Nothing new in the fact that resumes are enhanced, but many companies continue to use them as the de facto first-pass filter for candidates. Three points from the article:
A recent study by ResumeDoctor.com, a resume advisory service based in South Burlington, Vt., found that nearly 43 percent of more than 1,100 resumes it checked for dates of employment, job titles and education contained at least one significant inaccuracy. Nearly 13 percent of the resumes contained two or more inaccuracies.
If 43% of the resumes a company reviews in response to an employment ad contain “one significant inaccuracy,” how reliable is that process for selecting the best candidate?
“I think that some job seekers feel that in order to be competitive, they need to exaggerate their background . . . Another reason, he added, “is the sense that everyone is doing it, so what’s the harm?”
This approach is true. We have personally found strong candidates who did not get the position because of resume inaccuracies found during verification. Ironically in some, the inaccuracies were not critical to the job. Character is a different story.
Lastly, a personal observance. Have you ever seen an article with so many 1 sentence paragraphs?
It caught my eye when reading it.
It is from a newspaper so perhaps they were trying to fill the column space.