Executive Resume Story: Building the case for complexity in a keep-it-simple world

In Our Hustle Culture, We Are Pressed to Get to the Point

Less-is-more advice is prevalent in almost every area of our lives these days. Career communications; aka, executive resumes, are not immune from this weathered recommendation. Whether crafting a resume, creating a cover letter, penning an elevator pitch or preparing interview responses, so many people doling out career advice default to brevity and simplicity.

It all sounds so fitting for our hustle culture.
“Don’t waste my time with your words.”
“Get to the point.”
“Bottom line that for me.”
“Keep it simple sweetheart.”

As an aside, did you know that the origin of the less is more cliche is a Robert Browning poem?

“Who strive — you don’t know how the others strive
To paint a little thing like that you smeared
Carelessly passing with your robes afloat,
Yet do much less, so much less, Someone says,
(I know his name, no matter) – so much less!
Well, less is more, Lucrezia.
(emphasis added)

Writing Explained provides a definition of the ‘less is more’ cliche: “Simplicity is better than elaborate embellishment; sometimes something simple is better than something advanced or complicated.”

Building the Case for Complexity in a Simplicity-Minded World

All of this is well and good, but when speaking of a conversation as complex as that which encompasses a marriage between a company and potential employee, a bit of depth and complexity is not only wise, but essential.

Conversations, both in writing and in live interviews, should be well thought out and articulated in a way that delves into the contextual details–from original situations or challenges a candidate has faced in past employment, to the strategic planning and action involved, all the way to the measurable and reverberating results, both short- and long-term.

This is particularly true in regard to conversations around senior management and executive-level careers. And, amazingly enough, the refrain to pack a 20-30 year career onto 1-2 pages is exhaustingly repetitive and inane.

When Experts Bind the Resume With Rules

I recently ran across two separate, but recent Facebook recruiter group conversations on the resume length topic. The most recent thread started with a recruiter inquiring whether a 4-page resume was too long for a specific industry professional. I was mesmerized by the avalanche of comments this post spurred–104 to be exact.

Many of the commenters avidly insisted on a 1-2 page resume max, regardless of the level or depth of a candidate’s experience. Others suggested it depends upon the quality of the content or the years of industry and other relevant experience.

The lion’s share of responders hard-lined the 1-2 page maximum, with 3 or 4 (gasp!) pages being touted as “too long!” while exclamation points underscored remarks. One recruiter recommended 1 page for ever $100k of income, which I found interesting.

I even saw the commonly espoused, “provide the what” in the resume but “leave the how” for the interview. I vigorously object to this, as it is altogether possible to clearly articulate both the what and how in the resume story and still have so much more to expand upon during the interview.

However, my heart leapt with joy when I read the following comments from Amy Miller, recruiter for Google and owner / author at Recruiting in Yoga Pants blog:

“I haven’t thought about page length since the last time I printed a resume which was probably 2007.

Has anyone ever had a hiring manager reject a candidate purely because of how many pages a resume was? More importantly – WOULD YOU LET THEM?”
(note: Opinions are Amy’s + don’t necessarily represent those of Google.)

Another recruiter made the case that I regularly profess with my clients, articulating the value of expounding on a candidate’s level (and depth) of experience in the resume. She explained that using “super short resumes” just makes her job harder. This is because matching the muscular position requirements to an anemic resume simply falls short. Moreover, I’ve had many an executive referred to me for executive resume writing by recruiters seeking out more robust detail to market the candidate’s value, which brings me to …

Writing a Leadership Story Requires Detailed Context

Trying to contain years of specific and varied leadership experience and enterprise wide initiatives relevant to the role for which a recruiter is sourcing into such limited real estate is like trying to tell a 400-page novel in 50 pages. You must build muscular foundational narrative around the core outcomes. You frame the leader’s initiatives with detailed context and collateral behaviors that insinuate themselves into the actionable outcomes.

In a similar vein, I ran across this Fast Company article through my colleague, Hannah Morgan’s twitter stream recently, Why longer responses to ‘So, tell me about yourself’ are better. The author, Joseph Liu, a personal branding consultant, strongly disagrees with the advice that a job seeker contain their response to the ‘tell me about yourself’ question to 30-60 seconds.

Liu writes, “One minute isn’t enough time to deliver a meaningful response that benefits you as a candidate.” He goes on to explain four points of value in responding more deeply, including the opportunity to reveal motivations behind career decisions, relevant to the hiring manager’s hiring decisions.

Correspondingly, a longer resume can provide contextual leadership traits that underpinned the executive careerist’s decision making as they pioneered new products, broadened market share, rapidly scaled a startup operation. What were the pushback signals they received from the front lines? How did they influence other leaders who may have been reticent about a particular decision? What change management strategies, in particular, did they employ to go from negative profits to best-ever EBITDA?

Chipping Away at the Value Proposition May Be at the Expense of the Message

An article, When Hiring Execs, Context Matters Most, from Harvard Business Review, further reinforces the need for articulating the executive leader’s value in a more tailored way. In the article, research and advisory firm CEB “suggests that companies will be more successful if they consider the particular leadership context when hiring for every level.”

Olympic Gold Medalist and Performance Coach, Joe Jacobi additionally drives the overall point home that less is not always more in a recent LinkedIn post, of which I’m sharing just a snippet:

“Do ideas that ask you to reduce the message at the core  … help you better connect with the needed people, resources, and ideas to make it happen?

Or, do such ideas create more hysteria and continue to chip away more at what matters most?”

Follow this link to read Joe’s full message, which provides encouragement that is counterintuitive to many experts’ advice in regard to richer, deeper messaging beyond the 15-word sound-bites we are being pressed to whittle our social networking interactions down to.

—

The Value of Words in the Executive Resume

So, I think to bottom line this message that I am so ardently seeking to share with those who will take a few moments to read, to really internalize and consider, is that less is not always more. While brevity has its place, longer form writing and communicating still provides value. In fact, to engage in more intimate, sustainable conversations and to build chaptered, relevant detail around the information gathering and decision-making process, you must use words, sometimes a lot of them.

###

About the author: I am a master resume writer with 20 years’ experience in the resume writing trenches. No insta-resume service here. I built my story from ground up, living and breathing resumes, full time, self-supporting, and not as a side gig. My clients hire me for the highly consultative, thoughtful approach to resume writing. Contact me at jacqui@careertrend.net to discuss how I can help shape the stories (executive resume, bio, LinkedIn, elevator pitch, etc.) that will accompany you through your next career evolvement.