For the longest time, it seemed like employers had a preference for Chronological resumes. Certainly, that’s what the career centers, employment counselors and books on the subject suggested. A chronological resume featured the applicants’ work history in reverse historical order, most recent jobs first. Each job listed would state specific actions performed, equipment used, (hopefully) conveying how that person did each job, the company they worked for and the dates of employment.
Not surprisingly, not every job seeker benefits from the presentation of their work history in chronological order. The primary alternative was the Skills-based or Functional resume that highlighted the specifics of what was done on the job rather than the history with each company and the cache of an employer’s name. This was especially useful for folks who had been out of the workplace for an extended length of time, allowing applicants to emphasize what they knew how to do, the equipment they are most comfortable using, their success, accomplishments, etc.
Right now, most job seekers report being out of work an average of 6 months or longer before finding their next gig. That’s a relatively long time. For applicants in some fields the wait between jobs is even longer.
With this information, combined with some algorithmic hocus pocus, the folks at the job search site Indeed have decided that their systems will now concentrate on building Skills-based functional resume profiles rather than the chronological ones of the past. In the temperament of the current job market, this is a bold and smart move on their part. Bold because of the emphasis they are now placing on functional candidate presentations; and smart because the time was right to get employers to focus their attention more on skills than on applicants’ tenure with certain companies.
This is a long overdue move by the online search companies, and should be the direction employers want in applicant submissions. Skills-based resumes level the playing field. Regardless of how long a person has worked or the companies they have worked for, assessing and hiring primarily based on skills is the most equitable, providing a more consistent value comparison in the applicants consideration.
Regardless of resume format, content needs to be focused on the essential functions performed, particularly pertaining to the targeted employer’s needs.
As has been said in this space a few times over the years, all of job search – resumes, cover letters, online profiles, interviewing and networking – are all about conveying one thing: How do your skills and experience meet the needs of the employer? Everything else is just filler. The functional resume is the antidote to that filler by stressing the accomplishments and actions of the candidate.
Is one version of an applicant’s work history better than another?
Depends on the work history, the kind of work being sought, and the emphasis the applicant wants to place on longevity with their employers.
Is a chronological resume better than a skills-based/functional resume?
Not necessarily. A job seeker who has worked for a lot of employers in a relatively short amount of time in using a chrono resume would look like a job hopper, regardless of their skills. This brings up questions to the employer like, “Why is this candidate moving around so much?”
So, then is a functional resume better than a chronological one?
Sometimes. A candidate that has been with very few employers in a long career may find it hard to distill their qualifications for a functional presentation; whereas with a chronological document they could present each career benchmark and the related accomplishments in a neat, easy to discern format.
Do I prefer one kind of resume over another?
No. Over the years, I’ve instructed job seekers in the creation of both formats, and a few variations and hybrids of the two kinds.
Realistically, I believe every candidate should have multiple versions of their work history to suit the diversity of work they may be applying for. Consciously or not, some employers have a preference for one format over the other, though it might be hard to find this out. To combat this, some job seekers send/post multiple versions of their work histories to the same job search sites and employers in hopes one will filter through better than the other. No matter the format, the primary objective is for the candidate to get their content in front of decision makers, getting the job they want, this way or that way!
# # #