Communication Overtones Comments
Over here, it didn't get her in prison, but a former minister who had "been deliberately vague" about her diplomas, ended up retiring from office. Anyway, did I already tell you I have 5 PhD degrees? ;-D
You know what BS stands for, some call it a Bachelor's Science degree and others call it bull @?1! The follow-on degree is a PhD.
So, are you saying that you are Piled higher and Deeper (PhD) in your studies (hee-hee)?
This is a very timely topic, indeed. Case in point is a story in today's edition of the Wall Street Journal (page B7) entitled, "Eagle-Eyed Employers Scour Resumes for Little White Lies." The article, by Cheryl Soltis, cites 2005 statistics from ResumeDoctor.com in which 42.7% of resumes uploaded to the site had at least one inaccuracy, and 12.6% had two or more factual errors. Even with all of the recent scandals concerning falsehoods on resumes, this continues to be a practice used by many job seekers. Unfortunately, many of these people will only learn one way...the hard way -- Keith, PR Pro Extraordinaire
Kami:
I had a candidate once who claimed to be involved in a number of projects at a company where a very good friend of mine worked ... and my friend was the one who did all the tasks he claimed were his!
Even though I called him on it during the interview, he still kept bugging me wondering why he didn't get the job.
Keith; I looked up
ResumeDoctors.com, and they have a fairly impressive list of press that have capitalized on their survey about white lies on resumes. I did a Google News search and they have over 50 articles that have been writen about the survey they did. The kicker, they used 1,000 resumes from their own client database, that is clients that paid them $199 to spruce up their resume. So, did ResumeDoctor help them lie, or should you avoid them in case they out you? Whew, I am interested in the survey, which I can't find at their site, but am not sure how much business it will drum up for them. What do you think?
John; Great story, I guess some people don't know when to quit digging.
Kami:
My take on ResumeDoctor.com is that the company did not assist its clients with fibbing on their resumes. Rather, the company, as outlined in its survey results and as part of its dealings with clients, uncovered the fact that lying about job experiences and responsibilities is a relatively common practice among job seekers. I have found this to be somewhat true when I have interviewed candidates. The tendency to overexaggerate, embellish, and even outright lie is very real in today's day and age -- especially since the job market is so competitive.
I have personally investigated numerous companies which are similar to ResumeDoctor.com, and most of these firms, at least the reputable ones, simply help job candidates develop better resumes and strategically position job seekers for higher-quality positions. Some of these firms charge an outrageous amount for their services -- $5,000 and up -- and the ways they prey on the vulnerability of job seekers is another discussion for another time. However, in my view, most of these firms can add value to a job search, particularly if the candidate is looking to reposition himself in another field, or in another specialty area.
I cannot imagine that ResumeDoctor.com would risk its credibility, and the future of its business, by compelling its client base to engage in unscrupulous resume-writing practices. I also cannot imagine that the Wall Street Journal would turn to such a company as a viable source of commentary on this topic.
I guess I did say that (it was late), but I meant it rhetorically. I am just wondering what kind of results a survey about lying would have for their business model? It is getting great media coverage, but I wonder what their objective was?
The campaign seems to do very little for attracting people that want to upgrade their resume. And, I am saying, it may deter some since it is obvious that ResumeDoctor uses their data to disparage some clients.
I am trying to look at this from the PR campaign point of view and to suggest that not all press is good press. I am always interested in how the tactic chosen can be tied your campaign to the desired results?
If you want traffic, I am sure that has gone up, and maybe poeple signing up for their resume service has also gone up with the traffic. However, when I went to the site, I wasn't all that impressed, and they didn't even have a copy of the results of the survey, which would have built credibility (if that is what they are trying to accomplish).
You raise some valid points which I had not considered, and I certainly agree with you that the survey results should be posted on the site for all to view.
ResumeDoctor.com is typical of many clients I have worked with over years. It is very apparent from the way this campaign was handled, and from the amateurish appearance of the site, that this company recognizes the value of public relations, but lacks the expertise and sophistication to appropriately execute campaigns of this nature. For example, while the extensive media coverage is listed on the site, there is no online press room, no collection of archived releases, no press kit materials and inexplicably, no listed PR contact. Huh?
My view is that ResumeDoctor.com had good intentions with this survey (i.e., ResumeDoctor.com is pointing out a legitimate problem, and we are a company that can help job seekers avoid such pitfalls, but the company did not think through the associated positive and negative benefits associated with the campaign.
To your point, though, even the most well-intentioned, and well-executed campaigns, have unanticipated and negative consequences. Perhaps it's time for ResumeDoctor.com to hire a PR staff member, a PR firm, or both?
Keith; These are good thoughts. They are getting some great media coverage, and with just a little more thought they could get much more, such as results for their service and a reputation for honesty and helpfulness.
As for their message, "We are a company that can help job seekers avoid such pitfalls," is that message really delivered in this campaign since all of the cheaters came right out of their own database? Why didn't they "help" them avoid the pitfall then?
Maybe I am just too cynical. I have done so much crisis communication that I think of all of the diasterous angles of a pitch.
Hmmmmm!
Touché, Kami, touché.
I think that makes two of us that are cynical, but hopefully not to the extent that it prevents us from being able to objectively dissect and analyze these PR scenarios from every angle, positive and negative.
However, those are the marks of strong public relations counselors, no? We are paid to evaluate all sides, and then make appropriate recommendations based on the facts of the case, the client's needs, our respective experience, and a variety of other factors.
I wouldn't have it any other way. That is why I love this business.
Me too, you make it sound so positive, thanks 
And no, I am not too cynical yet, I am still in many ways a wide-eyed optimist.
Thanks for your input Keith.
Commenting by HaloScan
