Maybe this belongs in another forum. If so mods, feel free to move it.
Back when handing out resumes (1980s & 90s) in person was a thing, you always wanted it on special paper. 24 pound, parchment, cream or grey, etc. Nowadays resumes are uploaded and they are printed up by the interviewing committee on whatever paper is in their printer. Suppose I want to carry around a few resumes with me just in case. Or I want to bring a few to the interview just in case. Does it make sense anymore to print it on special paper or would it make me look out-of-date because no one does that anymore?
I haven’t seen a resume on parchment paper in over 15 years.
Though most of the time if a candidate proffers a resume I will refuse it because I have my own annotated copy received in advance from the recruiter/HR.
ETA: I’ve interviewed 100+ people in that time, either as hiring manager or “second look”.
As far as I know almost all resumes are electronically transmitted these days.
Mind you, I’m under the impression that the business card ritual is still important in Japan?
I could be out of date there; been a while since I had any formal business interactions.
I was taught to always have a few resumes with me in case an opportunity came up and I gave a friend a few resumes to distribute. Is that out of date now?
I remember seeing some resumes that were clearly trying to stand out (back when I used to see paper resumes). I don’t think that has ever been the person we ended up hiring, though.
Paper? If I have a candidate’s paper resume it’s usually because I printed a copy for myself. Sometimes a candidate brings some copies to their interview, but I never accept it because I’ve printed off a copy to myself. I have no idea if they printed theirs on special paper. I’m going to go with no, you do not need to print your resume on special paper anymore.
I was going to mention this re “standing out”. I think a nice paper stock resume would stand out, but in a good subtle way. I don’t think it would ever hurt or look as if you’re trying too hard. Might as well try and stack as many subtle advantages as you can - hopefully a few are noticed and stick.
Personally, I would love to get a nice paper stock resume. It would look and feel better - you can’t go wrong with making me feel better before an interview. With that said and as others have noted, you might get few chances to use it, though.
This is going to be difficult to cite factually, and requires some amount of opinion as to what is the best practice. I think it’s better suited to IMHO.
Moving from FQ to IMHO.
For any position below middle management, a paper resume feels obsolete. An “expensive” paper resume would feel pretentious or ostentatious, like you have money to burn on paper. Little different than wearing a Rolex watch or Italian shoes.
Now, at some level in an organization, that fancy stuff might be beneficial to getting hired, depending on company culture. A nicely-printed resume would be accompanied by a nicely-written, hand-signed cover letter describing your personal goals, all in a quality envelope hand-addressed. But none of that is useful to someone applying to an open req on a website, where everything is electronic.
Yes, this.
I’ve been involved in many job application/hiring situations from both sides. (Since I’ve had the same job pretty much for a decade, it has been on the hiring/interviewer side more of late.) I only ever see electronic resumes. That way they can be filed in the organization’s database, easily shared among everyone involved in the hiring process, etc. A paper resume doesn’t really make any sense.
I don’t think I’ve dealt with a paper resume in at least 20 years.
I always brought a few paper copies, just in case, as I have had a last minute (unprepared) substitute interviewer. For instance, the guy from Manufacturing that was going to be one of my interviewers was out, so they got someone else. Just regular paper, these days.
My last two jobs have been at the executive level. Neither involved any interview at all. I was recruited and most of those who would be hiring me already knew me, but I’m in a small and esoteric part of the business, so who knows if that’s normal.
Yeah, even if you give the prospective employer a paper copy, they’re going to want the electronic copy anyway. At which point why bother with the paper?
This particular bit of virtue signaling is gone, and good riddance to it. The kind of paper one gets something printed on has nothing whatsoever to do with how good they’ll be at any job whatsoever.
So even if we agree no paper copies in the interview. What about having paper copies on hand in case you meet somene?
Then you ask them what address you should email a copy to.
What’re they going to do with a piece of paper?
Times have changed. When I graduated from college in 1978, the thing to do was draft a resume, take it to a print shop, have them typeset it and you proofread it and you had them print it on high quality stock. Nobody wants a printed resume anymore. You can make a nice-looking one using Word and attach it to your online application. Chances are the online application has places to enter all the data that you’d put on a resume anyway.
I’ve not received a paper resume in years. The applicant sends an e-version to the contact person, that person forwards the e-version to anyone in the org who needs it.
I often print it out because I make notes directly on it, but I’m sure more e-aware colleagues make notes directly on the e-version somehow.
Applicants shouldn’t waste their money, or seem to demonstrate that they’re out of touch with modern business practices.
I have a funny story about that. Back in the day, I was in a symposium with HR specialists. (I was a moderator). One Specialist said, that if the resume is not on the special paper, she shitcanned it without reading- the bond paper shows you cared. Another piped in that is it WAS on special paper- she’d shred without reading- the bond paper showed you were more style than substance and trying too hard.
I dunno if this says more about paper or the vagaries of HR 'specialists".
Yes, and I was told to do that, and it worked well- sometimes they call in another person, and he/she doesnt have a copy. Having a copy to give them shows preparedness. And yes, it was on plain copier paper.
Right.
Sure. And of course it is already in their system. But are you gonna make the interviewer go over to their computer, find it and maybe print it? Nope, just hand them one. they will check it later of course.
Yes, bringing extra copies to the interview is a good thing, just in case, but no need for special paper.
Insert Toilet Paper Joke Here
Definately print out a resume or three to take with you to the interview loop. Can’t hurt and might help.
Snail mailing in has about as good a chance as email junk mail of getting read. I suppose if you’re going to go through all the trouble of “cold” mailing in a resume on the off chance it may get read, the special paper cost is negligible in the grand scheme of things. It might buy an extra 5 seconds with the recipient, if it ever gets that far. The chance is slim to none.
I work for a global 100 company. I don’t know how an actual letter would be delivered any more??? Used to be there was a printing room with a printer, supplies and a couple hundred hanging file folders with each employee on that floor’s name on it. Those were physically ripped out a few months ago. And I don’t think were actually used since covid. So, how would a physical letter via snail mail actually end up on my assigned desk in my “neighborhood” much less for “hybrid” employees without an assigned desk? My “neighborhood” has a sort of address, but not my desk. Good luck with that.