Top News

Ex-Google recruiter flags common resume mistake that hurts interview chances
06 Jul 2026

Farah Sharghi, a former recruiter for Google, TikTok, Uber, and The New York Times, has revealed a common mistake that can hurt job seekers' chances of landing interviews.

She calls it the "most common" and often "completely invisible" resume red flag.

The issue arises when candidates write their resumes as if they are addressing someone who already knows their story, rather than a stranger evaluating their application.

Sharghi's advice on resume writing
Key insight

Sharghi emphasized the need for clarity and context in resumes, as recruiters only spend a few seconds scanning them.

She said on CNBC Make It, "The biggest resume mistake I see is writing for the one person who already knows your story: you."

This means candidates often use generic statements that lack context about their work experience, making it hard for external recruiters to understand their contributions.

Add context before bullet points
Solution

To fix this common mistake, Sharghi recommends adding a line of context before listing bullet points in a resume.

She advises job seekers to briefly explain what their organization does and their role within it.

This way, even someone unfamiliar with the company can understand the impact of their work.

Explain metrics properly
Metric clarification

Sharghi also cautions against using metrics without sufficient context in resumes.

She says figures alone can be meaningless and candidates should explain what the metric represents and why it matters.

For instance, a claim like "$630,000 in Q2" doesn't clarify whether the number refers to sales, cost savings, donations, or revenue unless explained properly.

Other things to avoid in resume
Resume tips

Sharghi also advises against using internal acronyms, project codenames, or company-specific shorthand that outsiders may not understand.

She recommends describing projects in plain language for better understanding.

Further, she suggests removing unsupported claims like "excellent communication" or "hard-working" unless backed by concrete examples, as demonstrable achievements carry more weight than self-described traits.