On the one hand, I understand that -- I'm well aware of the flood of slush-pile resumes one can easily get. (My boss at Convoq listed a position on Monster exactly once, and regretted it horribly.) OTOH, my observation is that it's most often the wrong criteria.
Well, if you can find a way to state the right criteria in a sentence in the req, such that it's presence on the resume verified in a 30-second visual (or machine-automated) scan, and have it verifiable in a short question in an interview... well, I think that's probably HR's Holy Grail. Write a book on it, sell it for a bazillion dollars, and retire as a wealthy philanthropist.
The thing is that the qualities you actually want are simply not well-screened for on a sheet of paper, or even a single interview. They are intangibles only provable through longer-term examination. Until we have brain scans that can test for it, I expect you're pretty much out of luck.
no subject
Well, if you can find a way to state the right criteria in a sentence in the req, such that it's presence on the resume verified in a 30-second visual (or machine-automated) scan, and have it verifiable in a short question in an interview... well, I think that's probably HR's Holy Grail. Write a book on it, sell it for a bazillion dollars, and retire as a wealthy philanthropist.
The thing is that the qualities you actually want are simply not well-screened for on a sheet of paper, or even a single interview. They are intangibles only provable through longer-term examination. Until we have brain scans that can test for it, I expect you're pretty much out of luck.