Learning Journeys is a powerful and enlightening book. Though it’s focus is primarily on helping people become better mentors and leaders, it’s much more – it’s about self-discovery and personal growth.

A number of chapters make up each section. Beyond sections on leadership and mentoring, there are ones that cover:

• Seeing Yourself As Others Do
• Developing Self-Knowledge
• Unlearning What You Thought Was So
• Pain Is a Great Teacher

Forty-one different authors contributed to this book; all of whom are noteworthy experts on these subjects and who come from business, consulting, and academia. Individual contributors include Stephen Covey, Dave Ulrich, and Spencer Johnson.

Learning Journeys is an inspirational compilation that can be described as a mini-Ph.D. course in life, learning, and self-discovery. It will resonate powerfully with people who are introspective and who are by nature interested in self-development and life long learning.

This book is a gem.

Have you read a book that you consider “must read”? If so, please let me know by replying to this post. If you do not see a reply box, please click on the title of this post and scroll to the bottom.

Starting a resume with a summary allows you to encapsulate your career into a few lines and provide readers with a helpful, quick overview. Unlike objectives, which I think are often unnecessary, I do believe executive summaries have a place in a good resume, even though expert resume readers can scan a well written resume and sum up the background as well as any summary.

The most common problem

The biggest problem with most summaries is that they attempt to do too much. Instead of merely providing an overview of a person’s career, people try to use it as an additional sales tool, filling summaries with all sorts of subjective assertions that are not even in evidence in the resume. For example: exceptional leadership and change management skills, or being an innovative problem solver and strategic visionary.

You may think it’s fine to pile assertions into a summary without any supporting details. Wrong! Whenever you write anything that may raise questions or doubt, that’s the place where supporting details need to be presented. Allowing questions to develop without an immediate response weakens your resume. (See the article Lost in the land of make believe.) A summary is often too short to provide sufficient evidence, which is why it’s best to use assertions sparingly.

When a summary is crucial

There are a few instances when the use of a summary is crucial. One case is when a person has a diverse background and a reader may wonder, “What is your expertise?” What are your true strengths? Are you a marketing executive with strong exposure to finance or visa-versa? In such cases, a summary can provide a frame of reference that allows a reader to more easily follow your resume and assess your suitability.

Vinny Stabile, the SVP, People at JetBlue cites an example when he was considering candidates for a staffing role and received numerous resumes from human resource generalists. In many cases, it was difficult to gauge the strength and relevance of their staffing experience.

An HR generalist may have gained significant staffing experience over time, but it may be reflected in only a few scattered lines throughout a resume. A well written summary can pull such experiences together and convey two or three core competencies that might otherwise get lost in the body of the resume.

In this particular case, the proper use of a summary would have made it easier to determine if any of them had sufficient staffing experience to be invited to an interview.

How long is too long?

Summaries should be brief. Ideally one mid-sized paragraph, but definitely no longer than 2 or 3 short paragraphs. In a resume, anything longer is no longer a summary.

Facts are always stronger than assertions

The best summaries are fact based so use details that are not subject to personal interpretation. For example:

Financial executive with an MBA/CPA and 22 years in the hotel and restaurant industry, including experience in mergers & acquisitions, IPOs, and corporate strategic planning. Also includes five years of intense start-up experience.

This is a brief example of a fact based summary. You either have an MBA and CPA or you do not. You either have direct experience in mergers & acquisitions or you do not. You’ve either worked in a start-up or you have not. Fact based statements don’t rely on the subjective judgment of the individual making the claim, unlike communication, leadership, or change management skills.

Unique aspects

Finally, look for any unique aspects in your background that deserve to be pointed out in the summary. For instance, experience with start-ups, highly creative businesses, or fast growing companies are all examples of unique experiences that should be brought front and center. In particular, think of items that make you unique and are also relevant to the kinds of positions and companies you are going after.

Some people might consider these unique aspects to be subjective assertions themselves, but they are much less so than the examples cited earlier. For instance, anyone can claim excellent communication skills, but it would be impossible for an executive with the US Postal Service to claim to be working for a start-up, just as it would be difficult for a coal company executive to claim to be working in a highly creative and innovative business.

Adding these unique aspects puts a spotlight on them and ensures they’re not overlooked during the review of your resume.

I’ve received nearly a dozen resumes over the past six months that include gigantic summaries that are nearly identical. There must be a book somewhere that urges executives to fill their summaries to the brim with subjective assertions and along with it provides an example for people to copy.

What do you think?

I would like you to critically absorb this next paragraph and see how it strikes you. Is this summary effective? What in this summary can you be certain of? Ask yourself, is this summary an advocate or an adversary for this person?

Here goes:

“Competitive, pragmatic and responsive Sales & Marketing management executive with a proven track record of success. Creative & persistent problem-solver who thrives on challenges, excels under pressure and gets the job done. Bright, bottom-line oriented team builder who possesses outstanding interpersonal and excellent communication skills. Hands-on leader and catalyst, organized & thorough planner, and capable negotiator especially effective dealing with senior management. Accustomed to a fast pace & multiple projects while consistently maximizing business opportunities, relationships and profits.”

Well? Does this summary impress you? Do you want this person’s phone number so you can hire them before someone else steals them away? Or, have the assertions overwhelmed you to the point where you aren’t sure about any of the claims?

Now every assertion made in this summary may be true. There are a few people who are truly exceptional in every respect. However, it’s very rare and unfortunately most if not all of the capabilities cited here are based on individual perception.

One secret about assertions

The simple truth is, if you claim three great skills it’s more believable than when you claim 41 skills. The more you claim, the more suspicious it becomes. If you are absolutely determined to use subjective assertions, carefully weigh your skills and single out a few primary ones.

Doubt raises questions

As a critical reader I look at the summary above and question each assertion. First, is there evidence to support each assertion? Second, does this person have the expertise to accurately gauge their strength in all of these areas? Third, does it suggest insecurity or a lack of acuity?

When people make subjective assertions, it’s proper to question the voracity of their claims.

Evaluating the claims

Whenever faced with a resume full of subjective assertions I tend to become more critical. Note how the questions that result from this summary skew toward the skeptical:

Competitive:

• Are you a team player?
• Is it your way or the highway?
• Are you blindly competitive?
• Will you step over teammates to further your agenda?

Pragmatic:

• Are you capable of more complex solutions when needed?

Creative:

• Many people claim to be creative, but how does it show itself?
• Compared to artists, designers, etc, most business people just aren’t creative.

Persistent:

• Are you bullish and headstrong?
• Do you pound a single solution over and over until you get your way?

Problem solver:

• Do you solve problems on your own and not as part of a team?
• Do you work better by yourself than with others?

Bright:

• What’s your I.Q.?
• What degrees do you hold?
• Are they from elite institutions?

Bottom-line oriented & team builder: (Interesting combination)

• Can you quantify or qualify being bottom-line oriented?
• How do you know you build strong teams?
• What track-record do your teams have? Any metrics?
• What is the turn-over rate among your team? Has it improved?
• How many of your team members have been promoted?

Outstanding interpersonal and excellent communication skills:

• Yet another person claiming excellent communication skills.
• Have you received commendations or awards for your communication skills or did a few people tell you that you communicate well?

Hands-on leader:

• Do you micro-manage?
• Do you look over the shoulders of your staff and tell them how to do their job?

Catalyst:

• A “good” catalyst or a “bad” one? A catalyst for disaster?
• Are you a catalyst in the sense that you pressure people to work harder?
• Does being a catalyst mean you drive people around you crazy?

Organized & thorough planner:

• Do you have problems making timely decisions?
• Whenever quick decisions and execution are necessary are you a deer in the headlights because you have to thoroughly plan things out?

Consistently maximizing profits:

• Qualify or quantify how you maximize profits.
• You may tout a 7% increase in profits while competitors are achieving profit growth of 15%.
• Is there any evidence you maximize profits more than others?

Assertions affect the whole resume

Now that we have all these questions in our minds, we can go on and read the rest of the resume. Is this the frame of mind the writer would like the reader to be in? No, but it’s what this summary has created.

Be wary of unintended consequences. During an objective read-through, determine how first time readers might absorb the information. Be especially aware if you are trying to say too much. This resume is already being crushed by the weight of a summary that can’t possibly support all the assertions it makes.

Read the article How to write a strong summary to get helpful hints on how to write a powerful summary.

Adding an objective to your resume may seem beneficial. It gives the reader a clear idea of the kind of position or company you are interested in. Here’s a little secret: I rarely read this section and most of my colleagues don’t either.

With great certainty, most resumes would be better off without an objective.

Why?

Objectives are often too vague. If you are like most executives, you don’t want to lose out on good opportunities by making your objective too narrow. But that’s the very point of an objective. The result is that you make the more serious mistake of including an objective that is so vague you may as well write “Seeking a position that requires someone with a pulse.”

Rules that determine inclusion of an objective

The only instances when an objective makes sense, is when you’re:

1. In a narrow niche or in a highly specialized field.
2. Thoroughly committed to a very specific or well defined position.

For example, if you are a physicist who is only interested in directing ship-based research projects in atmospheric studies, by all means put that objective right at the top.

The only other time an objective might make sense is if your background is extremely diverse and lacking a clear focus. Imagine someone who’s worked in operations, finance, and marketing across five industries and is really interested in a senior finance position in the hospitality industry. In such case an objective does help create focus. But note how it narrows the scope of your search.

Just as a reminder, if much of your career had been in finance within the hospitality industry, this objective would be completely unnecessary.

Typical objectives divert attention.

Unfortunately, most objectives waste space and time with text like this:

“Broad based retail executive desires senior management position with a major retailer seeking to transform an underachieving sales organization through innovative leadership.”

Yikes, what gobble-dee-gook. Nearly every management role can use a star leader who can transform a team with innovative leadership skills. As an objective it doesn’t narrow down the target much at all. It’s more of an underhanded sales pitch. You’re telling the reader what you consider yourself to be. And you’re telling us by sneaking it in as an objective.

Another faux-pas objective:

Another objective that doesn’t go over well with reviewers is the “ultra-tailored” objective that targets a single position. You hear about the opening for Coca-Cola’s Vice President, Marketing in Europe and send your resume with this gem:

Objective: To become the V.P. Marketing of Europe for Coca Cola.

No doubt this meets the requirement for a narrow, well-defined position. But this is overkill. I always joke that if they don’t get this job, their career is basically over because it’s their only career objective. It’s just too cute. Don’t do it.

Your objective should also not change with every shift in wind direction. Instead, ask yourself seriously, if the positions you will consider can be narrowly defined to make an objective worthwhile. If the answer is no, don’t add an objective to your resume. A poorly written objective can cause a roll of the eyes before the reader even gets to the meat of your resume. That’s not how you want them to begin reading your resume.

It use to be that “great” jobs were defined by their prestige, title, and compensation. No longer! In this age of constant corporate churn and instability, defining great jobs takes on a new dimension.

Don’t get me wrong – title and compensation are valid components, but just two of many that define a great job. Today a great job is defined by the overall “fit”and the degree to which a job is truly compatible with “you”. Compatible with your capabilities and experiences, developmental needs, personality, style, and values.

Many executives are fixated on short-term benefits to the detriment of their long-term interests. It seems the standard job cycle has turned into landing “whatever” job you can and then coming up with all the reasons it didn’t work out 18 to 24 months later. This approach makes no sense.

Jobs are crucial, career building-blocks and as a result, broader career management issues are essential to defining great jobs. This is especially true in an era when companies no longer assume the responsibility for developing and managing the careers of its executives. That responsibility rests solely on the shoulders of each executive and it necessitates a different approach to your job search.

During the tech-boom in the late 90s I witnessed many high potential executives leapfrogging into high paying, big title jobs without any thought to their development. In a rush to ascend as quickly as possible, they failed to consider crucial developmental needs as they moved into positions they weren’t ready for. When the bubble burst there were many people holding lofty titles who really didn’t have the requisite skills.

“Great” job defined:

A great job leverages your strengths; offers opportunity for good growth and development in terms of learning new skills and improving on weaknesses, especially those skills essential to getting you closer to achieving your long-term goals; provides you with new and rich experiences; provides a degree of prestige in terms of the quality of the organization; and, is a job where the personalities, culture, values, interests and motivations are compatible with your own.

Finally, a great job is defined by the compatibility with organizational dynamics, in other words, the way an organization operates, in terms of making and executing decisions. It’s often overlooked, but a crucial component, that can determine success or failure based on how compatible or incompatible they are. Ultimately, it’s about the ability to succeed long-term, while growing and developing in an effort to achieve long-term goals.

Important questions

Here are some questions you must ask yourself:

1. Is this job compatible with my strengths and weaknesses?
2. Is this job compatible with my personality, my preferred way of operating, and my values?
3. Are any of my weaknesses in areas critical to performing this particular job?
4. Are any of of my key strengths critical to succeeding in this role?
5. What are the growth opportunities in terms of new experiences, skills, and capabilities? How do these align with my long-term aspirations?
6. What is the probability for success in this role?
7. Ask “Does this job stretch me? Will it help me grow?”

Of course a job should provide good compensation and benefits. But notice how these factors sound less important when stacked against some of these other points. Too often these important factors are ignored or touched on only briefly.

In order for any potential job to undergo proper scrutiny, these factors must be well established. And indeed, if a job is truly “great” it should stand up to thorough scrutiny.

In some ways, great jobs are like great cars…to make that determination you have to know what’s important and then look beyond the exterior and thoroughly under the hood. But you have to be willing to pull up the hood.

Don’t let fear sabotage your job search. Fear is either a “guide” or a “jailer” and it’s up to you to decide which one you would like it to be.

Fear is a natural, emotional response to being in an uncomfortable or stressful situation. And being on the job market any time, but especially in tough times, easily fits that bill. Fear itself, is neither good nor bad; it’s how you respond to fear that determines that.

The only way fear can be good is if you make it work for you. How? Fear has an amazing ability to guide you to the very things you need to understand and master. The key is to respond to fear intellectually, not emotionally. When you respond emotionally the most common result is paralysis.

Four Easy Steps

Analyze.

The first step is to probe your fears. Ask yourself why you feel a certain fear. Don’t settle for vague or emotional responses.

Why are you worried?

I’m worried about landing a job.

Why are you worried about landing a job?

Deep down I’m feeling lost and I’m not sure how to start or execute an effective job search.

What specifically don’t you know or understand?

I don’t know the specific steps I should be taking.

I don’t know how to sell myself effectively.

I don’t know how I compare to other candidates.

These answers provide insight and point us to the specific actions we must take to achieve our goals – in this case, landing a job. How?

Identify and take action.

Turn your fears into questions and develop an action plan to understand and master these points.

How do I conduct a strong job search? What specific steps should I be taking? What can I do to answer these questions?

• Contact colleagues who have conducted recent job searches and gain real life insights. What would they do again? What would they do differently?
• Read books that describe job search techniques.
• Speak with job search experts, including recruiters, human resource professionals, etc and get advice from them.
• Seek help from an outplacement service.

How do I sell myself effectively?

• Define your strengths. Understand what you have to offer.
• Contact close colleagues who can share their perceptions with you about what they consider to be your strengths and weaknesses.
• Put together a personal value proposition that encapsulates your strengths and shows how you can provide value to an organization or position.

How do I match up to other candidates? What do I have that they don’t?

• Contact colleagues you trust to get their insights about how you fair against similar professionals.
• Ask “How can I improve myself?”
• Ask people who interview you. “How to I match up against the other candidates? In which ways to I stand out and in which ways might I not?”

This simple example shows how probing your fears can guide you to the very actions you need to take.

The process is to analyze, identify, take action, and master. Using this technique turns fear into a powerful tool. And you will find fear diminishes as you take action and stop feeling paralyzed.

The final step: Prioritize.

People tend to fixate on whatever problem is top of mind. Your primary concern will take precedence over all other fears. For this reason it’s important to evaluate and prioritize your worries to ensure the most important concern is front and center.

The best example is of the two fears that rack most job seekers – the overriding concern about landing “any” job at all and the secondary concern of landing in the “wrong” job.

Statistically, these fears should be switched. Why? Because the likelihood anyone with a modicum of experience and talent won’t land any job at all is extremely slim, but the likelihood of landing a job that is a poor fit is extremely high. Statistics show that 35% of all new hires fail within 18 months. There are many reasons why new hires might fail, but with such a high failure rate, there’s no doubt, many jobs weren’t right for the people from the very start.

One reason so many people end up in jobs that aren’t right for them, is that they allow their fear of not landing a job to hijack their job search. As a result, landing any job becomes the priority and landing the right job becomes just a secondary concern. Make certain this doesn’t happen to you.

Many good, decent people come to me and ask what they must do to land a particular job.  What must they say? What should they do? How should they act?  Creating a facade that meets the expectations of an employer are far more likely to lead to a job that is a poor fit.  If their primary concern turned instead to landing in the wrong job, then these very questions about what to say, what do do, and how to act would become moot because creating a false facade would work against one’s own interest.

When people’s greatest fear is landing in the wrong job there is typically no facade, because a facade will only hide the real you and make it more difficult to determine if a fit exists or not.  The best way to proceed is to just be yourself.  If you are truly right for the job and you are just being yourself, you will almost always resonate more powerfully with the company and its representatives.

Don’t fear fear.  Instead turn it into a job search ally.