In addition to creating clutter, skill spamming is actually a risky gamble. It might indeed help you pass those pesky automated filters; however, you’ll look bad in an interview if you’re asked about those technologies you listed on your resume but which you’ve actually only heard of in passing.
Also keep in mind that you don’t need to list every single technology you’ve worked with. In fact, it’s probably better to trim the old technologies that are no longer relevant. e.g., I don’t care that you’ve worked with FoxPro, Windows 95, or VB 6. And certainly don’t put down that you’re experienced with Microsoft Word and Excel!
If you do insist on peppering your resume with buzzwords, it helps if you also list how much experience you have with each technology – e.g., 3 years with ASP.NET, 2 years with C#, etc. This keeps me from having to mentally add up your experience from the various jobs on your resume. And if you only have a basic familiarity with a technology, just go ahead and say so.
Here’s a sample resume snippet that illustrates this approach:
John D. Applicant
Las Vegas, NV
Skills:
- ASP.NET: 3 years
- C#/.NET: 3 years
- JavaScript: Basic familiarity
- XML/XPath/XSLT: Basic familiarity
- SQL Server: 3 years light experience
This format tells me exactly what skills to focus on.
2 comments:
Just this past week I also see that some people like to say what their skill level is instead of how long they've worked with a language. To me that makes a little more sense since, as an undergrad I don't have time to work with a language 8 hours a day whereas I would be working with it more if I were actually in a development position.
C++ (Novice)
C# (Expert)
Java (Experienced)
etc...
The problem with self assessments like this is that they're inherently subjective. A lot of people think they're experts at something when they're really not.
Years of experience is a more objective measure, even if it is far from perfect.
Post a Comment