There are hundreds of books on how to write resumes, but only few on how to actually review resumes. Here are some quick tips that will dramatically improve your resume evaluation skills.

1.) Be critical. An objective yet critical eye is imperative to evaluating resumes properly.  A resume is a basic tool for making an initial assessment and for identifying some of the key points that require further investigation.  If you accept everything as fact, you will never identify the points you need to probe in an interview nor will you really know which resumes stand out and which ones are filled with subtle red-flags.

When data is presented, ask how the 25% improvement in on-time performance was achieved? What specifically did the candidate have to do with achieving these results?  How was the turn-over rate reduced from 33% to 17% and again, how specifically was the candidate involved in achieving these results?

2.) Dismiss subjective assertions. If you want to test a resume for substance,  make a copy of the resume and use a red pen and strike out every unsubstantiated assertion.  If the copy is filled with red ink, it’s a good indication that this individual is sharing little substance and is hoping to trick you with a load of self-serving comments.  As a training exercise go through the following summary from a sample resume and simply strike every assertion that is based solely on the writer’s own perception.

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.

What do you have left?  If you say “absolutely nothing except that this person is likely a sales & marketing executive” you are correct.  The biggest mistake is to trust resumes like this.  Such resumes provide far less information than meets the eye. Well meaning, but untrained resume reviewers will believe they’ve got a star on their hands, when in fact such information should lead to greater scrutiny instead.

The best resumes share one secret ingredient.  They provide information and data that allows the reviewer to make the very assertions the writer wants to make - instead of them being spoon fed.  It’s very powerful when a reviewer can make the very assertions the writer was hoping to make. Why? Because people rarely disagree with their own assertions.  So having a reviewer make wonderful assertions about a candidate is far better than the candidate making them.

3.) List all questions and doubts. As you review a resume look for any points that create doubt, confusion, uncertainty, and misgivings.  These feelings point you to the very issues that need to be probed.  Do not sweep them aside. Too often hiring managers set aside lingering questions and/or doubts.  The candidate has created these feelings and you deserve to have them cleared up.  A poorly written resume will provide you with plenty to evaluate, if you still want to interview the candidate that is.   Don’t be satisfied with anything less than satisfactory explanations.

When possible, get additional feedback and verification, potentially from third parties if it can be done discretely and without exposing the candidate.  If nothing else, have the candidate provide references and contact these individuals to probe the issues you need clarity on.  They will provide an additional data point.

4.) Look for hard data. A resume should be non-fiction.  It should rest largely on data, details, and information that can be verified.  For instance, “managed a division of 2,000 employees” is something that typically should be easy to verify. An “MBA and experience with a start-up” are also things that can be verified.  As is “a 25% growth in revenue over 12 months.” Such concrete information should make up the bulk  of a resume.

5.) Find one glaring falsehood and you’re likely to find several more. When a candidate claimed he had been conferred a Bachelor’s degree from UCLA and it proved to be false, we combed through the rest of the resume and found out he had never worked at one company he claimed to have worked, and in another instance held only a Director title while his resume claimed he had been a Vice President.  It’s always good to verify a few easily verifiable points, such as the educational degrees.   If anything comes back fishy - it’s good to dig deeper or pass on the candidate entirely.

6.) Read the story behind the story. Often resumes have an underlying theme. Typically it’s a theme that seeks to address concerns or insecurities the candidate has about them self.  A resume that cites all kinds of education but where there is no discernible degree may be trying to hide a lack of education or an insecurity about their intellectual abilities.

A resume that fails to give the year of college graduation and starts with a Director position 15 years ago, is hiding something as well.  Most people will think the candidate is trying to conceal their age, which is immaterial.  However, the candidate may actually be hiding the fact they have plateaued. In one such instance, we learned that the candidate had 29 years of work experience but had never held a title beyond Director.  This is a red-flag that has nothing to do with age.  It goes to the question if they are capable of handling a Vice President position and if not, why not?  The missing information obscures a potential weakness that needs to be evaluated.  Without a full background this potential red-flag may have been missed.

Another example are dates of employment that are seamless by year only.  This can potentially hide involuntary departures or significant gaps of time between employment.  Of course such circumstances occur, but a confident professional is not afraid to explain the circumstances surrounding each departure.

The key is to determine that such employment gaps were not the norm.  A candidate attempting to hide such gaps is potentially hiding the fact that such gaps were more frequent and possibly hiding something material, such as a drug dependency, illegal behavior, inability to get along with other co-workers, incompetence, etc.  If you can identify an underlying theme it will typically point you to areas that deserve greater scrutiny.

7.) Grade the degree of clarity and focus, as well as the quality of the overall presentation. A resume communicates much more than a person’s background.  It exposes how well a person presents themselves in writing.  How well they know themselves.  Is the resume easy to read, well organized, displayed in a comfortable and logical format? Is the information substantive or hollow fluff?

It’s so important to glean more than the information the writer is trying to sell you.  This document is an example of how well this person organizes their thoughts, conveys their points, communicates with others, as well as, how well the candidate knows them self and how confident they are in sharing who they are.

8.) Play devil’s advocate. Just in case your assumptions about a person are wrong. Try and find evidence to the contrary.  Also seek independent references where possible.  A reference might be able to address some of your concerns.  It’s amazing how a strong, objective reference can either solidify your initial feelings or get you to look at the candidate in a completely different light.

One key skill to reviewing resumes is to always be open to the possibility you’re assumptions are wrong.  You set yourself up for disaster if you do nothing more than make a quick assessment and then only look for evidence that matches your incorrect assumption.  Be objective as you gather additional information.

Allow the information to guide you to wherever it takes you. Ultimately it’s about getting it right, not you being right.

Recently we were asked to conduct a secret search for a position that was currently occupied by an incumbent who had no idea he was about to be replaced. We declined.

Dealing with a hire before you fire situation is very touchy. My advice is to be extremely wary of using such an approach and to restrict its use to only the most extraordinary circumstances.

The simple truth is that a “hire before you fire” approach hurts companies more than it helps. Not only does it send a poor message to candidates, it sends a horrible message to current employees.

Your conduct is symbolic of who you are

How a company conducts a search for new employees creates a snapshot of the kind of company it is. Is it an open, honest, ethical environment? Is it a company people can respect? These questions are answered in part by the way you conduct your search.

The real question you need to ask is what kind of company are we? And what kind of company do we want to be? This should guide your actions. Even though a crucial employee may decide to leave prematurely if they learn they are going to be replaced, it’s the honorable thing to share this information. Of course, making contingency plans in case that employee does bolt prematurely is part of what good companies do. But attempting to actively go on the open market and fill the position in advance is another thing altogether.

Searches cloaked in secrecy create unintended consequences

Companies that engage in hire before you fire searches are usually oblivious of the unintended consequences. Secret searches are often difficult. Primarily because confidentiality is paramount. Often recruiters may not divulge essential information to candidates such as the company name, location, or other crucial details.

Mediocre or desperate candidates might accept this level of secrecy, but great talent definitely does not. “Come back to me when you can divulge all pertinent information,” one typically hears from talented professionals. And to their credit - it’s the answer I want to hear from them. Why? Because if they’re too interested in a position shrouded in secrecy, it makes me question if they’re really that good. Additionally, if they learn that an incumbent is unaware of the search and they see nothing wrong with it, it makes me wonder what kind of ethics and values they would bring to the company. Let’s face it, if a company is doing something sneaky, I have to assume willing candidates are quite willing to be just as sneaky.

One thing companies must understand is that every word, every behavior, every action, is evidence to potential candidates of the kind of organization they are dealing with. Everything communicates.

Our practice has turned away several hire before you fire assignments. What we have been willing to do in certain cases, is to prepare the search, conduct necessary research, identify the people we would want to approach, etc, so that we can jump into the search, full-speed, as soon as the incumbent has been informed of the company’s decision to replace them. Only then will we typically contact anyone about this search. Taking this approach frees us from maintaining secrecy and allows us to perform the best search possible, while reducing the lead time for bringing in candidates.

Search is more than just finding an executive

Of course the primary goal of any search is to find a suitable placement, but how you conduct a search is a a public display of the kind of organization it is. Don’t believe that simply because a search firm is running the search that your company won’t take a hit. The search firm you select and the way they run the search is equally telling as the interactions a candidate experiences with your company. After all, you hired this search firm, so the expectation is that you endorse their work and stand by how they represent you.

What’s more, engaging in a hire before you fire search is extremely damaging to your employees. It creates uncertainty and distrust. Don’t be surprised if a number of your employees start wondering if they might not be next.

But if all these factors don’t dissuade you from pursuing this approach, consider that such searches are often flawed, resulting in candidates who are not the strongest. Typically they are only incrementally better if that. And what kind of victory is that?

So think again and realize the upside to tackling the situation with integrity. Doing so will result in better results and a better reputation.

I just read an article touting the use of a mentor programs as a good way to help new hires integrate into their new company and to develop people long-term. However, it’s been my experience that such programs yield limited results, often creating more busy work than results.

Some common problems with corporate mentor programs

Finding natural mentors

The real key is to identify natural mentors within organizations as well as to look for strong natural mentoring skills whenever you are conducting an external search to fill key executive positions. Natural mentoring skills aren’t easy to learn and it takes a certain kind of personality.

Perhaps the best way to develop new mentors is to have talented people work with the great “natural” mentors you identify within your organization. My experience is that some of the very best mentors are those people who were once under the wing of a great mentor themselves. But this is a long process that results in long term benefits. In a world driven by a short term focus - this is not something many companies deem important.

Jump start the number of good mentors in your organization

One way to expand mentoring is to encourage and reward “productive” mentoring, not just busy work, and to steadfastly seek mentoring skills with every key executive search you conduct. With most hiring managers this is nothing more than an afterthought and often not part of the selection criteria at all.

The most important thing to realize is that the best mentor programs are not the result of institutional processes developed by corporate and pushed out to managers in glossy manuals. That would be akin to taking glass and putting it under man made pressure and calling it a diamond.

Far better is to have the real thing and it starts with looking for them.

Also read “Re-discovering the value of mentors” for more detailed information.

I’m often asked what’s the key to recruiting great talent. My answer seems to surprise many people who assume there’s magic recruiting pixie dust. The simple truth is that there are several key steps to hiring great talent and step one is a well defined position.

In our fast moving world, where a running start and cutting corners has become the norm, the importance of a well defined position is often overlooked.

A clear and comprehensive understanding of an open position is crucial for two reasons. First, it helps to shape and focus a company’s search effort. And secondly, it satisfies the need of talented executives to have a clear and concise understanding of a position and the confidence that the company has a solid understanding of the position it’s seeking to fill.

If you describe a widget. You’ll attract widgets.

In most cases, poor position descriptions are the result of an old formula that stresses basic job duties, a list of arbitrary requirements, and a few “wouldn’t it be nice” qualities. Such descriptions allow people who aren’t right for a position to believe they are. While leading those best suited to the role, to pass entirely on the opportunity. Why? The description fails to speak to them with its ambiguous tone.

It’s important to look at an organization chart like a large puzzle, where each opening requires a unique piece to create a good fit. One way to do this is to go beyond the basics duties of a position and focus on the unique aspects facing a particular role. This is where a position description develops the necessary nuance.

Talent is drawn to positions that speak to it.

How is this done? Let’s use an example of a Director, Marketing Communications for a billion dollar retailer. The role is responsible for managing a staff of 45 that provides marketing communication services to internal customer groups.

A typical position description will focus on the primary duties such as managing a group of marketing professionals, overseeing creative, acting as liaison to customer groups. Requirements often are simple arbitrary prerequisites, such as a minimum 10 years of marketing experience, previous experience managing a staff of 20 or more, etc.

You might realize this description is more effective as a sleep aid.

Look what happens when you when dig deeper and ask, what are:

• The challenges this position will face, both functionally and organizationally.
• The unique organizational dynamics within which this person must operate. (How are decisions made and executed in this company?)
• The personalities and individual styles he/she will be working with and against.
• The resources over which the position will have direct control and those that must be shared.
• The specific expectations for the position and the desired outcomes over the first 12, 18, 24 months.
• The values and motivations that are driving the company, division, and department.
• The three year history of the position and the group, including strengths and weaknesses, as well as recent failures and successes. (How did they get here?)
• The morale within the company, division, and department.
• The defining culture within the company, division, and department.

Depth, Shape, & Clarity.

After going through this list, you’ll certainly identify numerous additional duties and responsibilities that give the position greater depth, shape, and clarity. From these new duties you’ll also recognize important new requirements that will ensure a better fit.

See how our Marcom position is redefined with just a few insights:

1. Three different Directors have held this position in the past 24 months.
2. Morale is low and a number of key staff members have resigned to take positions with other companies, leaving the remaining group overwhelmed.
3. Internal clients have lost faith in the group and circumvent their own Marcom organization for external vendors.

These new factors expose a number of yet unspecified responsibilities, such as:

• Turning around an organization suffering low morale and several key departures.
• Developing sound solutions to urgent operational deficiencies.
• Providing leadership to an organization in need of strong guidance and mentoring.
• Instilling a sense of calm and consistency to the department.
• Providing honest communications so as not to over promise and under deliver.
• Building bridges and developing trust with internal client groups and creating renewed confidence in the department’s ability to provide both high quality and timely service and support – while also providing an honest timeline of capabilities as the department ramps up its abilities.
• Staffing open positions with strong candidates who fit well into the group and who can deliver quality work, increase the department’s bench strength, and help improve overall morale.

These new responsibilities also help a company better define essential requirements that are more succinct than the broad requirements generated by standard job descriptions.

A position description that “pops”.

What was once an ordinary non-descript position profile, now becomes a highly nuanced description, which is more accurate and well-defined. Most companies are averse to such honest descriptions, fearing it will scare off candidates. In fact it’s just the opposite - it speaks powerfully to candidates who fit the bill and are drawn to such challenges, while attracting fewer candidates who are not right for the role. A generic position description is a huge red flag, warning talented candidates that the company has little clue what the position is really about. Stepping into such a role is far more risky than one where the company has complete clarity.

Talent likes challenges. So make the challenges clear.

Talent is not afraid of challenges. They are enticed by position descriptions that accurately describe the unique challenges facing a role and which convey a strong sense that the company is open, honest, well aware of the challenges it faces, committed to the position, and open to the medicine that’s required to fix what ails them.

Don’t fret about sharing details you worry might scare candidates away - always present them as challenges to the position. Talent loves challenges. What you will find is that the candidates who are scared off weren’t right from the start.

Ultimately, a thorough, well defined position is the first step to landing true talent – because talent is drawn to it.

Companies that want to attract talent on a consistent basis must create an Employee Value Proposition that appeals to top talent. Doing so will noticeably improve the quality of hires across an organization.

Today it’s shortsighted for companies to rely on “titles” and “compensation” as the primary levers to attract talent. In this age of corporate free agency, real talent looks well beyond these factors. They’re looking for positions that address broader needs and interests.

Understanding the factors that are important to star talent allows savvy companies to create powerful Employee Value Propositions that consistently draw quality candidates. It may be surprising, but many components of a solid EVP don’t cost companies a dime. They revolve around issues of position scope, autonomy, control over resources, developmental opportunities, clarity of purpose, commitment to the role, etc.

What are star candidates looking for?

The first step to developing a powerful EVP is understanding what star candidates are looking for.

From my experience, most are looking for:

• A strong, clear, unambiguous, understanding of the role and its purpose.
• Responsibility and accountability with sufficient authority.
• Interesting and difficult challenges with the necessary autonomy and control over resources to meet those challenges and achieve targets.
• A dynamic, quality minded work environment.
• An environment where most of the time is spent battling the competition and not figuring out how to overcome internal barriers and road blocks. (Nothing frustrates talent more.)
• Talented superiors and peers from whom they can learn, grow, and develop.
• A superior and colleagues whose styles mesh well with their own.
• Organizations with a quality reputation.
• Organizations with a strong, clear understanding of the role they are seeking to fill, along with aggressive, yet realistic expectations.
• A title commensurate to scope and responsibility which shows progression.
• Financial rewards that match the “value” they provide the organization.
• Personal growth and advancement. Not just bigger titles, but mentoring and experience gathering that strengthens their competencies and improves their overall marketability.

The degree to which a company can provide and concisely communicate each of these components, will, in large part, determine the likelihood of landing a star candidate.

Build your EVP.

First, determine what you have to offer in terms of the areas mentioned above and ensure that you incorporate them in all relevant communications throughout the search. These issues resonate with top talent.

You must also realize when you don’t have a sufficient value proposition to land the quality candidate you envision. This will permit you to find ways to either enhance your Employee Value Proposition or decide you need to compromise in terms of the quality of your candidates.

Remember, it’s not that top talent can’t be recruited into less desirable positions; it’s just statistically less likely and more time consuming and costly.

Overcome weaknesses in your EVP.

You can overcome some weaknesses in your EVP by making changes. For instance, you can add additional responsibilities to the role. You can authorize additional resources to the position. If the superior for a particular role is not a sufficiently strong mentor or leader, you might consider restructuring the position to report elsewhere.

As a last resort, you can throw money at the problem, but this will require a compensation sufficient to offset any perceived shortcomings in the EVP. And that can be costly. It might also require an employer to mitigate unacceptable risks by offering an employment contract and/or other financial incentives and guarantees to entice a star.

To truly reap the benefits, an EVP should be in place at the start of a search. It’s not something that should wait until the end of the recruiting process.

Often companies without a compelling Employee Value Proposition find it necessary to rework the entire position, that may include adding responsibilities, providing a bigger compensation package, etc in order to land a strong candidate. Now imagine how many more star candidates they might have drawn into the process had the EVP been well established prior to the start of the search.

The “let’s worry about what we have to do to land a great candidate once we’ve found one” approach, relies on luck to attract talent. Every now and then this approach might land a star, but tragically, companies with such an approach would have drawn many more talented candidates, had they only put the work in up front.

If you are serious about recruiting talent, the factors cited above should be established at the very beginning of any search. Few talented executives are willing to go through the process without focusing on some of these important issues early on.

Legendary UCLA basketball coach John Wooden use to say, “Failing to prepare is preparing to fail.” When it comes to recruiting top talent nothing is truer.

The standard job search approach is similar to that of a used-car salesman. Polish your shoes, slick back your hair, and go out and tell them whatever you must to make the sale. But there’s a big difference between you and used-car salesmen? Used car salesmen sell products they don’t give a damn about. They just want it off the lot. You on the other hand are selling yourself. And with such a precious product, it matters to whom you sell yourself.

The standard job search approach was never meant to land the right job, just any job. It’s about doing what’s necessary to get yourself off the “job lot”. This approach relies on creating a facade that you believe makes you look stronger. Think again! In our hyper-critical, modern society, this no longer works.

As a society, we just don’t believe people anymore. We’ve heard it all before. Today such actions often achieve the opposite of what we intend. Instead of appearing stronger, we are creating doubt and suspicion about who we are. The only effective counter measure is to be “genuine”. Today it’s all about being “real”. Why? Because being genuine and real slices through cynicism and creates trust and believability.

How do I know if I’m using a “standard” job search approach?

See if you recognize any of these aspects in your own job search efforts:

1. HIDE AND EMBELLISH. Where you hide weaknesses and embellish good attributes.

2. ONE SIZE FITS ALL. Where you use canned answers to common interview questions. This is based on false belief that employers are looking for specific responses and you have to oblige them in order to land the job.

3. ACT THE PART. Where you focus on “acting” your best, not “being” best. It’s about how to act, how to dress, how firmly to shake hands, etc.

If you recognize any of these approaches as part of your job search effort, you’re pursuing a standard job search approach.

The standard job search approach fails on several fronts, but perhaps the most important one is that it’s not focused on the right fit nor on long-term success. It’s simply an effort to land any job you can. Long term success requires intermediate steps that string together essential experiences and developmental opportunities. To find and land such jobs requires a serious job evaluation, but it’s difficult to conduct such an evaluation when one is busy acting a part.

Beware! As the standard used-car sales approach becomes ever more ineffective, the pundits who advocate this technique will blame the competitive landscape and stress that the solution lies in polishing your act even more. This is a smoke screen. The real culprit is the approach itself. It’s time to separate your self from this approach. And in doing so, will lead to a more effective way to land the right job for you.

This is so important, because it’s the most desirable companies that are most critical of people who hide behind facades. As a result, the standard search approach fares best with less desirable companies that are less critical in recruiting employees. Is that the kind of company you want to work for? And how long will it be before even mediocre companies won’t go for this approach?

So if you realize your job search approach is like that of a used-car salesman, today’s the day to start doing something much more powerful - be “yourself”.