Some of those embellishments could get you in all sorts of shit if the company proved deeper, though this doesn't surprise me at all. Because 100% of companies lie on their Job Descriptions. You...
Some of those embellishments could get you in all sorts of shit if the company proved deeper, though this doesn't surprise me at all.
Because 100% of companies lie on their Job Descriptions. You will be doing more than expected, more often than expected. Even the most socially conscious employer will mess you about if you don't have confidence and boundary enforcement.
Not just job descriptions. They tell a lot of lies when giving you an offer. I've heard a few myself: "This is the highest we can go" Proven to be a lie (ended up getting more than this) "This is...
Not just job descriptions. They tell a lot of lies when giving you an offer. I've heard a few myself:
"This is the highest we can go" Proven to be a lie (ended up getting more than this)
"This is just our standard offer" Proven to be a lie (the person in the same role just before me was offered more)
You should feel just as emboldened to lie during the negotiation phase. And if you have any negotiating power you must use it. Accepting an offer without any adjustments is a mistake.
Preach that from the roof mate. I'm senior leadership and I don't do the negotiation fuck around phase in isolation. I legitimately talk to the folks from day one what the budget is for the role...
Preach that from the roof mate.
I'm senior leadership and I don't do the negotiation fuck around phase in isolation. I legitimately talk to the folks from day one what the budget is for the role from top to bottom. We have a conversation about skills, expectations and role with it.
It's a grown up chat for grown up people talking about something that is important. Both sides have to compromise in the end, but that founding relationship MUST start with respect around pay.
If give someone the impression you're fucking them? They won't respect you from day 1.
Do you have any tips for how to negotiate? I'm hoping to get an offer soon after over a decade in my current position and not really sure how to ask for more money. Just a flat "no I need more"...
Do you have any tips for how to negotiate? I'm hoping to get an offer soon after over a decade in my current position and not really sure how to ask for more money. Just a flat "no I need more" doesn't seem quite right?
As with most skills, there's a whole realm of possibilities and so it's much better to get your whole brain wrapped around the problem than just have a set of tips. So here are some starting...
Exemplary
As with most skills, there's a whole realm of possibilities and so it's much better to get your whole brain wrapped around the problem than just have a set of tips. So here are some starting points from which to building the mental model necessary for compensation negotiation.
Understand the employer's position. The better you can do this the more power you have. If you can somehow find out what their real limits on pay are you've won. Imagine two nations negotiating terms of a cease-fire. If nation A knows nation B is ready to accept full demilitarization they can demand that and never back down. If you're going to get an offer from a large corporation you can probably talk to an ex-recruiter and learn the exact pay bands and the company's negotiation process. When I got my offer from Google I paid someone who used to work there to negotiate by proxy on my behalf.
The employer will usually ask you questions like "Are you interviewing anywhere else?" or "Do you have any other offers?". They're trying to judge how desperately you need the job and whether you can pull up a competing offer. You can ask them how many people they're currently interviewing for the position and how far along they are. It's also helpful to understand how desperate they are to have the position filled - you can ask questions during interviews to get a sense of whether they're trying to get ahead of a business need or if they're far behind and needed someone hired yesterday. This is important for all negotiations - I've used the logic to negotiate down my rent by 10%. I knew the landlord saw the empty unit as losing money every month. If you can tell them you'll move in that weekend and start paying rent, but less than they asked for, then from their position they're still coming out ahead. So do the same for the employer. If you know they don't have any other candidates they want as much as you and they really need someone now then you can ask for more (within reason) and they're still coming out ahead. From their perspective they either pay you a bit more or wait another month for a good candidate to come around which will probably cost the business far more than your pay bump.
Edit: Most recently I asked for more salary with the excuse that I wanted my health insurance premium fully covered. I'm joining a very small company - 4 people - so they can't get an employee plan yet. The CEO said he's going to cover 80% of premiums - 100% would mean employees could get some ludicrously expensive plan at no cost to themselves. I'm still on a COBRA plan from my last employer which is pretty expensive. I told him I've always had premiums covered at 99-100% and it would be nice to continue that. So I told him the salary bump necessary to effectively do that (after deductions for taxes). The rational for making this a salary change being that I didn't want to change the "company policy" just for me, so it's better for both of us if it's factored into salary. And of course future compensation adjustments are relative to my current salary, so that bump will pay dividends. /Edit
In my experience larger organizations are more comfortable paying non-recurring compensation than salary. If you get an offer from one and they don't include one, just say the words "signing bonus" and you may see a ton of money appear. The last time I did this I went from fighting over an extra $5k in salary to instantly seeing a $40k bump in first-year compensation.
I think it really helps to practice bluffing on a regular basis. I play games like Avalon, The Resistance, and Secret Hitler with a bunch of lawyers every week. Practice makes perfect.
Edit 2: As for how to ask for more - a general tip would be to use language like “this would be an easy decision if you could increase the salary to X” or “I’d be ready to make a decision on the offer today if you can pay me X”. Usually proceed with a good explanation for why you are really excited about the company, but just need the pay to be right.
Saying things like "This is the highest we can go" is not a lie in the context of a negotiation. For Pete's sake. All that's required for it to be truthful is for the person speaking to be...
Proven to be a lie (ended up getting more than this)
Saying things like "This is the highest we can go" is not a lie in the context of a negotiation. For Pete's sake. All that's required for it to be truthful is for the person speaking to be understood to mean, "based on my current understanding of your value and our budget," and all that's required for that number to change is for the other party's understanding of your value and their budget to change.
"This is just our standard offer" Proven to be a lie (the person in the same role just before me was offered more)
Did they ever claim that they extend their "standard" offer to every single candidate?
Don't take it personally when "the facts of the matter" that people present during negotiation turn out to be a little flexible / the subject of spin. That's just how it always is. You're right that outright lying is not even unheard of, and also the examples that you gave aren't even examples of that.
I think we just have different definitions of lying. I'm not mad, I'm saying whatever they do is fair to do for yourself. The goal of what I've said here is to help employees overcome the fear...
I think we just have different definitions of lying. I'm not mad, I'm saying whatever they do is fair to do for yourself.
The goal of what I've said here is to help employees overcome the fear they have about negotiating with employers. You might have a gut reaction to saying "I absolutely need $X salary to accept" even though you are desperate and will take what you can get. It'll feel like you're lying. And in my opinion this is a lie. You don't need that bump in pay. But you should feel comfortable saying it and consider it ethical to do so because by this point the employer has probably already made a couple of comparable "lies" directly to you.
I never thought of job descriptions as contracts, though, and the formal employment offers I’ve gotten don’t include a job description. Job descriptions are future-oriented and plans can change....
I never thought of job descriptions as contracts, though, and the formal employment offers I’ve gotten don’t include a job description. Job descriptions are future-oriented and plans can change.
An extreme case of that was at Google where, like many, I got a job offer that didn’t even say which team I would be on, and got an unpleasant surprise when I got there. I do not recommend that. I should have negotiated. Don’t take a job without meeting the hiring manager, at least.
When plans change, you need to stick up for yourself anyway. You can refuse new assignments or ask them to be modified. However, that means having a backup plan. Starting out negotiations by threatening to quit is a bad idea since usually something can be worked out, but If negotiations fail and you do need to get another job, where will you go?
The word "are" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. Ideally they should be, but very often they aren't a reflection of actual plans or actually future oriented. There is a lot of discussion...
Job descriptions are future-oriented and plans can change.
The word "are" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. Ideally they should be, but very often they aren't a reflection of actual plans or actually future oriented. There is a lot of discussion possibly about the underlying causes there as they are wide ranging from people/departments writing the job descriptions who actually don't know the jobs in question to actual (semi-)malicious intend to sugar coat the job.
Yeah, good point. I guess another way of putting it is there is imagination involved when imagining the future and how hard people try to make accurate predictions varies. But it’s fundamentally...
Yeah, good point. I guess another way of putting it is there is imagination involved when imagining the future and how hard people try to make accurate predictions varies.
But it’s fundamentally different from a resume which is about the past. (A cover letter could be more future-oriented.)
Yes, it could be, but it depends on the organization. When a company is expanding it will hire a lot of people to do something new. Also, companies will do reorgs that shake things up. Backfilling...
Yes, it could be, but it depends on the organization. When a company is expanding it will hire a lot of people to do something new. Also, companies will do reorgs that shake things up.
Backfilling does assume the future will be like the past. Sometimes that’s true for a while.
They're 'not.' But if your Job Title is "Head of Software Engineering" and the JD was what attracting you with that title... then it kind of should be held to that level. Google are a nightmare...
They're 'not.' But if your Job Title is "Head of Software Engineering" and the JD was what attracting you with that title... then it kind of should be held to that level.
An extreme case of that was at Google where, like many, I got a job offer that didn’t even say which team I would be on, and got an unpleasant surprise when I got there. I do not recommend that. I should have negotiated. Don’t take a job without meeting the hiring manager, at least.
Google are a nightmare these days around not supporting what the individual wants, you're not the first person who's said that recently.
When plans change, you need to stick up for yourself anyway. You can refuse new assignments or ask them to be modified. However, that means having a backup plan. Starting out negotiations by threatening to quit is a bad idea since usually something can be worked out, but If negotiations fail and you do need to get another job, where will you go?
Agreed. But we also need to foster community spirit to support each other as well.
Not everyone has the chance to walk away and find something new, that's where it gets scary.
How did you get hired when employers all demand experience? I've only lied on a resume once, but a friend was trying to get me into an easy line of work that required experience with a particular...
How did you get hired when employers all demand experience? I've only lied on a resume once, but a friend was trying to get me into an easy line of work that required experience with a particular program. I downloaded the training version and played with it, but no one would have hired me if I hadn't embellished that experience.
I built work experience while in school and during vacations. None of it was relevant to my tech-related field. There was no issue getting interviews/jobs in my field after college. "I've never...
I built work experience while in school and during vacations. None of it was relevant to my tech-related field. There was no issue getting interviews/jobs in my field after college.
"I've never used ____ software before seeing your requirement. This is what I've learned in the time since my application" has worked well for me several times.
My whole strategy has always been not to play the game on resumés and cover letters, but make it blatantly obvious that it's descriptive, bordering on neutral. I've been lucky enough to have opportunities that stand out without embellishment. I think the contrast to flowering language of those who play the resumé game makes those experiences stand out even more.
I also worked to support myself from youth and didn't hide that low status experience. I felt conflicted about this incident and never lied on a resume again. I did however work for years using...
I also worked to support myself from youth and didn't hide that low status experience. I felt conflicted about this incident and never lied on a resume again. I did however work for years using that program and other related and similar technology.
Connections/Networking and recruiters. It's pretty hard to get in the door via "cold calling" aka just uploading a resume. High presence on LinkedIn. Look at your social seeking score or whatever...
Connections/Networking and recruiters. It's pretty hard to get in the door via "cold calling" aka just uploading a resume. High presence on LinkedIn. Look at your social seeking score or whatever it's called. Reach out to recruiters make sure they have the most up to date resume.
I'm terms of what's on the resume, the key words are important, but you need to show how you accomplished it and the value it drove.
It's not so much embellishing but adjusting to match each job description. Using powerful and varying action words to demonstrate skill sets.
For example instead of.
Held regular meetings with staff to meet goals and objectives
Forge and Cultivate strategic relationships through regular status meetings, individual recognition, and centralized meeting notes.
Both show I'm a leader, but one has much more powerful wording and both are 100% true with no embellishment. The second shows how I utilize my team and also how I track progress. The first just shows I did the bare necessities.
In the end your most powerful tool is networking, but you'll need a strong resume that meets requirements of that specific job.
That doesn't have to be the case. Granted, it really depends on the field you are applying in and what sort of other experience you do have. A lot of the job descriptions in IT (at least around...
but no one would have hired me if I hadn't embellished that experience.
That doesn't have to be the case. Granted, it really depends on the field you are applying in and what sort of other experience you do have. A lot of the job descriptions in IT (at least around here) aren't written by the people doing the actual selection and interviews but by a recruitment department. They basically get a bunch of requirements and then put their own (often slightly ridiculous) take on top of that. This very often results in hard requirements for specific tooling where it doesn't make the slightest sense.
For example, because the type of tooling is just an implementation of something of a broader standard. Or because the tooling itself isn't unique in the slightest and experience in similar tools (or languages, frameworks, etc) easily transfers.
So when you want to get through automatic screening for keywords you can easily do something like this. "Experience with tooling similar to <insert required tool here> through the use of toolX and toolY".
Similarly when they ask about such things directly in the interview you can basically say the same thing
No, I don't have direct experience with this specific tool. I am aware of it as it is very similar to other tools I have used at previous jobs.
Depending on the context you can even make a stronger case and assert that it is not the experience with that tool specifically is what is valuable but the way of working around this tool and others.
Again, this depends on previous experience and when you are fresh out of college this is not as easy.
As a bit of a sidetrack, but very much related. At my current job I am involved in the training track of so-called young professionals. One of the things I try to hammer into them is that their main focus shouldn't be to learn to work with a tool. Instead, they should focus on the environment the tool is used in, how it is being used and why it is being used there. It's the difference between learning a trick with a tool and actually understanding what and how you are doing things. The former will potentially get you stuck as a "specialist" with a piece of software that might be irrelevant in the future. The latter allows you to potentially get around hard requirements for specific tools on job descriptions.
I bootstrapped my career by going to a university that has a built-in co-op program. The employers have no expectation of prior experience. I got paid decently well and gained a ton of experience....
I bootstrapped my career by going to a university that has a built-in co-op program. The employers have no expectation of prior experience. I got paid decently well and gained a ton of experience. Then once I graduated from college full-time employers all remarked at how much I'd accomplished already.
Such opportunities are great, but not available to many. It is very common for, employers to want to poach experienced employees not train their own. From the outside it can look like an...
Such opportunities are great, but not available to many. It is very common for, employers to want to poach experienced employees not train their own. From the outside it can look like an impenetrable system.
My CV is actually perfectly honest, but I also don't get very many callbacks. Maybe that's what I'm doing wrong. I honestly don't even know what I could lie about to seem substantively more...
I don't know a single person who doesn't have at least one instance like that on their CV.
My CV is actually perfectly honest, but I also don't get very many callbacks. Maybe that's what I'm doing wrong. I honestly don't even know what I could lie about to seem substantively more impressive that wouldn't also catch me out as a bullshitter in an interview.
In the same position. Not sure what I would lie about, everything on my resume is factual and I think it's full of bangers. PhD with published research, promoted 4 times over 3 years (in a massive...
In the same position. Not sure what I would lie about, everything on my resume is factual and I think it's full of bangers. PhD with published research, promoted 4 times over 3 years (in a massive corporation), work history in programming fields going back 15 years. I don't get calls.
I feel that pain. I have literally been auto-rejected by HR screens after being referred by the hiring manager for the role I'm applying for! It's insane! I'm sympathetic to the fact that...
I feel that pain. I have literally been auto-rejected by HR screens after being referred by the hiring manager for the role I'm applying for! It's insane!
I'm sympathetic to the fact that recruiting is a cluster right now, especially since people are evidently spamming job-boards with ChatGPT generated resumes. But seriously what are recruiters even doing!?
Have a professional rewrite your resume. I thought mine was string. Updated mine and I've now been contacted 4 times on LinkedIn since doing so. Didn't even think mine changed that much.
Have a professional rewrite your resume. I thought mine was string. Updated mine and I've now been contacted 4 times on LinkedIn since doing so. Didn't even think mine changed that much.
I never have just one resumé. If I want a particular position, I'll go through the description looking for keywords, and tailor the resumé version to pass the HR filter. The cover letter...
I never have just one resumé. If I want a particular position, I'll go through the description looking for keywords, and tailor the resumé version to pass the HR filter. The cover letter emphasizes what the hiring manager might actually want, based on whatever research I've been able to dig up about the company and department.
Perhaps this is dishonest, in the sense that it's selective truth, but I'm never claiming skills or experience I don't have.
I've never lied, but also I interview extremely well and I have a skill set that's rather rare. I don't think there's anything wrong with lying on a resume, as many others have pointed out the job...
I've never lied, but also I interview extremely well and I have a skill set that's rather rare. I don't think there's anything wrong with lying on a resume, as many others have pointed out the job requirements are lies and the cards are in general stacked against you (non transparent pay, little to no bargaining power, etc.). There's privilege in being able to be hired easily without lying, and it's likely a big driver behind why I never felt pressured to lie.
That example you gave falls into staright up lying territory though doesn't it? You're telling them you left a team, and expect it to sound it was for a regular and permanent and full time...
That example you gave falls into staright up lying territory though doesn't it? You're telling them you left a team, and expect it to sound it was for a regular and permanent and full time position, when it was for 15 minutes that one time?
It's a fun example for a funny comment right? Maybe more like, if it was a team of five for those two weeks when A was leaving and B is taking As place, and really it was usually four people you led?
Or am I embellishing my resume all wrong all these years?
It's a bit of a self-perpetuating cycle though, isn't it? If you know (or suspect/believe) that almost everyone else competing with you for a job lies on their resume and/or during interviews,...
It's a bit of a self-perpetuating cycle though, isn't it? If you know (or suspect/believe) that almost everyone else competing with you for a job lies on their resume and/or during interviews, taking the high road is almost self-sabotage, unless you're one of the few lucky people with compketely bullet-proof resume that is so packed with content that makes recruiters salivate that it truly doesn't need embellishment...
Just want to clarify, the recruiter padded an applicant's resume so that they would look like a more viable candidate? Isn't that straight up fraud at that point?
Just want to clarify, the recruiter padded an applicant's resume so that they would look like a more viable candidate?
Every recruiting agency I've ever gone through has completely rewritten the resume that I gave them and put them "in their format". But they've often changed large parts of it, one recruiter had...
Every recruiting agency I've ever gone through has completely rewritten the resume that I gave them and put them "in their format". But they've often changed large parts of it, one recruiter had really poor spelling and I had to explain in an interview that the version of the resume they had wasn't written by me. Fuck Robert Half.
Yep, they just hope they won't get caught before the check clears. They either lie to the applicant to get them to apply or to the employer to get them to interview an applicant. Some do both....
Yep, they just hope they won't get caught before the check clears.
They either lie to the applicant to get them to apply or to the employer to get them to interview an applicant. Some do both.
These are all "recruitment consultants" though, the ones that will try to network with everyone with a pulse on LinkedIn to build up a recruitment pool. In-house recruiters are always better.
My resume is honest, but I lie through my teeth during the interview. If you ask me one of those "describe a time where you _________" type questions during an interview, it will always be 100%...
My resume is honest, but I lie through my teeth during the interview. If you ask me one of those "describe a time where you _________" type questions during an interview, it will always be 100% made up on the spot.
Conversely, if you have led or managed people, it's a delicate process to rewrite your resumé and explain why you'd like to return to a purely technical role. It's rarely desirable to bash your...
Conversely, if you have led or managed people, it's a delicate process to rewrite your resumé and explain why you'd like to return to a purely technical role.
It's rarely desirable to bash your current/former employer. You probably shouldn't confess to being an example of the Peter Principle in action. You don't want to denigrate the role of the person hiring you. But you do want to emphasize how it's made you a better team player, given you more empathy for the hard work your interviewing manager is doing, etc.
I got glass-cliff'ed more than I hit my Peter Principle limits, but the same proposition applies. I didn't have any path to success for my team, and barely managed to ensure their continued...
I got glass-cliff'ed more than I hit my Peter Principle limits, but the same proposition applies. I didn't have any path to success for my team, and barely managed to ensure their continued employment on my way out the door.
The experience seems to have permanently killed any ambition I might once have had to lead people in doing things at a bigger scale, even at a much better employer. It came close to destroying my marriage, health, and sanity. I can only imagine what you're going through trying to survive that level of strain with a young family.
Also, don't trust recruiters for career advice. Unless you have a truly unique, high-demand skill set, they're going to get a bigger, faster commission on a director+ placement than an IC role.
I didn't go through recruiters for my current job. I just picked a company I wanted to work for, doing things I was interested in. Though I started over at the entry level, I got promoted as soon as they had a more demanding position open. There are plenty of lateral moves I can make to other technical roles if I start to feel like I'm not challenged, without having to shoulder middle or upper management again.
God i hate how we handle "experience and qualifications" in general as a society. It's all so much bullshit on top of bullshit. If i can, let me put out a test and then interview anyone who passes...
It doesn't help that hiring practices dictate that we put silly experience ranges and expect people to "reach" for jobs just outside their experience range so we can hire someone who might stay still for a couple of years.
God i hate how we handle "experience and qualifications" in general as a society. It's all so much bullshit on top of bullshit. If i can, let me put out a test and then interview anyone who passes (I've had several hr's lose their mind at the idea because we might get sued).
I don't want to waste your time and mine having to wait until we talk to find out that 'yeah you're lying about x or y skill, or at least embellishing to the point it's just not going to work'. Yes there's issues with tests and assessments as well, but I'd prefer those to "some random degree that probably won't matter at all and a bunch of esoteric specifics HR made me put on a flexible technical position"
That's actually how some tech jobs work, thankfully! I don't understand why it's a lawsuit waiting to happen. It's the most equitable process possible as you're interviewing blindly (granted, the...
If i can, let me put out a test and then interview anyone who passes
That's actually how some tech jobs work, thankfully! I don't understand why it's a lawsuit waiting to happen. It's the most equitable process possible as you're interviewing blindly (granted, the test itself can be biased, but I think that's less risky than a human being biased).
Yep, i'm in tech, and yet I cannot. To be fair, i'm not in love with how tech has just decided to take a bunch of hackerrank questions that have very little to do with the job, throw them on a...
Yep, i'm in tech, and yet I cannot.
To be fair, i'm not in love with how tech has just decided to take a bunch of hackerrank questions that have very little to do with the job, throw them on a test, and call it a day, but I would MUCH rather do even that than the current list of nonsense.
And to be fair, it's not like tech ONLY does that. It's just that AFTER you pass the arbitrary requirements check THEN you get to take the hacker rank test.
Some places have you work on toy repos - that's the best I've seen so far. I've even seen one like this: Pick a language from Java/Python/Ruby/Javascript Here's a simple web app in that language...
Some places have you work on toy repos - that's the best I've seen so far. I've even seen one like this:
Opens up accusations of bias and discrimination in hiring. It's easier to do in circumstances where outputs are objective or deterministic, but if it's a customer facing role or a...
I don't understand why it's a lawsuit waiting to happen.
Opens up accusations of bias and discrimination in hiring. It's easier to do in circumstances where outputs are objective or deterministic, but if it's a customer facing role or a leadership/management role those are all soft skills that are hard to test objectively.
I've always thought a recruiting firm whose only thing is just pre-vetting that people have the actual skills listed on their resumes would be amazing. I generally only get 30 min to an hour of...
I've always thought a recruiting firm whose only thing is just pre-vetting that people have the actual skills listed on their resumes would be amazing. I generally only get 30 min to an hour of time to interview someone. I want to spend that time talking about their ideas and getting a sense for how they think, how they'll fit into the team, the unique approaches they bring to their work, etc. Instead I often have to spend 20 minutes just validating that they've actually done the stuff they say they've done.
I'm confused. Wouldn't it be better to advertise how easy the job is and you only need very few years of exp, so that less ambitious candidates come along? Surely you don't want to hire over...
I'm confused.
It doesn't help that hiring practices dictate that we put silly experience ranges and expect people to "reach" for jobs just outside their experience range so we can hire someone who might stay still for a couple of years.
Wouldn't it be better to advertise how easy the job is and you only need very few years of exp, so that less ambitious candidates come along? Surely you don't want to hire over qualified people who are surely going to leave immediately?
Organizations often have canned job descriptions that go with a title. If you're hiring for a Level II or III in a role, there are set bands for number of years of experience. And you have to use...
Organizations often have canned job descriptions that go with a title. If you're hiring for a Level II or III in a role, there are set bands for number of years of experience. And you have to use the canned description verbatim because reasons (legal, equity, internal hire priority...).
As /u/Olrox indicated, one of the characteristics you're really hiring for is attitude. You want someone with raw talent, drive, courage, curiosity, resilience, and whole host of other character attributes that mean you can trust the person will grow into (and likely beyond) the role.
But you can't put all that into the job description. As far as hiring managers are concerned, the job description is there to provide a bare introduction and set the salary bands they can offer.
[I did write a precise description once for a role I was trying to fill, and it took four separate cycles through HR, Legal, a couple of directors, and a CIO signature before posting. Another couple of months to find, hire, and terminate a candidate who ghosted the job when he found out that the job description was accurate.]
Hm, people are mostly talking about the tit for that with job post descriptions but I don’t think that’s really where it hits? It’s not like you’re in a competition with the hiring managers. The...
Hm, people are mostly talking about the tit for that with job post descriptions but I don’t think that’s really where it hits? It’s not like you’re in a competition with the hiring managers. The company has a number of spots it wants to fill, and will hire in descending order of apparent skill.
In practice, the arms race is with other applicants. The more other people lie on their resume, the more you need to lie in your resume to have a chance.
That being said, it’s not like I don’t think you should lie on your resume. But it is a bad Nash equilibrium. It would be better for all applicants if all applicants agreed to be honest in their resumes. But individually, it’s optimal to lie on your resume. So, like the prisoners dilemma, everyone ends up in a shittier spot, but the shitty spot is stable, and the better spot is not.
This reminds me of Louis Rossmann getting new place for his store in New York. Wherever he came, the listing for the olace showed bigger floor plave than it really was. I wonder ehat they would...
This reminds me of Louis Rossmann getting new place for his store in New York. Wherever he came, the listing for the olace showed bigger floor plave than it really was. I wonder ehat they would say if he moved there and paid only the fraction of what they wanted because the floor space also wasn't as they listed it...
But the comment here saying that 100% of employers lie in their job descriptions is good point. If employer does it, why should they expect that possible employees won't do that too?
The logic I heard on the Other Site was something like this: You lied in your job description about my responsibilities and salary for this job, so I'm going to play your game as well and lie on...
The logic I heard on the Other Site was something like this:
You lied in your job description about my responsibilities and salary for this job, so I'm going to play your game as well and lie on my resume- we both know all the stuff is false, so if you call me on my resume I'm going to call you on the job advertisement.
... there was also the addendum of, "Don't actually lie, but don't be afraid to embellish your resume."
I’m not sure how I’m expected to make this trade. I don’t lie about job requirements, so according to this I should expect applicants not to lie — but they still do.
You want full honesty, then you have to give it.
I’m not sure how I’m expected to make this trade. I don’t lie about job requirements, so according to this I should expect applicants not to lie — but they still do.
The candidates have no way of knowing you didn't lie. There's a whole thing in tech to apply for any job when you meet at least 80% of the requirements. One reason is the lying, but the other is...
The candidates have no way of knowing you didn't lie.
There's a whole thing in tech to apply for any job when you meet at least 80% of the requirements. One reason is the lying, but the other is that it's an opportunity for growth. If a person only applies to places where they match 100% of the requirements, they'll basically keep doing exactly the same things for their entire career unless they have a fantastic manager who helps them progress.
That’s my point — OP is framing it like companies are responsible for applicants lying because of some sort of tit-for-tat but that’s not true. People (on both sides of the equation) who lie do it...
That’s my point — OP is framing it like companies are responsible for applicants lying because of some sort of tit-for-tat but that’s not true. People (on both sides of the equation) who lie do it because they believe it benefits them. Anything else is just rationalization after the fact.
Never lied on a resume, to the best of my knowledge. I have mentioned certifications I haven't yet earned as "in progress" just to get the keywords in, if I already had domain competence for those...
Never lied on a resume, to the best of my knowledge. I have mentioned certifications I haven't yet earned as "in progress" just to get the keywords in, if I already had domain competence for those requirements.
But the whole process is terrible - there have been hoops I've jumped through knowing I'd never work for a company that forced employees through those hoops. Tip for would-be employers - don't mention a salary number in a job description or interview that you aren't prepared to offer. X money for Y work is the fundamental capitalist bargain, and if an employer won't honor that, it's game over.
Honesty is punished in this corporate world. Corporations are not your friend, you are not even a human to them, but a tool that can perform certain things. They will not hesitate to replace you...
Honesty is punished in this corporate world. Corporations are not your friend, you are not even a human to them, but a tool that can perform certain things. They will not hesitate to replace you with AI the second they think it would perform as well as you or better and at a lower cost.
I have been nothing but honest in my resume and have not been able to get a job since graduating a number of years ago just because I have no professional experience. I have been so naive in this regard thinking that honesty is rewarded. There's a reason why most CEOs are psychopaths. I'm going to start making up bullshit on my resume that tailor fits to each job.
Talking to a professional resume writer can help. Also as several people on this thread have said, where employers feel a perceived lack of employees, you as the prospective employee have a better...
Talking to a professional resume writer can help. Also as several people on this thread have said, where employers feel a perceived lack of employees, you as the prospective employee have a better chance.
Just a quibble ... 70% of American workers lie on their resumes. Nowhere in the entire Forbes article do they bother to make that clarification. I had to go to the original source of the survey.
Just a quibble ... 70% of American workers lie on their resumes.
Nowhere in the entire Forbes article do they bother to make that clarification. I had to go to the original source of the survey.
I never lied on a resume, but I did embellish my Tinder. Didn't lie, but I did put myself as a CEO at one point (without mentioning I was CEO/owner of a company that was only me lol). My wife...
I never lied on a resume, but I did embellish my Tinder. Didn't lie, but I did put myself as a CEO at one point (without mentioning I was CEO/owner of a company that was only me lol). My wife matched me that way. She's not complaining :P
Some of those embellishments could get you in all sorts of shit if the company proved deeper, though this doesn't surprise me at all.
Because 100% of companies lie on their Job Descriptions. You will be doing more than expected, more often than expected. Even the most socially conscious employer will mess you about if you don't have confidence and boundary enforcement.
Not just job descriptions. They tell a lot of lies when giving you an offer. I've heard a few myself:
"This is the highest we can go" Proven to be a lie (ended up getting more than this)
"This is just our standard offer" Proven to be a lie (the person in the same role just before me was offered more)
You should feel just as emboldened to lie during the negotiation phase. And if you have any negotiating power you must use it. Accepting an offer without any adjustments is a mistake.
Preach that from the roof mate.
I'm senior leadership and I don't do the negotiation fuck around phase in isolation. I legitimately talk to the folks from day one what the budget is for the role from top to bottom. We have a conversation about skills, expectations and role with it.
It's a grown up chat for grown up people talking about something that is important. Both sides have to compromise in the end, but that founding relationship MUST start with respect around pay.
If give someone the impression you're fucking them? They won't respect you from day 1.
Do you have any tips for how to negotiate? I'm hoping to get an offer soon after over a decade in my current position and not really sure how to ask for more money. Just a flat "no I need more" doesn't seem quite right?
As with most skills, there's a whole realm of possibilities and so it's much better to get your whole brain wrapped around the problem than just have a set of tips. So here are some starting points from which to building the mental model necessary for compensation negotiation.
Understand the employer's position. The better you can do this the more power you have. If you can somehow find out what their real limits on pay are you've won. Imagine two nations negotiating terms of a cease-fire. If nation A knows nation B is ready to accept full demilitarization they can demand that and never back down. If you're going to get an offer from a large corporation you can probably talk to an ex-recruiter and learn the exact pay bands and the company's negotiation process. When I got my offer from Google I paid someone who used to work there to negotiate by proxy on my behalf.
The employer will usually ask you questions like "Are you interviewing anywhere else?" or "Do you have any other offers?". They're trying to judge how desperately you need the job and whether you can pull up a competing offer. You can ask them how many people they're currently interviewing for the position and how far along they are. It's also helpful to understand how desperate they are to have the position filled - you can ask questions during interviews to get a sense of whether they're trying to get ahead of a business need or if they're far behind and needed someone hired yesterday. This is important for all negotiations - I've used the logic to negotiate down my rent by 10%. I knew the landlord saw the empty unit as losing money every month. If you can tell them you'll move in that weekend and start paying rent, but less than they asked for, then from their position they're still coming out ahead. So do the same for the employer. If you know they don't have any other candidates they want as much as you and they really need someone now then you can ask for more (within reason) and they're still coming out ahead. From their perspective they either pay you a bit more or wait another month for a good candidate to come around which will probably cost the business far more than your pay bump.
Edit: Most recently I asked for more salary with the excuse that I wanted my health insurance premium fully covered. I'm joining a very small company - 4 people - so they can't get an employee plan yet. The CEO said he's going to cover 80% of premiums - 100% would mean employees could get some ludicrously expensive plan at no cost to themselves. I'm still on a COBRA plan from my last employer which is pretty expensive. I told him I've always had premiums covered at 99-100% and it would be nice to continue that. So I told him the salary bump necessary to effectively do that (after deductions for taxes). The rational for making this a salary change being that I didn't want to change the "company policy" just for me, so it's better for both of us if it's factored into salary. And of course future compensation adjustments are relative to my current salary, so that bump will pay dividends. /Edit
In my experience larger organizations are more comfortable paying non-recurring compensation than salary. If you get an offer from one and they don't include one, just say the words "signing bonus" and you may see a ton of money appear. The last time I did this I went from fighting over an extra $5k in salary to instantly seeing a $40k bump in first-year compensation.
I think it really helps to practice bluffing on a regular basis. I play games like Avalon, The Resistance, and Secret Hitler with a bunch of lawyers every week. Practice makes perfect.
Edit 2: As for how to ask for more - a general tip would be to use language like “this would be an easy decision if you could increase the salary to X” or “I’d be ready to make a decision on the offer today if you can pay me X”. Usually proceed with a good explanation for why you are really excited about the company, but just need the pay to be right.
Teaearlgreycold (TEGC) thank you so much! This is fantastic advice. Feeling ready to negotiate.
Saying things like "This is the highest we can go" is not a lie in the context of a negotiation. For Pete's sake. All that's required for it to be truthful is for the person speaking to be understood to mean, "based on my current understanding of your value and our budget," and all that's required for that number to change is for the other party's understanding of your value and their budget to change.
Did they ever claim that they extend their "standard" offer to every single candidate?
Don't take it personally when "the facts of the matter" that people present during negotiation turn out to be a little flexible / the subject of spin. That's just how it always is. You're right that outright lying is not even unheard of, and also the examples that you gave aren't even examples of that.
I think we just have different definitions of lying. I'm not mad, I'm saying whatever they do is fair to do for yourself.
The goal of what I've said here is to help employees overcome the fear they have about negotiating with employers. You might have a gut reaction to saying "I absolutely need $X salary to accept" even though you are desperate and will take what you can get. It'll feel like you're lying. And in my opinion this is a lie. You don't need that bump in pay. But you should feel comfortable saying it and consider it ethical to do so because by this point the employer has probably already made a couple of comparable "lies" directly to you.
So not so much as “lies” lies but moreso white lies or half lies.
I never thought of job descriptions as contracts, though, and the formal employment offers I’ve gotten don’t include a job description. Job descriptions are future-oriented and plans can change.
An extreme case of that was at Google where, like many, I got a job offer that didn’t even say which team I would be on, and got an unpleasant surprise when I got there. I do not recommend that. I should have negotiated. Don’t take a job without meeting the hiring manager, at least.
When plans change, you need to stick up for yourself anyway. You can refuse new assignments or ask them to be modified. However, that means having a backup plan. Starting out negotiations by threatening to quit is a bad idea since usually something can be worked out, but If negotiations fail and you do need to get another job, where will you go?
The word "are" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. Ideally they should be, but very often they aren't a reflection of actual plans or actually future oriented. There is a lot of discussion possibly about the underlying causes there as they are wide ranging from people/departments writing the job descriptions who actually don't know the jobs in question to actual (semi-)malicious intend to sugar coat the job.
Yeah, good point. I guess another way of putting it is there is imagination involved when imagining the future and how hard people try to make accurate predictions varies.
But it’s fundamentally different from a resume which is about the past. (A cover letter could be more future-oriented.)
I still think job descriptions are pointing to the past, unless it’s a brand new role, because they’re usually backfilling an existing job
Yes, it could be, but it depends on the organization. When a company is expanding it will hire a lot of people to do something new. Also, companies will do reorgs that shake things up.
Backfilling does assume the future will be like the past. Sometimes that’s true for a while.
They're 'not.' But if your Job Title is "Head of Software Engineering" and the JD was what attracting you with that title... then it kind of should be held to that level.
Google are a nightmare these days around not supporting what the individual wants, you're not the first person who's said that recently.
Agreed. But we also need to foster community spirit to support each other as well.
Not everyone has the chance to walk away and find something new, that's where it gets scary.
I guess I'm way too honest on mine. Everything on mine is 100% legit
How did you get hired when employers all demand experience? I've only lied on a resume once, but a friend was trying to get me into an easy line of work that required experience with a particular program. I downloaded the training version and played with it, but no one would have hired me if I hadn't embellished that experience.
I built work experience while in school and during vacations. None of it was relevant to my tech-related field. There was no issue getting interviews/jobs in my field after college.
"I've never used ____ software before seeing your requirement. This is what I've learned in the time since my application" has worked well for me several times.
My whole strategy has always been not to play the game on resumés and cover letters, but make it blatantly obvious that it's descriptive, bordering on neutral. I've been lucky enough to have opportunities that stand out without embellishment. I think the contrast to flowering language of those who play the resumé game makes those experiences stand out even more.
I also worked to support myself from youth and didn't hide that low status experience. I felt conflicted about this incident and never lied on a resume again. I did however work for years using that program and other related and similar technology.
Connections/Networking and recruiters. It's pretty hard to get in the door via "cold calling" aka just uploading a resume. High presence on LinkedIn. Look at your social seeking score or whatever it's called. Reach out to recruiters make sure they have the most up to date resume.
I'm terms of what's on the resume, the key words are important, but you need to show how you accomplished it and the value it drove.
It's not so much embellishing but adjusting to match each job description. Using powerful and varying action words to demonstrate skill sets.
For example instead of.
Held regular meetings with staff to meet goals and objectives
Forge and Cultivate strategic relationships through regular status meetings, individual recognition, and centralized meeting notes.
Both show I'm a leader, but one has much more powerful wording and both are 100% true with no embellishment. The second shows how I utilize my team and also how I track progress. The first just shows I did the bare necessities.
In the end your most powerful tool is networking, but you'll need a strong resume that meets requirements of that specific job.
That doesn't have to be the case. Granted, it really depends on the field you are applying in and what sort of other experience you do have. A lot of the job descriptions in IT (at least around here) aren't written by the people doing the actual selection and interviews but by a recruitment department. They basically get a bunch of requirements and then put their own (often slightly ridiculous) take on top of that. This very often results in hard requirements for specific tooling where it doesn't make the slightest sense.
For example, because the type of tooling is just an implementation of something of a broader standard. Or because the tooling itself isn't unique in the slightest and experience in similar tools (or languages, frameworks, etc) easily transfers.
So when you want to get through automatic screening for keywords you can easily do something like this. "Experience with tooling similar to
<insert required tool here>through the use of toolX and toolY".Similarly when they ask about such things directly in the interview you can basically say the same thing
Depending on the context you can even make a stronger case and assert that it is not the experience with that tool specifically is what is valuable but the way of working around this tool and others.
Again, this depends on previous experience and when you are fresh out of college this is not as easy.
As a bit of a sidetrack, but very much related. At my current job I am involved in the training track of so-called young professionals. One of the things I try to hammer into them is that their main focus shouldn't be to learn to work with a tool. Instead, they should focus on the environment the tool is used in, how it is being used and why it is being used there. It's the difference between learning a trick with a tool and actually understanding what and how you are doing things. The former will potentially get you stuck as a "specialist" with a piece of software that might be irrelevant in the future. The latter allows you to potentially get around hard requirements for specific tools on job descriptions.
I bootstrapped my career by going to a university that has a built-in co-op program. The employers have no expectation of prior experience. I got paid decently well and gained a ton of experience. Then once I graduated from college full-time employers all remarked at how much I'd accomplished already.
Such opportunities are great, but not available to many. It is very common for, employers to want to poach experienced employees not train their own. From the outside it can look like an impenetrable system.
Yup, mine too. I've never had an issue getting a job so I don't think I need to make that change yet.
My CV is actually perfectly honest, but I also don't get very many callbacks. Maybe that's what I'm doing wrong. I honestly don't even know what I could lie about to seem substantively more impressive that wouldn't also catch me out as a bullshitter in an interview.
In the same position. Not sure what I would lie about, everything on my resume is factual and I think it's full of bangers. PhD with published research, promoted 4 times over 3 years (in a massive corporation), work history in programming fields going back 15 years. I don't get calls.
I feel that pain. I have literally been auto-rejected by HR screens after being referred by the hiring manager for the role I'm applying for! It's insane!
I'm sympathetic to the fact that recruiting is a cluster right now, especially since people are evidently spamming job-boards with ChatGPT generated resumes. But seriously what are recruiters even doing!?
Have a professional rewrite your resume. I thought mine was string. Updated mine and I've now been contacted 4 times on LinkedIn since doing so. Didn't even think mine changed that much.
Have you had someone else go through it with a fine toothed comb? A lot of places will completely ignore resumes that contain typos.
I never have just one resumé. If I want a particular position, I'll go through the description looking for keywords, and tailor the resumé version to pass the HR filter. The cover letter emphasizes what the hiring manager might actually want, based on whatever research I've been able to dig up about the company and department.
Perhaps this is dishonest, in the sense that it's selective truth, but I'm never claiming skills or experience I don't have.
I've never lied, but also I interview extremely well and I have a skill set that's rather rare. I don't think there's anything wrong with lying on a resume, as many others have pointed out the job requirements are lies and the cards are in general stacked against you (non transparent pay, little to no bargaining power, etc.). There's privilege in being able to be hired easily without lying, and it's likely a big driver behind why I never felt pressured to lie.
That example you gave falls into staright up lying territory though doesn't it? You're telling them you left a team, and expect it to sound it was for a regular and permanent and full time position, when it was for 15 minutes that one time?
It's a fun example for a funny comment right? Maybe more like, if it was a team of five for those two weeks when A was leaving and B is taking As place, and really it was usually four people you led?
Or am I embellishing my resume all wrong all these years?
It's a bit of a self-perpetuating cycle though, isn't it? If you know (or suspect/believe) that almost everyone else competing with you for a job lies on their resume and/or during interviews, taking the high road is almost self-sabotage, unless you're one of the few lucky people with compketely bullet-proof resume that is so packed with content that makes recruiters salivate that it truly doesn't need embellishment...
Just want to clarify, the recruiter padded an applicant's resume so that they would look like a more viable candidate?
Isn't that straight up fraud at that point?
Every recruiting agency I've ever gone through has completely rewritten the resume that I gave them and put them "in their format". But they've often changed large parts of it, one recruiter had really poor spelling and I had to explain in an interview that the version of the resume they had wasn't written by me. Fuck Robert Half.
Yep, they just hope they won't get caught before the check clears.
They either lie to the applicant to get them to apply or to the employer to get them to interview an applicant. Some do both.
These are all "recruitment consultants" though, the ones that will try to network with everyone with a pulse on LinkedIn to build up a recruitment pool. In-house recruiters are always better.
My resume is honest, but I lie through my teeth during the interview. If you ask me one of those "describe a time where you _________" type questions during an interview, it will always be 100% made up on the spot.
Conversely, if you have led or managed people, it's a delicate process to rewrite your resumé and explain why you'd like to return to a purely technical role.
It's rarely desirable to bash your current/former employer. You probably shouldn't confess to being an example of the Peter Principle in action. You don't want to denigrate the role of the person hiring you. But you do want to emphasize how it's made you a better team player, given you more empathy for the hard work your interviewing manager is doing, etc.
I got glass-cliff'ed more than I hit my Peter Principle limits, but the same proposition applies. I didn't have any path to success for my team, and barely managed to ensure their continued employment on my way out the door.
The experience seems to have permanently killed any ambition I might once have had to lead people in doing things at a bigger scale, even at a much better employer. It came close to destroying my marriage, health, and sanity. I can only imagine what you're going through trying to survive that level of strain with a young family.
Also, don't trust recruiters for career advice. Unless you have a truly unique, high-demand skill set, they're going to get a bigger, faster commission on a director+ placement than an IC role.
I didn't go through recruiters for my current job. I just picked a company I wanted to work for, doing things I was interested in. Though I started over at the entry level, I got promoted as soon as they had a more demanding position open. There are plenty of lateral moves I can make to other technical roles if I start to feel like I'm not challenged, without having to shoulder middle or upper management again.
God i hate how we handle "experience and qualifications" in general as a society. It's all so much bullshit on top of bullshit. If i can, let me put out a test and then interview anyone who passes (I've had several hr's lose their mind at the idea because we might get sued).
I don't want to waste your time and mine having to wait until we talk to find out that 'yeah you're lying about x or y skill, or at least embellishing to the point it's just not going to work'. Yes there's issues with tests and assessments as well, but I'd prefer those to "some random degree that probably won't matter at all and a bunch of esoteric specifics HR made me put on a flexible technical position"
That's actually how some tech jobs work, thankfully! I don't understand why it's a lawsuit waiting to happen. It's the most equitable process possible as you're interviewing blindly (granted, the test itself can be biased, but I think that's less risky than a human being biased).
Yep, i'm in tech, and yet I cannot.
To be fair, i'm not in love with how tech has just decided to take a bunch of hackerrank questions that have very little to do with the job, throw them on a test, and call it a day, but I would MUCH rather do even that than the current list of nonsense.
And to be fair, it's not like tech ONLY does that. It's just that AFTER you pass the arbitrary requirements check THEN you get to take the hacker rank test.
Some places have you work on toy repos - that's the best I've seen so far. I've even seen one like this:
Opens up accusations of bias and discrimination in hiring. It's easier to do in circumstances where outputs are objective or deterministic, but if it's a customer facing role or a leadership/management role those are all soft skills that are hard to test objectively.
I've always thought a recruiting firm whose only thing is just pre-vetting that people have the actual skills listed on their resumes would be amazing. I generally only get 30 min to an hour of time to interview someone. I want to spend that time talking about their ideas and getting a sense for how they think, how they'll fit into the team, the unique approaches they bring to their work, etc. Instead I often have to spend 20 minutes just validating that they've actually done the stuff they say they've done.
More than fair. I agree that at some point you have to find a line and tests aren't going to work for every situation.
I'm confused.
Wouldn't it be better to advertise how easy the job is and you only need very few years of exp, so that less ambitious candidates come along? Surely you don't want to hire over qualified people who are surely going to leave immediately?
Organizations often have canned job descriptions that go with a title. If you're hiring for a Level II or III in a role, there are set bands for number of years of experience. And you have to use the canned description verbatim because reasons (legal, equity, internal hire priority...).
As /u/Olrox indicated, one of the characteristics you're really hiring for is attitude. You want someone with raw talent, drive, courage, curiosity, resilience, and whole host of other character attributes that mean you can trust the person will grow into (and likely beyond) the role.
But you can't put all that into the job description. As far as hiring managers are concerned, the job description is there to provide a bare introduction and set the salary bands they can offer.
[I did write a precise description once for a role I was trying to fill, and it took four separate cycles through HR, Legal, a couple of directors, and a CIO signature before posting. Another couple of months to find, hire, and terminate a candidate who ghosted the job when he found out that the job description was accurate.]
Hm, people are mostly talking about the tit for that with job post descriptions but I don’t think that’s really where it hits? It’s not like you’re in a competition with the hiring managers. The company has a number of spots it wants to fill, and will hire in descending order of apparent skill.
In practice, the arms race is with other applicants. The more other people lie on their resume, the more you need to lie in your resume to have a chance.
That being said, it’s not like I don’t think you should lie on your resume. But it is a bad Nash equilibrium. It would be better for all applicants if all applicants agreed to be honest in their resumes. But individually, it’s optimal to lie on your resume. So, like the prisoners dilemma, everyone ends up in a shittier spot, but the shitty spot is stable, and the better spot is not.
This reminds me of Louis Rossmann getting new place for his store in New York. Wherever he came, the listing for the olace showed bigger floor plave than it really was. I wonder ehat they would say if he moved there and paid only the fraction of what they wanted because the floor space also wasn't as they listed it...
But the comment here saying that 100% of employers lie in their job descriptions is good point. If employer does it, why should they expect that possible employees won't do that too?
The logic I heard on the Other Site was something like this:
You lied in your job description about my responsibilities and salary for this job, so I'm going to play your game as well and lie on my resume- we both know all the stuff is false, so if you call me on my resume I'm going to call you on the job advertisement.
... there was also the addendum of, "Don't actually lie, but don't be afraid to embellish your resume."
Of course we lie on resumes. Employers lie on job requirements. You want full honesty, then you have to give it.
I’m not sure how I’m expected to make this trade. I don’t lie about job requirements, so according to this I should expect applicants not to lie — but they still do.
The candidates have no way of knowing you didn't lie.
There's a whole thing in tech to apply for any job when you meet at least 80% of the requirements. One reason is the lying, but the other is that it's an opportunity for growth. If a person only applies to places where they match 100% of the requirements, they'll basically keep doing exactly the same things for their entire career unless they have a fantastic manager who helps them progress.
That’s my point — OP is framing it like companies are responsible for applicants lying because of some sort of tit-for-tat but that’s not true. People (on both sides of the equation) who lie do it because they believe it benefits them. Anything else is just rationalization after the fact.
Never lied on a resume, to the best of my knowledge. I have mentioned certifications I haven't yet earned as "in progress" just to get the keywords in, if I already had domain competence for those requirements.
But the whole process is terrible - there have been hoops I've jumped through knowing I'd never work for a company that forced employees through those hoops. Tip for would-be employers - don't mention a salary number in a job description or interview that you aren't prepared to offer. X money for Y work is the fundamental capitalist bargain, and if an employer won't honor that, it's game over.
Honesty is punished in this corporate world. Corporations are not your friend, you are not even a human to them, but a tool that can perform certain things. They will not hesitate to replace you with AI the second they think it would perform as well as you or better and at a lower cost.
I have been nothing but honest in my resume and have not been able to get a job since graduating a number of years ago just because I have no professional experience. I have been so naive in this regard thinking that honesty is rewarded. There's a reason why most CEOs are psychopaths. I'm going to start making up bullshit on my resume that tailor fits to each job.
Talking to a professional resume writer can help. Also as several people on this thread have said, where employers feel a perceived lack of employees, you as the prospective employee have a better chance.
This thread is not brand new but discusses where Tildes users see demand for employees. What are industries and specialties where you see demand for employees
I lie on my resumes literally all of the time, I assumed it was just standard procedure, given how employers also lie an equal amount.
Just a quibble ... 70% of American workers lie on their resumes.
Nowhere in the entire Forbes article do they bother to make that clarification. I had to go to the original source of the survey.
So wait how did the 30% end up getting hired
I never lied on a resume, but I did embellish my Tinder. Didn't lie, but I did put myself as a CEO at one point (without mentioning I was CEO/owner of a company that was only me lol). My wife matched me that way. She's not complaining :P