The murky ethics of job applications and selection criteria
Plenty to like in this article in the SMH about people professional writers to write selection criteria. We don’t. We advise and edit selection criteria but we don’t write them. How can someone write an accurate selection criteria for a structural engineer if they're not an engineer? We write in partnership with clients. In doing so, the final product is more accurate and compelling.
SMH: The murky ethics of job applications and selection criteria By Markus Mannheim 1 April 2014
Job applications and their associated dross, such as claims against selection criteria, are mostly awful documents. Many candidates who should know better can't seem to resist filling them with jargon, parroting the management phrases they think impress others.
Yet what makes these documents particularly painful to read is that so many are burnished well beyond the truth, often transparently so. This is especially uncomfortable for Australian readers, who are bred to despise tall poppies and arc up at any whiff of big-noting.
Gilding the lily while on a job hunt appears to be no great crime.
Still, it's hard to be objective about ourselves, so big-note we do. Casual work in a mail room morphs into logistics coordination. Updating a spreadsheet? That's database management. An EL1 officer once sat a few metres away from her minister at a meeting - ''demonstrated high-level liaison skills''.