As an 11 year IP pro living the the DC area, I had never given a ton of thought to the intraate qualities of my resume. Sure every 6 months or so I would go in, tweak it out, but for the most part I always considered the "long format" the end-all-be-all of resumes. By long format I mean beaing very granular, listing major & minor accomplishments as single bullet points, wash, rinse. repeat. In the past couple years I moved back to Update NY where the job market is much more cut throat and jobs are more scarce.

After vetting my last changes to my resume, and getting into a small debate about >1 page reumes, I had gotten a critique that made me think on this a lot more:

I doubt that they will file ALL >1 page resume's in the circular bin on the floor, but I can certianly see why they might file your 2 page resume that way.

You simply have a rediculous and unnecessary amount of information on there. A resume is not to tell your life story, or to detail every minor project you've worked on. It's to highlight your key skills and experience. That's it. You've got about twice as many bullet points as you should have for the actual content in your resume. All that extra info isn't going to make a hiring manager get a #### for you; more often than not it's going to cause them to skip over the actual important and relevent info that buried in all those bullet points.

Ask yourself one question when creating your resume, "What does this hiring manager want a candidate to be able to do?" Your resume should highlight those points, with as little clutter as possible.

So this got me to think, do hiring managers really look for just the short and sweet or are they looking for details. After hiring a couple people myself I didn't really have a personal opinion on the subject, as long as their resumes seemed to cover the bases of the job qualifications. But i am not the typical hiring manager.

So I bring the topic to you. What constitutes the holy grail of resumes? What is the right dose of info while not going overboard. And of course most importantly which of my resumes would be more likely to get me into the 2nd phase of the process:

a) http://paristechnical.com/Lou_Paris_Resume.pdf

b) http://paristechnical.com/Lou_Paris_Resume_short.pdf

Differnces that I made between the two:

• Reduced the number of bullets under two of the jobs
• Elimanted jobs that are not relevant to my current career path (<2001)
• Created short sentences of job descriptions for each job
• Created a core competence section to give a "top of the line" summary

So I would love to hear opinion and disect my two resumes? Which is better?