Discussion on:

Resume formatting: Word or PDF?

"It is better than RTF"

How, exactly?

Why you dont use .txt + .jpg?

Using plain text is better for almost all purposes.

Unfortunately, it is worse for purposes of getting your resume past bigoted and willfully ignorant recruiters and HR drones.

Given most CVs get binned in the first 30 seconds or so, the MOST important thing is to actually READ about the job you are applying for and work out what you can do that is relevant.

Follow the MORE is LESS and KISS rules. If you list 10 things you can do and 3 are relevant, you MIGHT get to second level screening. If you only list 5 and these same 3 are the first 3 you stand a better chance.

Make sure you have used the key words you think are important, often these are in or implied in the job ad.

RTF is good, HTML is good since both open easily and are SMALL. Both allow fonts, tables, colour and justification and you can save as either from Word, just read the file back in again to make sure it still looks ok.

Really? The members of Tech Republic don't know how to make and test a searchable PDF?

ofcource, you need to say more,, i dont know anything about Latex!!!
can u help me??

Toni raises some excellent points that were not obvious to me. Her advice seems quite solid for most situations, especially for blind submissions. But in the cases where you've spoken with a recruiter or know someone in HR or someone is going to shepherd you resume it's probably even smarter to quickly inquire about which approach is safest.

I can imagine a situation where an RTF file is perceived as representing a rudimentary approach (or an unsophisticated applicant), not as a thoughtful attempt to apply to a specific company.

Thanks for the pithy advice Toni!

Yes, I prefer Rich Text Format. But a couple of problems:

1. Some "technical" recruiters have never heard of .rtf and their IT systems reject it.

2. OpenOffice.org / Libre Office do not export or import .rtf very well: I have often had to re-open files using MS Wordpad in order to strip the junk and to correct problems. (Various versions of MS Office are also poor.)

Funny, I do it all the time

Why not go for something state of the art... like WordPerfect? PDF is the go.

Well, just because some company cannot read CV in PDF and do not know how to copy/paste text from PDF cv to a text field of the database says a lot about company. If they do not or do not want to deal with it, then you as employee of such company will be treated with all sort of other idiotic limitations. Basically it already tells me that this is not the place I would like to work because they will treat me in the same way.
Lets put things on a side would I be ready to give them chance to do anything except reading it for many other reasons which includes privacy. I sometimes do not want that my information is hanging in several databases for long time.
Its no problem, more companies make this kind of idiotic limits, more work force is going to be from average to under-average pool with all consequences of that to the wider world and to companies themselves. It is time that some things in HR change. Idiocracy is already rampant.

Nor do the majority of people posess a high-level knowledge of operating complex PC applications. Being comfortable spending hours playing on a game console/smartphone/tablet, let alone the ability to surf the web/answer email/chat & text with friends/post on Facebook & other social media sites, does not mean that these people (even among these "Millenials") are "computer experts".

As for the companies we work for, the vast majority of companies, let alone the vast majority of jobs out there, do not require the high level of computer expertise that the average TechRepublic member possesses. And even people that are "comfortable" using computers won't approach using them the same way that we "professionals" do. My wife, for example, is extremely comfortable with computers, due to her education (Bachelor's in Education with Math & Science focus) and her experience as a teacher (not only has taught adult-education computer courses, but also teaches college pre-algebra with a curriculum that requires online computer use for study & homework purposes)...but it sometimes drives me crazy the way that she uses a computer. When she wants to check her Yahoo email, she types in "www.yahoo.com" in the address bar, then clicks on the "Mail" link; she knows she could just type in "mail.yahoo.com", but she prefers the other way "because that's how I learned how to do it myself". Same with typing in a Word document: instead of highlighting & retyping when she's made a mistake, she'll use the Backspace key to delete entire words & sentences, then start typing from scratch. Again, not as efficient of a method, but it's "her" way of doing it.

So, no, I wouldn't expect someone whose background is in HR, and whose computer experience was on-the-job training, or maybe 1 or 2 "using PC applications" courses in college, to be interested in, let alone knowledgeable, about using a program to create searchable PDF files, & utilizing said files. Just as I don't expect the average non-accountant to know that you use a Form 4562 to depreciate equipment used in their home-based business.

By the same token, however, I'm not an HR professional. So when it comes to knowing how to sift through a pile of candidates to develop a list of interview candidates, I'll leave it... to the professionals.

I prefer to send the resume in .RTF, but I have had it rejected because it did not end in a ".DOC" extension!

Did I read correctly? "recruiters often have to copy and paste information from a resume into a new format...They can???t do this with a pdf." You're kidding, right? You can't copy text from a pdf to, say, a text file or Word file? Of course you can! And..."you can???t be sure the person looking at your resume has the same version." when talking about MS Word? Are you talking about Word 3.0 or something? I don't know of a person that I work (or deal) with that is incapable of opening and reading any modern version of Word, be it a .doc or .docx with the Office Compatibility Pack. Just doesn't happen.

To recommend that resumes be submitted in RTF format is ludicrous. And if you haven't noticed, many employers ask for only specific types of files, as they don't want to be bothered with the problems of opening up a Volkswriter Deluxe documents in Word. They have long since gotten over the "please attach your document in text format only" mode. Anyway, why would I want to work for an employer that has an HR department still living in the 80's? Would they still be using IBM PC's?

P.S. I composed this message in Word 2010, proofed it, saved it, converted it to a pdf, and cut and pasted the pdf text into the comment window. Just like that!

i agree. after 20+ yrs as a corp. legal wp & graphics tech spclst. help desk & trainer (subsequently laid-off) any cv/resume i submit is always required to be in msw 2003 - whether to an agency or directly to the employer. they also want to SEE my formatting as a test of my knowledge of the proper usage of the software. the resume "example" is utilized to determine whether a candidate warrants an interview invitation. i cannot see why any recruiter would want a cv/resume in any programming code as companies test their candidates to truly assess their knowledge.

"i cannot see why any recruiter would want a cv/resume in any programming code as companies test their candidates to truly assess their knowledge."

I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean. Please clarify.

if you use the current version of MS Word's built in capability to save your file as PDF, search functionality is not an issue

Unless a person scans their Word document in a copy machine to create a pdf any document converted to pdf has extractable text. Coping text from a pdf that has been converted from Word is just as easy as in its original format. These extracting programs should have no problems viewing the text. RTF would be the safest bet if you are okay with the chance that your resume could be edited by someone else.

I switched to pdf years ago after a bad incident with my resume in word format. Someone in the HR department had edited it without my knowledge (or permission). I flew to Atlanta for the final series of in-person interviews. All was going well until someone asked me what something meant. I was stumped because I didn't know either and I supposedly wrote it. Did I look bad? Oh yeah.

Later, when my HR contact phoned with the rejection, I asked about it. She said she fixed resumes all the time "... because you techies don't know how to communicate." Now whenever I produce a document that I suspect someone may want to "improve", I pdf it.

From my recent experiences many jobsites prefer you to upload a PDF version of your CV, this enables them to see how you present yourself. Obviously on these sites you need to ensure that people can find you, typically you do this by completing the online CV (cut-and-paste from your own CV), on those that only require you to upload a CV then searchable PDF (unless requested otherwise) is a good choice.

It is a point of debate as to whether someone should be able to cut-and-paste from your uploaded CV without your express permission. Personally, I don't really want an unknown recruiter blindly cutting-and-pasting my CV into their house format and send it out to their client list, as this may overlap with other approaches I'm making. I do want a recruiter to read my CV and contact me if they see an opportunity, that way we exchange emails and/or telephone conversations leading to a better understanding. At this point I'm happy to send them an MS Word version and tailor it to fit a particular opportunity/need.

With respect to formats, it should be remembered that both PDF and MS Word DOC formats are evolving and have history. From experience it would seem that the safest/most portable formats are: PDF/A (for text this is basically PDF v1.3 with fonts embedded) and Word 97-2003 Document. As there are differences between Word on Mac and Windows, I've tended to use PDF to ensure the recipient can see what I intended and DOC to facilitate WYSIWYG cut-and-paste.

I have several points to make.

1. I STRONGLY disagree with the comment that it is difficult to copy from PDF. It was EXTREMELY easy to copy from the PDF version of my resume into plain text format. Here is what I did.
Open the PDF version of my resume in Acrobat Reader, which is free.
Select ALL (Ctrl-A).
Copy (Ctrl-C).
Open a new document in TextPad, one of many plain text editors.
Paste (Ctrl-V).
Save the plain text version of my resume.
All of the information that was in the PDF version transferred properly to the plain text version.

2. I write and maintain my resume in WordPerfect (*.wpd). I find WordPerfect to be much easier to work with than MS Word. Also, WordPerfect is much more upwardly-compatible than MS Word. I then export the *.wpd to MS Word 2007 (*.docx) and PDF. Exporting to PDF is only two keystrokes: File, Publish-to-PDF (Alt-F, B). When I reply to ads by e-mail, I send copies of all three and let the recipient choose which one they prefer. This method works 99% of the time. If the recipient wants something different, then I prepare that at the time I apply.

3. Many recruiters or their organizations are like lemmings, i.e., they follow the herd. That means in MS Word. Usually, they don't specify which version. In that case, I send MS Word 2007 (*.docx), hoping that by now they will have upgraded to that version.

I never send an editable document (.doc, .rtf, etc). I did that once and HR embellished it. Sorry, that document represents me not HR and needs remain as sent.

Rather than worry about what format I should use had my resume in. I used the phone to call and ask what format they wanted it in.

Ah, your site doesn't support proper formatting. I tried spelling the word correctly, with the accented "e" but it shows up incorrectly. This wouldn't happen with a PDF.

And perhaps that's why so many respondents are using "CV" as as if it meant the same thing as "resume," when it does not.

I prefer ASCII-compatible characters when at all reasonable, because cutting and pasting, viewing with different software than me, using different local typefaces, and so on, can result in a nice, neat, carefully crafted document's content looking like crap.

Even among systems and apps that support some Unicode variants (I generally use UTF-8), the accented "e"s get mangled. Maybe in another decade or so the interoperability will have improved to the point that most people can exchange the non-ASCII characters (past code point 127) safely round-trip. Until then, it's "resume".

I tried posting a link to a shirt on a t-shirt site -- a shirt that I have, which humorously refers to exactly the sort of problem you just described -- and TR's broken friggin' filtering ate it. I tried posting the link differently: same effect. I tried posting something talking about it in a way that might give you enough information to go there and find the shirt yourself: same effect. Maybe this will get through, but I'm not holding my breath.

Who needs to be fired to stop this stupid crap from happening at TR?

The word "resume" is not being misspelled. The word "resume" has been fully assimilated into English as a standard English word. In English, fully assimilated words drop any diacritical marks that they may have had in the languages from which they came. The noun "resume", in the sense of the job application document, came directly from modern French. The verb, "resume", to begin an activity again, came from Middle English and, before that, from Middle French, and, before that, from Latin.

My dictionary, Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language, 2nd College Edition, by Simon & Schuster, (C) 1980, spells the noun, "resume", both with and without the accents.

Perhaps it's time for Recruiters to adopt the same criteria at the time of requiring a Resume. And I'm not talking only about file extensions, but the way of presenting and organizing the information. I've found a valuable resource for example in Europe [http://europass.cedefop.europa.eu/en/home]. I think in a global economy at these times it becomes essential to have standardized methods for selecting human resources.

I generally will send both the .doc and .pdf versions of my resume if they don't specify formatting. I use OpenOffice/derivatives, so I don't want to rely on the .doc for formatting, but it has all of the content and is generally the same in appearance on other systems/programs. As well, the .pdf is fully tagged and copy/paste-able.

Giving the employer the choice between the 2 is the goal. And hey, it's done me well so far. I even got compliments/thanks on multiple occassions, when the recruiter was used to seeing only one or the other and resented having to ask for the "right" one.

I hate receiving Word documents unless I am supposed to use/edit the document. If I only need to read (and extract information), a properly produced PDF works fine and load much faster. You may need to get a good PDF conversion tool. I personally use Adobe Acrobat. Besides producing text from Word documents, it will also OCR scanned documents. I can not comment on all Applicant Tracking Systems, but my document imaging system will pull text directly out of the PDF. Even with PDFs, you may want to limit permissions to avoid changes. I have compatibility set to Adobe 7 or later, but I can go back to Adobe 3 or later.

My resume is a ASP program. I select what I want for the content and export it to the approptiate format. It depends on who is getting the resume and their requirements. Very few are Word files and I only do word if specifically requested, many more are text formatted as PDF, some are plain text and most are rich text.

I send PDF unless the prospective employer requests something else. This is the "executable", it's the finished application, etc. If they want the source code (.odf, or translated to .doc), they request it.

In addition, I have a complete portfolio online in HTML, which follows the resume but elaborates in great detail. This is useful as a followup, once you have their interest.

To PDF, DOC or RTF is an interesting problem. It seems to depend on who the recipient is and what they are using to read/view your resume. Emphasis on keywords is a technique to get past the HR department, but if you are submitting a resume directly to the hiring manager then the keywords may or may not be effective.

The best advice on resumes is to consider the audience, if you are responding to a blind ad then assume it is going to HR to be filtered, if you are sending directly to a hiring manager then show that you researched his company or at least paid attention to the ad. Most important is that your resume has about 20 seconds to hold the reader's interest.

What helps to improve your resume is to peruse the resumes on the online job forums like Dice, Craig's list and so on. If you go through a pile of 100 resumes then you will find yourself with that 20 second mindset and see what interests you and what stops you from continuing to read.

A resume is a short document that should feel like it is talking about a living individual and not an obituary (Here lies John Tech). The resume is only to get you in the door, it is a personal advertisment to show how dynamic you are and what you can bring to the employer. A cover letter can help focus on the stated requirements without having to pad the resume.

If the HR Dept or recruiter won't look at PDF, having a nice PDF is useless.

If the recruiter wants machine readable, HTML would be ideal. But they (or their consultants) think going with the industry standard MSWord is the way to go. So if you want a job, submit in Word. (Sometimes the computer can handle plain text, and believe it or not, the result may get slurped into the computer's database more accurately.) I know, submitting in PDF and following up with Word makes more sense, but remember, you're dealing with the recruiter's consultant's idea of what works, and it's not what you think works (even though you are right and the consultant is all wet).

It doesn't matter whether you can copy and paste text from PDF. If the recruiter (or rather, the recruiter's consultant's computer program) can't extract text from the PDF, it's useless to you. And they can't (or more accurately, won't).

It's the golden rule. Those with the gold make the rules. You do your resume in the format that they want, not in what makes sense technically or makes your resume snap visually.

You should have a paper copy when you go for the interview; that's about the only place you have any control over formatting. Have a PDF version available in case a real human asks you to e-mail them something. Otherwise it is all about keywords and a machine being able to read your Word document. Sorry.

... his online presence speaks volumes about him, that no CV could match: Blog, open source projects, LinkedIn, etc.

I have my CV on a web page which is great. I always have it available and I have a nice edit page to update the data on MySQL as life rolls on. Hirers can select the level of detail and the skillset they are interested in and PHP does the rest. If they want illustrations (I've worked as an illustrator) they can have them, or scans of references or other documents.

Unfortunately the "the disreputable scum of the head-hunting trade", who I must negotiate with for the programming work I do now, REQUIRE my CV in Word. I don't use word, I don't have it and I don't want it, and besides, I like my CV as it is, and so do employers. Open Office creates Word format, but it's not reliably compatible with the big W... I tried PDF, but no, Word or nothing said the the disreputable scum. And besides, I didn't feel like merging a Word template with my MySQL data via ODBC just for the sake of getting a job.

In the end I wrote an HTML to RTF XSLT transform so that my web page could be downloaded in the form currently being viewed, from a link on the page. This worked well enough, although recruiters still wanted 'Word' format, The problem was that even tho the 100% compliant RTF I generated worked fine in Wordpad and every other program I tried it with, Word still manged to import it as unrecognizable jibberish.

I think the requirement for Word is simply a way of testing the resilience of applicants who don't dwell in M$ land, to ensure they will manage in the corporate environment. Which I avoid. So problem solved. I now hawk my skills direct to market, which loves my web page.

:P

It sounds like you've got your priorities straight. The only way you should diverge from the approach that works for you that well is to serve desperation and, with luck, you'll never be that desperate for a job.

My approach is similar in many ways, but I use Markdown formatted plain text and skip the SQL. If I was going to store it in an SQL database, I'd probably go for SQLite instead of MySQL, anyway; the latter seems like overkill, and not the best choice for overkill. To each their own, though, especially if you're keeping your skills sharp because using MySQL is a skill you use to differentiate yourself.