In hiring systems, the decision-making process begins the first time the candidate pool is narrowed down and continues until a final pool of acceptable candidates is identified.

In most cases, the online portion of decisions used to narrow the candidate pool is made using a process that involves the review of some basic qualifying information (i.e., salary desired, willingness to relocate, minimum educational requirements) and a resume review. While all of this information is important to the hiring process, it does not provide the right tools for making choices among candidates, and thus is not a strong enough link to support the rest of the process.

Over 87% of employees fail, not because of capability, but because of attitude. -U.S. Dept. of Labor

No matter what tool you use ­ intuition, resumes, ability tests, behavioral interviewing, etc. ­ the primary purpose of all selection tools is to make predictions about how well someone can do the job. Certain tools are inherently better predictors than others, and making accurate predictions requires the use of the right tools for the job. But when it comes to accurately predicting job performance, research and practice have both shown that the best tools have the following characteristics:

Are based on a clear, objective definition of performance for the job in question Provide an objective way to measure traits related to this definition Ensure that all candidates are evaluated in a standardized manner Provide a scientific and therefore an objective scoring system that ensures candidates can be compared to one another using the exact same information

When you compare the resume review process to the list of qualities required for making good predictions, the shortcomings of the resume are clear. There are several reasons why the resume is a poor foundation for matching people with jobs. For instance:

Resume evaluation is a highly subjective process, and resumes offer no clear, objective process for linking the information they contain directly to job performance. Resumes do not measure workplace behavior. They don't get under the surface to provide hard core data about a candidate's ability to do the job. It is almost impossible to translate the information found on a resume into the kind of quantifiable, measurable data needed for accurate prediction. There is no standardization among resumes to ensure that candidates are compared to one another in a systematic, objective manner.

Two of three new hires will disappoint in the first year.

Resumes are just too subjective to be used for making important predictions about candidate quality and their ability to do a job. close ...

Résuméfit's patent pending, scientifically based Integrated Evidentiary Résumé System™ (IERS™) asks candidates to provide relevant and detailed job experience and personal trait information. This information is then used by the candidate to build a resume that reveals their giftedness. Each candidate's IERS™ is differentiated from all others because it represents them as a unique person whose irrepressible desire is to perform well.

At the same time, employers / hiring managers can go through a job specification inventory process that allows them to choose the skills, experiences, traits, and qualifications required for the job in question. The end result of the IERS™ is a filtration process that provides a data-driven, standardized way to compare candidate qualifications with job requirements using a process that does not require any subjective evaluation.

Note that even if an employer doesn't complete a job specification inventory, the employer greatly benefits from those candidates who submit an IERS™, which transforms “soft” or subjective candidate information into a “harder,” more objective, more structured form required to identify good job fit and increase the resume's content and trustworthiness. close ...