Resume Review #001 — The Experienced Hire Who Buried the Lead

Slide 1 is the verdict: the summary section disqualifies this candidate before a recruiter ever reaches their experience. Eight years of work, and the opening line reads like a job description template.

The fix isn't adding more — it's cutting to what's actually distinctive. What industry? What scale? What do you do better than the next Senior PM in the stack?

Slide 2 — Experience section: every bullet describes a responsibility, not a result. "Responsible for managing timelines" is not a contribution; it's the job title paraphrased. Recruiters spend about 6 seconds on an initial scan. None of these bullets give them a reason to slow down.

The pattern to kill: starting a bullet with "Responsible for," "Worked with," "Helped," or "Assisted." These words signal passive involvement. They also don't start with a strong action verb, which is what ATS systems and humans both reward.

Slide 3 — Skills and Education: 23 items in the skills section, 14 of which are either soft skills without proof or tools every office worker uses by default. "Communication" and "Teamwork" without a concrete example aren't skills — they're filler that dilutes the actual technical proficiencies buried in the list.

On the GPA: after 8 years in the workforce, your track record is the evidence. A 3.2 from a decade ago adds nothing and occasionally subtracts credibility.

Slide 4 — The rewrite: same three years, same company. The original bullets were hiding the actual work. Once you add scope (14 concurrent projects, 3 product lines, 6 teams), mechanism (async Loom updates, redesigned templates), and outcome (40% fewer meetings, 25% faster sprint planning), the candidate looks like a completely different hire.

Formula worth keeping: action verb → specific scope → measurable result. It works on every bullet, in every industry.