Loading…
Views
130,100
Likes
3,522
Comments
62
Shares
420
Duration
44s
VPF 0.1623
Caption
Don’t be that person with great experience and a terrible resume! #resume #career #jobsearch #Inverted
Transcript
This person is highly qualified, but their chances of getting hired are gonna go up in flames because of these 3 resume mistakes. First, the branding here is so weak. We'd never want an objective and our summary should not just tell them what we've done. Good branding includes titles that are catered to the job, a professional summary that brags about the work we've done, and a nice keyword optimized areas of expertise. These bullet points truly suck cause they're really just a run through of what this person was asked to do. If you wanna get hired, your bullet points need to not just tell them what you did, but how you did it using the vroom formula, that's verb results method. Finally, this template's pretty weak and this template much more likely to be read by someone. It's a t s optimised, super eye catching, very professional.
Hook analysis
brand_fit: with_changes“This person is highly qualified, but their chances of getting hired are gonna go up in flames because of these 3 resume mistakes.”
Pattern
warning
Format
screen_walkthrough
Topic
resume-not-working
Sub-topic
resume branding, bullets, template
Content angle
qualified people get rejected on presentation, not capability
CTA
—
Narrative structure
verdict on a shown resume -> three named mistakes, each with the fix
AU transplant
with_changes
Transplant note
The teardown shape (show a real resume, name three flaws, give the replacement for each) transplants cleanly and is exactly the 'Australian resume conventions' subject. Country-specific bits to swap: the 'objective vs summary' convention and 'ATS optimised template' framing are US-coach staples; Australian hiring reads length, STAR-style achievement bullets, and recruiter skim behaviour differently, and many AU mid-market employers aren't screening through a heavy ATS. The 'VROOM / verb-results-method' bullet formula carries over unchanged if renamed and given a worked example from an overseas-trained candidate's experience.
Brand fit note
No Never-ships trip — nothing here advises misrepresentation, it's reordering true work into a commercially compelling form, which is the brand's own framing. Usable structure, but as written it's generic-career-coach substance: 'branding is weak', 'bullet points truly suck', 'keyword optimized areas of expertise' could be published by any US coach unchanged, which fails the 'no Australian specificity' relevance test and the 'could a generic career coach have written this sentence' check. It also carries zero numbers — the voice doc demands cost accounting (e.g. how many seconds a recruiter spends, how many applications the reader has already sent). To ship: open cold with a contrarian inversion ('Your experience isn't the problem. The order you listed it in is'), rewrite each fix with a real before/after line from an internationally-trained candidate, and point the contempt at the resume-template industry rather than at the person whose resume is on screen.