Explore your opportunities! Create an account or Sign In
The most trusted and popular consumer complaints website

JobFox.com Resume Critiques

Posted:    

Generic Computer Generated Critiques

Complaint Rating:  98 % with 122 votes
98% 122
4.9
Contact information:
JobFox.com
United States
jobfox.com
JobFox.com provides generic critiques generated by a computer. I had the opportunity to have a critique shared with me by two of my clients. It was apparent to me that it was a form letter and computer generated, because it had the following problems:

1. Wrong job title used throughout the document in both instances.
2. Provided no real advice on how to fix the "mundane" and "flat" resumes.
3. Called the clients' experience "pudding in a cup." Yes, pudding in a cup.
4. Pulled out half of two bullet points and stated that those bullet points didn't have accomplishments in them.
5. Said that one of the clients had an objective and a career summary. The resume had niether. I would never include an objective on any resume.
6. Indicates that only entry-level candidates have an objective. Well, there is no objective and the client is an entry-level candidate.
7. Makes a point that the resumes change case and emphasis. Untrue.
8. Said the resumes do not contain keywords, when the software clearly pulls out keywords to create the "critique."
9. It's insulting to the reader and tries to convince the person that they need to spend about $400 to fix his/her resume.

Real resume writing companies, with true experts, will be comfortable showing you examples of what they can do. This company does not.

JobFox.com fails on all accounts on this one. In case you are interested I have included the information in this complaint. Below is one of the critques for a client that had two months of experience and a certification:
____________________
I'm the Jobfox resume expert that was assigned to critique your resume. I reviewed your resume with the goal of giving you an honest, straightforward assessment of your current resume, and not a judgment of your skills and qualifications. I should warn you about my style: I'm direct and to the point, so I hope you won't be offended by my comments. My perspective is that resumes get chosen, not candidates. In a perfect world, interview candidates would be selected based on their strengths and experiences. In reality, this isn't how the process works. A recruiter chooses the short list of candidates from a pile of resumes. Meaning, we have to make sure your resume does the heavy lifting in the selection process.

Here’s the good news: my first impression of you is that you are off to a good start in your career. You’re an up and coming contract management support professional, with a lot to offer an employer. Now, here’s the bad news: your resume isn’t doing a good job saying that to an employer. I found it to be mundane and unlikely to catch an employer’s attention. If you were selling yourself as Crème Brulee, it’s as if your resume is saying “pudding in a cup”.

Your resume needs a boost from a visual, content, and organizational standpoint to engage the reader. It needs to make them want to learn more about you. I didn’t find it to be exciting and it didn’t make me want to run to the phone to call you. These days, employers are being flooded with resumes, and we need yours to compel a hiring manager to continue reading and contact you for an interview. Countless studies have proven that resume quality is the key determinant as to whether a candidate is selected to be interviewed.

Amanda, to be honest with you, I think you should view this version of your resume as a work in progress. It's missing many key elements that we like to see on resumes at your level.

Here are the major issues I see on your resume:

VISUAL PRESENTATION

Your design is very flat and visually uneven. The appearance is not polished, and doesn’t say “experienced Contract Administrator”. By way of example, it’s like the difference between a professionally printed brochure, and one that was done at home and printed on an inkjet printer. For people at your level and experience, I’m used to seeing a much stronger visual appeal. In the real world this means your resume is at a disadvantage when the manager is culling the pile of resumes. The ideal resume format is airy, clean, and uncluttered, with the effective and strategic use of white space.

CONTENT

As I was reading your resume I was trying to imagine myself as a hiring manager, looking for that ideal Contract Administrator. I then asked myself whether I’d have picked your resume, and whether it was memorable. I concluded that much of the information was superficial and that in many instances it was too unclear. Simply put, I wouldn’t remember you. There are a lot of words on your resume, but they’re not formulated into powerful and impactful statements.

You have both an Objective and a Career summary. Having one or the other is fine, but not both. Objective statements are used often by recent graduates, so you may give the impression that you are not an experienced professional. In addition, your Career Summary is weak. It’s a critical element of your resume that should be designed to compel the hiring manager to keep reading. The purpose of this section is to define you as a professional and cover those areas most relevant to your career level and job target. By having a weak Career Summary, you are making it easier for the reviewer to say “pass” when your resume is given the customary cursory glance.

From a grammatical standpoint, I found your resume to possess many of the most common flaws. Expressions like “maintained” and “collaborated” are monotonous for the reader, and serve to repel versus attract their interest. There were some disagreements in case and punctuation and I also noticed that you often used passive language.

From the way the resume is worded, you come across as a “doer” not an “achiever”. Too many of your job descriptions are task based and not results based. Meaning they tell what you did, not what you achieved. To be effective and create excitement, a great resume helps the hiring manager visualize you delivering similar achievements at his or her company. By way of example, you can say you were responsible for managing a particular business process, or you can wow them by describing how you overhauled the process to deliver 50% higher results. Here are some examples of task based sentences in your resume.

Entered, tracked and maintained contract
Developed a comprehensive understanding
These statements are more about what you did, not what you achieved. It would be like you saying “I played tennis last week” when you could have said “I won the tennis tournament at my club last week unseating the person that held the title for the past three years.” Which sounds more impressive?

Employers want to know not only what you accomplished at your jobs, but the depth of those accomplishments. How did your work improve things, save money, etc. Employers are looking for return on investment (ROI).

Additional Issues

Also, I noticed that your resume changes emphasis patterns, which may make it difficult for some employers to follow. Successful resumes use emphasis elements in patterns that are easy for the eye to follow and that highlight the things that are most important to employers. This makes it easy for hiring executives to decide on whether to contact you or not.
It was difficult to give you a detailed critique, because your resume has limited information on your skills and achievements. Our professional resume writers can help you expand your resume so that employers have the necessary information to decide if they want to contact you.

Lastly, I'm a little concerned that you won't be found in resume databases. A well-designed resume includes the keywords and formatting that makes it easy for a resume parsing machine to learn about you and route you to a decision maker. I'm not suggesting you put a block of keywords in your resume. That just annoys recruiters. Rather, it's important that as you describe yourself, your accomplishments, and your skills, that you do it in a way that gives hints to the key word filtering system.

SUMMARY

Amanda, I’d like you to go back, reread your resume, and ask yourself whether it’s selling you short. Does it say “Amanda is a contract management support professional with tremendous expertise?” A great resume is the lynchpin in your job search, and I hate to see a strong person like you being underserved by something that’s so easy to fix.

NEXT STEPS

Most people are like you - they struggle to put themselves down on paper effectively, but that's where we come in. All the recommendations above can be combined in a cohesive, strategic manner so that you can distinguish yourself from other candidates. Our resume writers are experts in doing this. Countless studies have proven that professionally written resumes get more interviews, and, if it shortens your job search by even one day, a professional resume will pay for itself.

Purchasing the right resume writing service is important. You want to be sure you are getting everything you need to be successful in your job search without being nickel and dimed. The Jobfox Deluxe Package includes a Cover Letter (a $75 value), an Electronic Version of your resume (a $39 value), and Keyword Optimization (a $59 value). I’ve included the comparison below so you can see how the Jobfox Deluxe Package compares to other services. At $399 we are priced to be the best value service.

If you would prefer to pay in installments, we have a fantastic option that no other resume writing service provides: Six (6) payments of $69.95 per month. You will receive your professionally written resume now but have the advantage of paying for it over time.

To order your resume rewrite online, click here
Complaint comments Comments (106) Complaint country United States Complaint category Job & Career

Comments

Sort by: Date | Rating
N  7th of Nov, 2011 by    +1 Votes
Well, I feel better knowing that I'm not the only one who is a "doer." LOL! Looks like after two years, the resume critique is still the same. BTW, $329 is currently the discount price, which is far from a discount to me.
A  26th of Nov, 2011 by    +1 Votes
I received my free critique and alas, like many of you, I'm a doer, not an achiever. I was feeling like a loser based in their critique, but after reading/scrolling through all of the pages on here, I'm glad to see I'm in good company. I was offered their service for $399 or six easy payments of $59. Thank goodness for everyone who has posted their experience!
A  5th of Jan, 2012 by    +1 Votes
I just received mine and the wording is 90% or more to the one you posted. Lucky for me I decided to double check their authenticity as I was prepared to pay them to redo mine since I really need a job. Thank you so much for these posts, they are eye openers. I feel so defeated now that I think, here we are trying to gain employment whilst there are people out there trying to rip off the unemployed. What a damn shame!
A  15th of Feb, 2012 by    +1 Votes
I am a former JobFox employee (although it was Market10) back then. Any company, and there seems to be many these days, who pray on people in need should be ashamed and I hope punished for their actions. I was recently updating my resume when I came across the JobFox section and decided to do a quick search to see how the company was doing. I have to admit (and it will be clear why later) that I was amused when I saw how many people think JobFox is made up of a bunch of crooks. When I worked there (I am a software developer), the model was different than it seems to be today. Immediately, when typed jobfox into google, the autocomplete wanted to fill in many terms such as "scam", "complaint", and "class action". When you type amazon, you don't see anything like that. Doesn't surprise me at all.

Our goal back then was to create a next generation of job matching, similar to eharmony where the applicant and employer would receive much better matches than the existing job sites CareerBuilder and Monster provide (which mainly find matches by keyword searches, at least they did then). It was also a way to prevent unqualified applicants from applying for the "CEO" opening as a selling point to employers. I was very skeptical that a candidate would really have the discipline required to spend 20 minutes or so categorizing his/her career so our match engine had the information to do its job. I would often tell my my bosses that I spent 5 minutes elsewhere and got a lot of hits whereas I haven't received one email from an actual employer via jobfox containing a matching job. Then they got pissy and told me to remove my resume from the real site. But, I trusted those with more experience in the field that we really could revolutionize job matching. After all, they were the people who started CareerBuilder and turned it into one of the 2 big players in the space and say what you want, that's a difficult accomplishment.

The development staff worked very hard to make the user's experience and match engine as strong as possible. The first year I worked there, it was a great place. I really felt we were going to make a difference. At parties, I would tell people what we were doing and people would call me for job search advice. The crash of the early 2000's wasn't far behind. On September 11th, 2001, as tower 2 fell, I was laid off from another company after working my butt off. And when I got settled, a lot of people sent me their resumes, good people who lost their jobs because others didn't do their job. And I really felt for them and wanted to help. And I was pretty good at identifying skills, talking to our hiring managers and recruiters to find openings and I helped get quite a few people jobs. So, I took pride that at jobfox we could make a difference and help people find better jobs faster. Even if I wasn't sure the idea would work, I hoped it would and tried to do whatever I could do as a developer to make it successful.

In that first year, I didn't really think about the other parts of the company such as marketing and the executive team although I sat very near them. But, everytime I dealt with them, I just had this suspicion that they were not very trustworthy and not to the level I expected from a staff of hand picked, startup employees (some of them, not all). These are the people who don't apply for their job but are recruited because they worked with each other. And I was one of those people and took pride that I was given a great opportunity, deserved or not. But, I didn't see them staying late every night like we did. And most of our VC money went to them and they burned thru it pretty quickly with very little to show for it. My team continued to work really hard, but one day I came in and they made some big changes to the development side. New people were brought in. And the people who brought me in and whom I believed in were set aside. Whereas, I happily worked a lot of hours and felt appreciated before (at least by the development team), we were told to work longer hours. The new CTO positioned his office so that you had to walk past him when you left the facility and he would give you a dirty look. Seriously, is this seventh grade? We were working hard, not smart and we just kept rewriting the application for the sake of changing it. I rarely thought the ideas we were implementing were good ones. We'd work past midnight to deliver a build ontime and the next day, we wouldn't be thanked or told to take a long weekend and see our family, we'd be told we were not working hard enough. And the new task would be to completely rip apart what we had just slaved over and completely redo the application to implement the next, great idea. One of these ideas was to create a bunch of emails designed to drive people to the site. I know this seems obvious now but at the time, most companies didn't have this feature in their email. These emails were signed by someone with a big title that didn't exist..."A phantom. An apparition. Second cousin to Harvey the Rabbit. I conjured him out of thin air. He doesn't exist... except on paper" to borrow a great quote. Something such as Thomas Cronkite, Vice President of Job Recruiting. The content didn't so much matter, it had to be really easy for the user to get to the site from these fabricated emails. They didn't contain the blatant lies that the emails people on this site are complaining about, but it was a step in that direction. I felt squirrely implementing them. They wouldn't have been as offensive to me if these form letters (with sections replaced with personalized content to seem legit) led to people getting jobs, but if the idea worked, I don't think they would be scamming people into paying $400 for a computer to analyze their resume. And I wasn't comfortable with this and just didn't trust the people I worked for, so I left. I think all the people I respected have since left also. I know, boo hoo me, there are much worse business practices in the world so grow up. I realize this but ultimately, I have to believe in the people I work for/with.

And a lot of the signs I saw along the way that made me wonder about the ethics of the marketing and executive team turned out to be real. I really think it's pathetic to ask someone to pay for a service, claim the service is an actual person and an expert (maybe a lawyer can prove nothing in the emails really says that but they seemed to intentionally fool people). And then parse the person's resume and reformat it as it sounds like they are doing and ask for more money to be put in the front of the queue for job openings. I can imagine the decisions people make in desperate times, hoping to catch a break. At the time, we didn't parse resume's and uploading a resume was not a big part of the application. It wasn't a person's resume that was important, it was the taxonomy of their work experience that was important. I tried to push parsing a person's resume to help them fill out their "match", help cut down that 20 minutes it took before you could view postings. The taxonomy and questions were complex and users had trouble doing it accurately as did the employers and if this information wasn't reliable, our match couldn't improve anything. You know what they say about garbage in.

Asking, presumably, an unemployed person to fork over $400 seems like a desperate act. Don't get me wrong, I realize that there are many experts who really do take poorly written resumes and improve them (I've had this done myself) and are likely an essential part of their clients' finding good jobs. But, this wasn't "the big idea" that we, or at least I tried to make come true. There was always talk that if the match engine doesn't work, there's another, almost fool proof idea we could develop. Perhaps this was their big idea all along. But, I never would have worked for them if I knew their plan was to take the last $400 from millions of people desperately seeking a job. And I really believe this is deliberate. The people who founded CareerBuilder had plenty of money when they were bought out, millions but not billions. The idea just doesn't seem "scalable" to me unless, as it appears, the expert is an automated engine, reformatting thousands of resume's a day or a minute or a second for $400 a pop rather than hiring a huge staff of experts to rewrite resumes and spend the time it takes to do it properly. I'm not trying to offend anyone because I think a person who spends his/her time really helping someone get a job is doing a great service. But, the people who founded CareerBuilder, in my opinion, want to build something that puts CareerBuilder and Monster out of business and I think they are arrogant enough to believe people are not smart enough to recognize a form letter. Or maybe they do and they just figured they'd lawyer up and still make billions. Those were our competitors at the time (although, I'm sure they were not scared of us). I didn't get the impression things ended well when CareerBuilder was bought out. The people there seemed to hate them. And there was certainly a competitive spirit that we could do a better job than the giants.

I really didn't want this to come off as a disgruntled employee trying to get revenge on a former employer. I almost never think about jobfox. I really wanted to say that as a former employee, I don't agree with the tactics they seem to use. And if they really do a good job and don't deliberately rip people off, it wouldn't be the first suggestion that pops up. And as a once insider, it doesn't surprise me they lowered themselves to praying on those in a bad situation, just hoping to catch a break. To all of you still looking for that special job, I really hope you find it. You spend almost half your conscious, adult life working and you should love what you do. It makes all the difference. Good luck on you complaints and your search.
A  20th of May, 2012 by    0 Votes
I'm so glad that this complaint received attention. I wish the company would change their ways though. It seems they still give out the faulty information, insult their customers, and collect money from unsuspecting customers. Be sure to select agree when you post a similiar complaint. The default on this site is for neutral which appears as a thumbs down for your comment.
A  20th of Aug, 2014 by    0 Votes
Oh my gosh! I got the exact same critique! I've been driving myself crazy trying to rewrite my resume according to the critique I received! Mine was through Beyond.com. I applied for a position through their website and they sent me a "complimentary critique" ! My critique said all the same things. I'm a "doer" and not an "achiever", structure is a mess.

Post your Comment

Please check text spelling before submitting a comment
Your attitude towards Complaint Agree Neutral Disagree
Comment text
Attach photos (optional)

Contact Us
bdomains.com
     

Reply to

Send