I hate to contradict my respected colleague Tony Lee (“New to the Endangered Species List: the Resume,” Recruiting Trends, Aug. ‘07), but I see no sign that the resume is endangered or dying. Sure, it’s evolving, and at a fast pace to match our dynamic high-tech culture. But until online applications improve to the point that they are actually useful tools for employers, the resume will remain an essential element of the job search.

Consider these points:

• Contrary to Tony’s assertion that online applications are “easy to complete,” in many cases they are confusing, contrary, arbitrary, and frustrating… if they can be completed at all. The frustration starts when candidates can’t easily navigate from home page to career page or must click through multiple screens to get from a job description to an application. Highly educated, tech-savvy professionals find themselves booted off or in a squirrel cage of roundabout clicks, and in frustration they leave the site without completing their applications.
• And are online applications “absolutely objective,” as Tony asserts? Sure – if you consider two candidates with “4 years of marketing experience” to be absolutely equal. By requiring apples-to-apples comparisons of what may be limes and kumquats, the automated process undoubtedly deselects great candidates in favor of so-so or even poor candidates.
• Tony also states that “making a good impression as a candidate should rely on skills, experience and training.” Yet how can an online application convey the richness of that experience, the depth (not just the duration) of those skills, or the effectiveness of that training? Where’s the proof? By breaking down a candidate’s experience to dry facts and credentials, the online application robs candidates of their uniqueness and limits employers’ ability to select candidates who can make a difference.

This, of course, is where a well-written resume comes in! In addition to “skills, experience and training,” an effective resume lets employers know precisely how, when, where, and why these credentials were used and the results. A good resume emphasizes the candidate’s strengths and illustrates capabilities with examples.

Tony mentions that companies concerned with meeting hiring regulations are requiring all candidates to complete the online application. That’s an interesting point – it implies that candidates are reaching recruiters or hiring authorities through some means other than the online system, and then are directed to the system to cover the bases. And my experience as an executive resume writer and career consultant proves this point over and over. Real people approach other real people to discuss careers, jobs, and opportunities. The “system” exists to keep the paperwork in order – not primarily as a candidate selection tool. And that’s as it should be, given the limits of the system and the way it removes the human factor from the hiring process.

I’ve also observed a high frustration level on the employer’s side. Companies have thousands, maybe millions of resumes in their databases yet still can’t find “good” people or the right skill sets. I predict that technology will continue to improve and perhaps improve the experience and the results for both candidates and employers. But until then, the resume remains a vibrant, useful tool for conveying value, promise and capability to employers. It’s not going away any time soon.