Key Takeaways Resume inflation is when a candidate lists skills, experience, or accomplishments that give a false impression of their actual ability. Many candidates who inflate their resumes aren’t acting…
Read More
Key Takeaways
- Resume inflation is when a candidate lists skills, experience, or accomplishments that give a false impression of their actual ability.
- Many candidates who inflate their resumes aren’t acting in bad faith. They’re trying to get past automated filters and into a conversation where they believe they can prove themselves; employers need to separate real dishonesty from candidates “playing the game.”
- Adding more hiring steps tends to cost you top candidates. Instead, use the interview to dive deeper into questionable claims: ask for stories, suss out the candidate’s actual contributions (vs. those of their team), and test one essential skill.
When was the last time you took a resume at face value?
Today, 71% of applicants use AI to help write their resume. You’ve probably noticed the result: resumes seem to be cleaner than ever, often a little too clean. Either they eerily mimic the job description, or they claim more experience, skills, and accomplishments than are plausible for the candidate’s level of experience.
The problem is pronounced enough that it has a name: resume inflation. And it’s causing a lot of recruiters and hiring managers to rethink their approach to applications and interviews. In this article, I’ll walk through what we’re seeing at The Lee Group, why candidates deserve some benefit of the doubt, and how employers can address it through better interview questions.
What is resume inflation?
Resume inflation is the practice of adding more skills, experience, and information to a resume, often as a keyword-stuffing exercise to get past screening tools.
This is more than the typical “padding” that applicants have been doing for decades. It goes further than just exaggeration; it involves stating things that, frankly, just aren’t true.
Why candidates deserve the benefit of the doubt
Now, I’ll admit that sounds bad. And it’s easy to point fingers at the candidates. But I think the situation is more nuanced than that.
Here’s the truth: being a candidate is hard right now. These people are sending resumes into the void, knowing that of the 100 they submit every day, they may get a callback on one, two if they’re lucky. So if a candidate is inflating their resume, it’s probably because:
- They’re using an AI tool to personalize their resumes for the hundreds of jobs they’re applying for
- They’re trying to stuff their resumes with keywords from the job description to increase their odds of getting past AI-assisted screening tools; because if they’re getting rejected outright, what’s the point of applying?
- They may not have the exact skills listed in the job description, but they have related skills and are a quick learner, and believe they can get up to speed if they’re given a chance; the resume represents where they think they can be vs. what they’ve actually done
Now, I’m not saying we should let dishonesty slide. But it’s important to recognize that many candidates are caught between a rock and a hard place. As the employer, it’s important to weed out true dishonest candidates from people who would make a great employee, but they’re just “playing the game.”
Part of the challenge has to do with how you write your job descriptions. Are you setting unreasonable expectations, or writing them in a way that’s off-putting to top performers? Check out this free workbook for some tips on how to fix those problems.
How to adjust your interviews to account for resume inflation
Here are some of the ways I’m seeing employers respond to this problem:
- Adding more (yes, more!) steps to the hiring process, like practical exercises or skills assessments
- More pointed, confrontational questions during the interview (e.g., “Did you really do this? Prove it.”)
- Pulling out previous application materials and comparing them with the candidate’s current resume to check for inconsistencies
Of course, this is what happens if the recruiter even looks at your resume in the first place. I’ve heard just as many stories of recruiters who just toss a resume they suspect is over-inflated.
I don’t think this is the right approach. It’s not helpful to the candidates, it puts a bad taste in everyone’s mouth, and it doesn’t position either party for success. I think there’s a better way forward.
Thankfully, there are some “tricks of the trade” you can try before thinking about adding another screening step to your hiring process. Next time you’re talking to a candidate, consider incorporating these and using them to suss out what’s going on behind the resume.
1. Ask for a story behind a questionable claim
If you suspect a candidate is overstating their experience on their resume, ask for details. Usually that’s where it becomes pretty easy to tell who actually has the experience. For example:
- Ask: “Walk me through a specific time you did this at that employer. What was happening, and what were you responsible for?”
- Follow up: “What did you do first? What happened next? Which tools, systems, or equipment did you use? How did you know the work was successful?”
- If the answer stays generic, and you can tell the candidate is struggling to come up with examples: “That helps me understand the process. Now take me through one particular time you handled it.”
If a candidate is able to recount the story with ease, then odds are there’s something real behind that claim. If they hesitate to get specific, that’s a red flag that it’s made up.
Check out this workbook for a proven interview process that will help you get the most out of your conversations with candidates.
2. Dig deeper into what the candidate owned vs. participated in
Another area where people “fake it” on their resume is listing their team’s accomplishments as their own. If a candidate does that, then it’s important to clarify whether they observed, assisted, performed independently, or led the work.
- Ask: “You mentioned what the team did. Which part did you personally handle? What decisions could you make independently, and what required approval?”
Listen for a clear account of personal responsibility. If an answer is unclear, ask another question before drawing a conclusion.
As with questionable claims, if they aren’t able to readily point to a specific aspect they managed or contribution they made, odds are they’re taking credit for their teammates’ work.
3. Check one essential skill in a realistic way
If you do feel you’d be more comfortable with a practical assessment of the candidate’s skills during the interview, then limit that to one assessment per candidate (and use the same assessment for candidates applying for the same role to keep things fair and consistent).
Use a brief, job-relevant exercise to explore a capability that matters to success in the role. Examples include finding discrepancies in a fictional order, prioritizing a sample workload, or explaining how to investigate an equipment problem.
Set clear instructions and decide whether the exercise evaluates unaided knowledge or effective use of tools. Use the same criteria for candidates being considered for the same role.
- Ask: “Walk me through your approach. What would you check first, and why?” Use fictional materials rather than confidential information or real work product.
Why professional, local recruiting matters
If there’s one thing resume inflation has proven, it’s that technology won’t be the solution to our hiring problems. In this case, it could be argued that it just made a bad situation worse.
This is one of the reasons why having local recruiters is more important than ever. In-person, hands-on interviews and candidate assessments tell you more about a candidate than all the AI assessment tools in the world.
If you’re interested in a partner with 55 years of experience in Richmond, Chesapeake, Newport News, and surrounding areas, get in touch with The Lee Group here.
