facts.
You've got just one match. Don't waste it!
You have your reader's attention when she first glances at your resume...whether it blows in through the window or it comes in the mail. Your match is lit and burning. It ignites the dried leaves. But if you haven't laid out enough persuasive factors to fuel the chain reaction, your match is wasted. You've sparked attention. But there's no bonfire. And your phone doesn't ring.
Q: What happens when you apply direct mail copywriting to your resume?
A: It goes from 2 pages to 3 or 4 pages... and it contains 3 or 5 times as much of the persuasive information employers are interested in.
"Look, John," I'll bet you're saying, "forgetting for the moment the fact that everyone has always told me resumes should be brief, not long... and maybe conceding that the direct mail people do know about stimulating action through a written sales presentation...still I can't let you get away with saying that doubling the pages from two to four will provide five times as much persuasive information."
I knew I'd grab you with that idea.
But think about it for a minute. On two pages you're barely able to list your name, address, office and home phone numbers, college degrees, a couple personal facts, and lay out a reverse-chronological listing of all the companies you've worked for and the progression of titles and responsibilities from college to now...all requisites of a good resume. Certainly that's true if you create a nice clean layout with lots of white space separating all the elements, so that where you've been and what you've done is easy to scan...a point we'll get back to later.
So in two pages, you are able to list all the job titles you've held and give a skimpy description of responsibilities for the more recent and important ones. Unfortunately, you haven't got room to say much, if anything, about what you achieved when you held those responsibilities. And achievements proving you're special are what a prospective employer is looking for.
Everyone has been given responsibility. Only a special few...you among them, I hope...have given back anything really substantial in the way of achievement.
Let's say that in a nice, open, quick-to-scan layout, with your chronological units floating in a decent amount of white space, you get 400 to 500 words on a page, 800 to 1,000 on two pages...and 75% of them are devoted to covering the mandatory data. That leaves about 200 to 250 words for accomplishments that could make you stand out as interesting...and hopefully special...in the eyes of a potential employer.
Now go from two pages to four. You've got room for 1,600 to 2,000 words...800 to 1,000 more than before. And every additional word can be devoted to achievements, because the basics were already covered in the two-page version. Add your original 200 to 250 words on achievements, and the box score looks like this:
Who and When?
Was it your "Counselor" at the contingency firm that helped you getting your first job out of college or graduate school? Was it someone who "worked with" you or "headhunted" you as you moved into middle management with your second or third job? Face it: in those days you hadn't done anything really significant yet. At that stage no one has. Or if they have, nobody is prepared to believe they have.
From entry level up through middle management you're somewhere from a "GI Joe" to a first lieutenant in the army of industry. What an employer wants to know is where you've been...how fast you're moving up...and how closely your experience matches what she wants done. That information fits neatly on one page...certainly no more than two. Indeed, if you're bright, attractive, and ambitious, it won't matter if your entire early career has been spent working on a string of corporate flops! You won't be blamed. You didn't commit the corporation to those misadventures. And you weren't so centrally responsible for implementation that anyone will figure you made a good idea fail.
Today, however, you're in an altogether different situation. You're at or reaching for $100,000+. Now you're at least a "field commander." You legitimately can claim some victories. And you can be held responsible for some defeats. Your resume must deliver more factual information.
Also consider the "why" behind the advice you're given.
If you're now at $100,000+, and "when" you were told to "keep it brief was yesterday, and "who" told you was a prestigious retainer recruiter...then maybe we should consider "why" he said that.
The most obvious reason is that you only have a fleeting moment of your reader's time and attention before he'll give up on your resume as too tedious to figure out, and toss it aside. This reason I totally agree with. However, I don't agree that the solution to the problem is to strip away your persuasive factual information.
The other reason could be that the retainer recruiter has orally "presold" you to his client, so your resume doesn't have to be persuasive.
My reaction to this reason from your standpoint is "OK...but." The recruiter is introducing several other candidates besides you, and if you have some impressive achievements, you want them clearly known to the employer as she chooses between you and the others.
Your resume absolutely must do two things. Unfortunately, while brevity achieves one, it defeats the other. Therefore, unless you're Lee Iacocca, brevity isn't your answer.
1. Quick Orientation
Your reader will allow your resume only about thirty seconds...no more than a minute...to orient him to who you are, and whether you might be relevant to his needs right now. Certainly that's true if it arrives "cold" in the mail or is blown in through the window; he'll spend more time with it, not less, if he's paid a retainer recruiter over $30,000 to look for it.
Most of the time your resume will reach the reader when he doesn't need you. Your "one match" will burn less than a minute. By then, if you've done a poor orientation job, he'll have dumped you for being too tedious and confusing. And even if you've done a good job, he'll almost always have dumped you for not being needed right now.
2. Thorough Convincing
But in the rare, rare instance when you do happen to hit a reader at the moment she has a need you might fill, and you quickly orient her to that fact, then she's willing to extend her attention span a bit further.
She didn't find you irrelevant. Now she's looking to find you ordinary. But, wait a minute; you've been involved in several things that were impressively successful...another "turn off' bypassed. Okay, but probably these programs were conceived, planned, and strategically implemented by others, and you were merely a supporting player. No, wait another minute; your clear, succinct explanation of the reasons underlying the actions that were taken certainly sounds like you were the strategist, not just the "gofer." Your reader decides:
As you see, a very brief resume could have performed the quick orientation and helped your reader turn off. Unfortunately, it probably couldn't have turned her on...and on...and on...to the point of picking up the phone and calling you.
Right away you're probably saying, "I can see, John, where long copy will be great at 'Thorough Convincing,' but won't it interfere with 'Quick Orientation'?"
No. Not if you're careful to make your resume visually accessible. Format and layout become extremely important. Just make your resume:
Your reader will glance at 3, 4, 5, or 6 pages if it's instantly evident with just one glance what's on each of those pages. If you arrange your resume right, the recipient will probably glance through all of the pages before reading any of them. That's everyone's normal impulse as a reader anyway. You probably flipped through this book before you began reading it page-by-page. Fortunately, with resumes in particular, it's easy to help that normal human tendency along.
Don't you just hate topically-oriented resumes? Don't you wish everyone did?
I have never yet met anyone who likes to receive a topically-oriented resume.
You know the kind...where practically the whole thing is a list of claimed accomplishments, presented entirely out of context of when they happened...who the executive was working for...what his title, responsibilities, reporting relationships, and staff were...and what the size and nature of the businesses were. Finally, if you're lucky...and it's not always there...you find a deliberately sketchy little "Chronology of Employment" buried at the end, from which...if you're not already too turned off...you try to guess when and for whom and from what position of how much authority those previously-claimed management miracles were achieved.
You and I are in the overwhelming majority in disliking topically-oriented resumes (also sometimes euphemistically referred to as "achievement-oriented"). When on the receiving end, virtually everybody prefers the good, honest, comfortable, easy-to-read old-fashioned kind, where name, address, and business and home phone numbers are at the top, and work history proceeds backwards from current job on the first page to earliest on the last page.
If you don't go out of your way to confuse your reader, you've got the scan-ability problem solved...no matter how long you choose to make your resume.
Everyone in a position to read the resume of anyone at or reaching for $100,000+ has read hundreds of resumes before. If yours is in standard reverse-chronology format, and each employer/time/position copy-block floats in enough white space to make it clear where one segment ends and the earlier one begins, your reader will go on automatic pilot...scanning through any number of pages in just a very few seconds.
One page or five, he quickly sees that you're not somebody he can use right now. But if by stroke of lightning you happen to have dropped into his hands at precisely the time he does need someone with a background even remotely like yours, he'll read on...and on. Having your entire "fire" laid out, you've got an excellent chance that your reader will proceed all the way from flicker-of-interest to action. Expect a phone call or a letter!
Forget about "long copy sells." Assume that two resumes, one reverse-chronological and the other topical, are the same length...any length.
The one that deliberately strips away the employment context from the claimed accomplishments not only frustrates the reader's comprehension, it also raises the presumption that there must have been some very good reason for doing so. "This woman obviously has something to hide," thinks the reader. "I wonder what it is."
Usually it's too-brief tenure at the latest or two latest jobs...and maybe at lots of jobs along the way. That's what the reader immediately suspects. And readily confirms, if a truthful "chronology" is included anywhere in the resume. And assumes if it's not.
Wanting to de-emphasize their latest job and not put it at the top of a reverse-chronological list is overwhelmingly the reason executives turn to a topically-oriented resume...even though when they're personally hiring, they hate to receive one. That's a mistake. It's better to deal with the problem straightforwardly.
The next page shows a successful lead-off entry for a reverse-chronological resume. This person wisely stuck to the traditional format.
As you see, by the third paragraph on the top page of her resume, the writer is back to talking about the AT&T chronology and the accomplishments she loves to discuss. Above all, she hasn't been forced into a topical resume a cure far worse than her mild disease.
Questions I've always been curious about, too. So I've checked into them with the people who've handed me topical resumes over the past 24 years.
Invariably, once we got down to talking frankly, these people pointed out problems similar to the one I just dealt with, which made me feel they were forced to give up the standard reverse-chronological format. I can't recall a single person maintaining that he went to the topical format because that's the type he preferred to receive.
It's from Sam Sage, one of the many executives you'll meet when you view an executive search through the eyes of a retainer recruiter in Appendix I.
As you look at Sam's resume...begin by doing what everyone always does with a resume. Scan it for a few seconds.
What function does Sam perform? Who's he done it for? How long has he been at it?
See if Sam's someone you might need right now. Chances are he's not. And you'll see that at a glance.
You scanned Sam's resume in seconds.
You saw at a glance that he's a marketing executive. And a very high-level one.
Is there any kind of resume, no matter how brief...or any kind of letter, no matter how vague and misleading...that could have hidden Sam's basic information from you? And could he have benefited from the concealment, even if it were possible?
I don't think so.
If you didn't need what Sam was selling, merely limiting your knowledge couldn't have increased your need.
But if you'd had even the slightest interest in anyone even remotely like Sam, then seeing how very special he is would have made you more not less...interested.
Indeed, Sam even managed to tell you that he believes he's ready to be a president; to imply that he's recently been functioning almost like one; and to demonstrate over and over that he certainly thinks like one.
You saw, too, that Sam's been transplanted several times and has succeeded in each new context...even running the family car dealership. He's versatile. And his sense of loyalty...as extended to his mother and brother...is also admirable.
About the only thing you could imagine Sam wanting to hide is the fact that he's spent the most-recent and highest-level part of his career marketing drugs...* fact which, if known, might turn off a CEO looking for someone to market anti-aircraft missiles or panty hose.
But Sam can't even name his employers without letting his "drug experience" out of the bag. And no CEO...indeed, no reader...is going to be turned on by self-praise in mere "percentage" terms by someone who refuses to reveal who he's worked for until after he's been granted an interview. Straight to the wastebasket with a letter or resume like that!
After reading Sam's resume, you and I suspect that he could market just about anything...missiles and stockings included. Nonetheless, no retainer recruiter being paid $30,000+ to find a "defense" or a "soft goods" person can get by with just offering Sam plus a "he-could-do-it" pitch...even though Sam might make a good "wild card," tucked in among several "on-target" candidates.
On the other hand, if Sam can somehow get the resume we've just read into the hands of the CEO of an armaments or a hosiery company before he's paying somebody $30,000+ to find exactly what he wants, the CEO may think:
Face it. Despite any kooky advice to the contrary, there's no way Sam can "package" himself differently for different employers. So he's being straightforward. And he's right! Just like you and me, others will also admire Sam's achievements...their diversity...and the thinking behind them. They too will envision him doing an outstanding job, no matter where he ends up.
No question about it. Sam's taken the best possible approach with his resume. He's told the truth openly, voluntarily, and impressively.
There are two common approaches to presenting a work history. One is to use paragraphs, with each job written up as a mini-essay. The other is to use "bullets"...sentence fragments preceded by a raised dot. Pioneered by advertising copywriters, the "bullet" format attempts to make every single point seem like a highlight.
Either style is acceptable. But, for several reasons, I strongly prefer paragraphs...very tightly and specifically written. Sentences in paragraphs are easier for the reader to comprehend and believe, because they closely resemble what he sees in newspapers, magazines, books, memos, and other informational writing. Bullets, on the other hand, resemble advertising copy...subliminally not an aid to believability.
Also, sentences in paragraphs enable you to use transition phrases and conjunctions that connect the various statements in ways that serve your purposes better than a series of unrelated exclamations. It helps to be able to say: "In recognition, I was promoted to..." "When my report was accepted by the Board, I was asked to assemble a team..." "After consolidating these three acquisitions..." You get the idea.
For each management-level job, orient your reader to the size, nature, and trend of (1) the larger unit in which you participated and (2) the part of it you were responsible for. What was the size of your operation in people, sales, and profit? What was its mandate? The general business climate around it? The problems and opportunities you identified? The strategies you came up with? And the results you achieved?
Focus on quantifiable data. Give dollar figures for sales, profits, ROI, costs, inventories, etc. before and after your programs were implemented. When you use percentages, you'll usually want to give the base and any comparative figures on the rest of the industry or another part of your company that will show your numbers are special.
Avoid empty words and statements.
Omit the self-praising adjectives that losers wallow in... "major", "significant", "substantial" and "outstanding." Wherever such a word is justified, a number will be far more persuasive. And never make meaningless over-generalized statements like this:
"Responsible for managing the strategic technical issues impacting the company's on-going core businesses."
What does this person do all day? What's his budget? Who does he report to and who reports to him? Has his employer gained anything from having him around?
Create a mosaic.
You've seen those pictures made out of lots of little colored stones. Imagine that each promotion to a new job, each numerical improvement, each specific point of analysis and strategy is a stone. When put together in the right order, these fragments will be connected by your reader into an image of you. Don't assert what the shape of it is. Just lay out enough specific facts...stone by stone...so she'll see for herself the favorable patterns they imply. Let her create her own picture in her own mind.
Maybe you're in a declining field and you'd like to move into a growth industry. Or you're re-entering the commercial sector after a sojourn in the military, government, or academia. If so, make a special version of your resume that drains off industry-specific buzz-words and explains your exploits in terms everyone can appreciate. But resist the temptation to "go topical" and try to hide "where" while emphasizing "what."
Your reader will never quite be able to believe your claimed achievements unless he has a mental picture of you located at some specific place and time in the real world actually doing them. Withdraw orientation, and he drops belief...and probably attention, too.
Rather than resort to a topical resume, you should:
- Write a covering letter that says what specific need your reader may have that you from another field can fill for him in his field. Don't say, "Here I am; guess what I can do for you."
- And be realistic. If you're stumped when you try to write a persuasive covering letter explaining how you can fill a specific need of an employer in an unrelated field, then stop. Think of someone else in a different field for whom you do have a persuasive message. Don't pursue a hopeless mismatch. If you're not persuaded, you can be absolutely certain that no one else will be either.
Many resumes begin with a statement of what-kind-of-job-I-want labeled "Career Objective" or simply "Objective."
This is a good idea when you're fresh out of college or grad school and you want to orient the "Counselor" at an employment agency, or the personnel department of a corporation, to what you're looking for. But it's seldom necessary after your career is well underway. By then, what you're prepared to do next should be pretty evident from what you've already done.
If you're retiring from the military or the diplomatic corps, or leaving academia or the priesthood, then maybe your resume should begin with a statement of what you seek in the business world. Otherwise, let your resume be a clear and self-confident statement of where you've been and what you've achieved. Say what you're looking for in your covering letter and through personal contact.
Creative Use of Avocational Interests in Your Resume
In general, never mention your hobbies and other outside interests.
If you had time to be assistant pastor of your church, chair the United Fund drive, coach a Little League team, do petit point, build an extension on your home, train for and run a marathon, and groom and show poodles in the U.S. and three foreign countries last year, when did you have time to work?
But if you're 58 years old, it might be good to mention your marathon running, and the fact that you're an avid scuba diver and an instructor for Outward Bound. Your stamp collection, of course, will remain in the closet.
And if you're a paraplegic, your competitive sports car driving and skeet shooting might just be a worthwhile inclusion. So might building that wing on your house, if you're only missing one arm or one leg.
If you just have a high school diploma, the fact that you're an amateur writer who's published stories in Harper's and The New Yorker...or even a trade journal or the business section of your daily newspaper...could help show that you have a mature, cultivated mind others respect. So might your membership on the Mayor's Commission for the Arts, writing computer programs as a hobby, creating mathematical puzzles, and playing duplicate bridge.
And if you're in a racial or ethnic minority and have the stomach for such a gambit, you may feel like listing your memberships in exclusive social and athletic clubs that, until recently, didn't seem to have people with names or faces like yours. Everyone else should maintain a discreet silence on all clubs.
Don't fall into the trendy trap of leaving age off your resume and omitting years from college degrees so it can't be calculated. True, employers can't ask. But voluntarily listing year, month, and day of birth subliminally shouts "forthright and self-confident," whereas concealing age just because the law permits you to do so sends out the opposite "vibes"...and raises a presumption that you think you may be over the hill.
Incidentally, employers who, in the late '60's and early '70's, considered 30 to 35 the ideal age now seem to feel that way regarding mid-to-late-40's, and they have virtually no qualms about dynamic people in their 50's. They still find a young hotshot attractive. But they no longer insist on one. I absolutely refuse to discriminate on the basis of age, and have recently had candidates in their late 50's win out over excellent candidates ten and twenty years younger.
Education
List college degrees, with years...highest and latest degree first. Forget about Cum Laude, Class President, and Varsity Letters. You've moved on to more recent and bigger achievements.
If you have several years but no sheepskin, say: "Completed three years toward B. A. at Syracuse University." And if you flunked out of several fine schools, say: "Two years of college, intermittently at Carleton, Dartmouth, and the University of Virginia." With no college, you may want to say, "Self-educated during an uninterrupted career," and then bail yourself out under the heading "Other Interests," with some suitably cerebral and cultural avocations.
Marital Status
Say "Married," "Divorced," or "Single," whichever applies and, if you wish, number of children (not names, ages, or with how many and which mates).
Gender
If you're a woman with a name like Lindsay or Leslie, or a man with a name like Carroll or Kelley, use a middle name to be more specific or just let your reader be surprised when he or she meets you.
Height and Weight
Nice to put in if it's favorable; although women often omit weight because it seems sexist to raise the subject. Overweight men and women might consider listing an optimistic weight toward which they're dieting, as a way of cushioning the inevitable visual shock with some advance notice.
Religion, Politics, and National Origin
Silence! If the reader has a prejudice, you may stimulate it.
Race
Probably silence. For all minorities but African-American, surnames dispel any impending visual surprise...hardly a major consideration anyway. For the person of color who wants to dispel surprise, mentioning support of any obviously African-American institution...possibly along with similar non-racially-defined institutions...will do the trick.
Health
Don't mention. It's fine, or you should be writing a will instead of a resume.
Picture
Never, NEVER, NEVER! Nobody could possibly be attractive enough to justify the narcissism implied by attaching a picture.
