As I mentioned in an earlier post, I'm not going to have an article in the November issue of California Lawyer magazine. However, my next article (which I believe will publish in December) will be about how we leave an electronic trail behind when we manipulate electronic data.
I'm sure you've read about people inflating their resumes, then getting caught, but have you ever thought about prior versions of your resume that are floating around the Internet? This article at The Recorder points out what happens when a snoopy potential employer searches for – and finds – those old versions.
A program like Wayback Machine, which I posted about this past January, is the type of software that would be integral in a search like this.
What about headhunters? Any of you had the experience where a headhunter wants you to "polish" your resume to make it more appealing (what they really mean is, "embellish"). Worse, what if they decide to polish it for you (which, to my embarrassment, has happened to me a couple of times).
Resumes may look deceiving even when they're legitimate. For example, as a consultant, I've worked for more than one client simultaneously. In a couple of cases, I've worked for the same company as both an employee and a consultant. Do I list one range of employment dates? Two? Do I list those periods as self-employed for Charon Solutions (true) or should I list the actual companies (also true)?
I think you can see the conundrum. If I broke it out specifically, my resume would be a longer read than War and Peace! And that begs the other question; in this short-attention-span and time-constrained world in which we live, who will take the time to read it?
Hint: if you didn't make it to this final sentence, you won't be one of those people…
