Choose from a wide range of NEWCV resume templates and customize your NEWCV design with a single click.
Use ATS-optimised Resume and resume templates that pass applicant tracking systems. Our Resume builder helps recruiters read, scan, and shortlist your Resume faster.
Use professional field-tested resume templates that follow the exact Resume rules employers look for.
Create Resume
Use professional field-tested resume templates that follow the exact Resume rules employers look for.
Create ResumeRecruiters do not read resumes the way candidates think they do. We scan first, question second, and only read properly if the resume gives us a reason to continue. In the Canadian job market, your resume usually has a very small window to prove three things quickly: you match the role, your experience is credible, and you are worth a conversation. That does not mean your resume needs to be flashy. It means it needs to be clear, relevant, and easy to evaluate.
When I read a resume, I am not looking for perfection. I am looking for evidence. I want to understand what you do, where you have done it, how senior you are, what kind of environments you have worked in, and whether your background makes sense for the role in front of me. A strong resume answers those questions before I have to dig.
The biggest misconception candidates have is that recruiters carefully read every line from top to bottom. In reality, most resumes are scanned first. That first scan is not lazy. It is triage.
Recruiters are usually working against time, hiring manager expectations, job requirements, competing candidates, and sometimes an applicant tracking system full of resumes that look painfully similar. The first scan helps us decide whether the resume deserves deeper attention.
During that initial scan, I am usually checking:
Your current or most recent job title
Your industry or company background
Your years and level of experience
Whether your resume matches the role’s core requirements
Whether your career path makes logical sense
Whether your location, work authorization, or Canadian market fit is clear
When I open a resume, my eyes usually go to the top third of the first page. That section sets the tone. It tells me whether the rest of the resume is likely to be relevant or whether I am about to go hunting for basic information.
The first things recruiters usually notice are:
Your name and contact details
Your location
Your professional title or resume headline
Your summary or profile section
Your most recent role
Your most recent employer
Your employment dates
Whether the resume is easy enough to understand quickly
This is why vague resumes struggle. If I need to work too hard to understand what you actually do, the resume creates friction. And friction is dangerous in hiring because recruiters are not only assessing your qualifications. We are also assessing how easily we can explain your profile to the hiring manager.
A resume does not need to tell your entire life story. It needs to make your fit obvious enough that someone wants to learn more.
Your key skills, if they are presented clearly
The top of your resume should not be treated like decoration. It is prime real estate. If it is filled with generic claims like “hardworking professional with excellent communication skills,” it wastes space. I already assume you think you are hardworking. That does not help me evaluate you.
A stronger opening quickly positions you.
Weak Example
“Motivated and results driven professional seeking a challenging opportunity where I can use my skills and grow.”
This tells me almost nothing. It could belong to an accountant, project coordinator, warehouse supervisor, sales associate, or software developer.
Good Example
“Customer Service Supervisor with 6 years of experience leading frontline teams in high volume retail and contact centre environments across Canada.”
This is much better because it gives me role, level, years, environment, and market context. I immediately know what kind of candidate I am looking at.
Recruiters are not impressed by vague confidence. We are impressed by useful clarity.
A recruiter’s first question is not “Is this person talented?” It is “Does this person fit this specific job?”
That distinction matters.
Many candidates write resumes that try to prove they are generally capable. But hiring is not a general capability contest. Employers are solving a specific business problem. They need someone who can do a particular job, in a particular context, with a particular level of independence, salary expectation, and ramp up time.
When I screen a resume, I compare your background against the role in front of me. I am looking for overlap between:
The job title and your recent titles
The required skills and your demonstrated skills
The industry context and your previous environments
The seniority level and your scope of responsibility
The tools, systems, or methods required
The complexity of work you have handled
The outcomes you have produced
This does not mean you need to be a perfect match. Canadian employers often say they want the “ideal candidate,” but what they usually mean is someone who reduces hiring risk. If your resume shows enough relevant evidence, you can still be considered even if you do not tick every box.
The issue is that many candidates bury the relevant evidence too deeply. They assume the recruiter will connect the dots. Sometimes we can. Sometimes we do. But when the resume is unclear, the safer candidate often wins because their fit is easier to defend.
Your resume should not make the recruiter become a detective. Help us help you.
Your work experience section is where recruiters spend the most serious attention. This is where your resume either becomes credible or starts to fall apart.
When I read your experience, I am not just looking at what tasks you performed. I am trying to understand your actual level of responsibility. Job titles can be misleading. A “manager” in one company may manage a team of 20 people and a large budget. A “manager” somewhere else may be an individual contributor with a fancy title and no direct reports.
This is why context matters.
A strong work experience section answers:
What was your role responsible for?
What type of company or environment did you work in?
Who did you support, manage, sell to, serve, build for, or report to?
What tools, systems, processes, or methods did you use?
What results, improvements, or outcomes did you contribute to?
How complex was the work?
How closely does this experience match the target role?
A weak resume lists duties. A stronger resume shows scope, context, and impact.
Weak Example
“Responsible for managing customer service operations.”
This sounds fine at first, but it is too vague. What operations? How many people? What volume? What kind of customers? What changed because of your work?
Good Example
“Led a team of 12 customer service representatives handling 800 plus weekly inquiries across phone, email, and live chat, improving response consistency through updated call scripts and coaching sessions.”
This gives me scale, leadership, channels, process improvement, and practical value. It helps me understand the role properly.
Recruiters notice when a resume gives real evidence. We also notice when someone tries to sound senior without giving senior level proof.
Generic resumes create doubt. Not because the candidate is necessarily weak, but because the resume does not give enough useful information to support a confident screening decision.
When I see phrases like “excellent team player,” “strong communication skills,” “detail oriented,” or “proven track record,” I do not automatically reject the resume. But I do mentally skip over those phrases unless they are supported by evidence.
The problem with generic language is that it asks the recruiter to believe you instead of showing why we should.
In real hiring, unsupported claims do not carry much weight. Hiring managers rarely ask me, “Did the candidate say they are detail oriented?” They ask, “Have they done this type of work before?” or “Can they handle this level of responsibility?” or “Do they understand our industry?”
That is why your resume needs to move from claim to evidence.
Instead of saying you have “strong leadership skills,” show the team size, leadership context, and outcome.
Instead of saying you are “experienced with stakeholders,” explain which stakeholders and what kind of decisions or projects were involved.
Instead of saying you are “results driven,” show the result.
Generic resumes often come from good candidates who are trying to sound professional. The irony is that the more generic the wording becomes, the less professional judgement it shows. Strong candidates are specific because they understand what matters.
Recruiters notice gaps and job changes, but not always in the dramatic way candidates imagine. A gap is not automatically a rejection. A career change is not automatically a problem. Several short roles are not automatically fatal.
What matters is whether the pattern creates unanswered questions.
In Canada, hiring teams are usually more practical than theatrical about career history. Life happens. Contracts end. Companies restructure. People relocate. Newcomers to Canada may have transition periods. Parents take time away. Professionals change industries. None of that is shocking.
The problem starts when the resume gives no context and leaves the recruiter guessing.
When I see a resume gap, I ask:
Is the gap recent?
Is it long enough to require context?
Does the candidate show current skills or recent activity?
Is the overall career path still credible?
Does the gap affect readiness for this specific role?
When I see frequent job changes, I ask:
Were these contracts, layoffs, restructures, or voluntary moves?
Is there progression or just repetition?
Did the candidate stay long enough to deliver results?
Is this pattern normal in their industry?
Will the hiring manager see this as risk?
This is where candidates often overcorrect. They either hide everything or explain too much. Neither works well.
A simple note can be enough when context is useful.
For example:
“Contract role completed after successful project delivery.”
Or:
“Career break for relocation to Canada, followed by Canadian job search and professional development.”
You do not need to confess your entire personal history. You just need to reduce unnecessary doubt.
Applicant tracking systems are part of the hiring process, but they are often misunderstood. An ATS does not usually “read” your resume like a recruiter. It stores, parses, filters, and helps recruiters search applications. Some systems rank or sort candidates, but the bigger issue is usually whether your resume can be understood and retrieved properly.
The recruiter still matters. The hiring manager still matters. But your resume needs to be ATS friendly enough to survive the system before it reaches human judgement.
For the Canadian job market, a practical ATS friendly resume usually means:
Use standard section headings such as Summary, Work Experience, Education, and Skills
Use a clean format without heavy graphics, text boxes, or complex columns
Include relevant keywords naturally from the job posting
Spell out important terms and acronyms where useful
Use standard job titles where possible
Save the file in the requested format
Avoid headers or footers for critical contact information
The mistake candidates make is thinking ATS optimization means stuffing keywords. That is not strategy. That is panic wearing a blazer.
If the job posting asks for payroll, benefits administration, HRIS, employee relations, and onboarding, those terms should appear in your resume if they honestly reflect your experience. But they should appear in context, not as a random keyword dump.
Recruiters can tell when a resume is written for a machine and not a human. The best resumes satisfy both. They are searchable for the system and readable for the person.
A shortlistable resume is not always the most impressive resume. It is often the clearest relevant resume.
This is something candidates underestimate. Hiring decisions are not based only on who has done the most. They are based on who appears to match the role with the least confusion and the most credible evidence.
A recruiter friendly resume usually has:
A clear professional direction
Relevant experience placed where it can be found quickly
Specific achievements tied to the target role
Consistent formatting
Logical dates and job progression
Skills that match the job posting
Enough detail to prove competence without drowning the reader
Canadian hiring context where relevant, especially for local market experience, certifications, compliance, or industry standards
The best resumes create a smooth screening experience. I can scan the top section, understand the candidate, review the latest role, see relevant proof, and decide whether to move forward.
The weaker resumes make me pause for the wrong reasons. Not because the person is unqualified, but because the resume forces too much interpretation.
For example, if you are applying for a project coordinator role and your resume spends the first half page talking about your passion for collaboration but does not clearly show project timelines, stakeholders, tracking tools, documentation, budgets, or deliverables, the resume is not doing its job.
Recruiters shortlist resumes that make the hiring case easy.
A red flag does not always mean rejection. It means something requires caution, clarification, or verification. Some red flags are fixable. Others depend on the role, industry, and hiring manager’s risk tolerance.
Common resume red flags include:
Missing employment dates
Unclear job titles
Vague responsibilities with no measurable scope
A resume that does not match the role applied for
Too many unexplained short roles
Inflated language that does not match the experience level
Skills listed with no evidence in the work history
Major formatting issues that make the resume hard to read
Inconsistent company names, titles, or timelines
A summary that says one thing while the experience says another
One of the biggest red flags is mismatch. For example, a candidate applies for a senior operations manager role, but the resume reads like an administrative coordinator resume. That does not mean the candidate cannot do the job. It means the resume has failed to position them at the right level.
Another common issue is overclaiming. If someone says they “transformed operations across the organization” but the work history shows a six month junior role with no scope or metrics, I become cautious. Hiring teams are not allergic to ambition, but they are allergic to exaggeration.
The resume needs to sound confident without sounding inflated. That balance matters.
Candidates often misunderstand “relevant experience.” It does not always mean the exact same job title. It means the experience gives the employer confidence that you can handle the work.
Relevant experience can come from:
Similar tasks
Similar industry conditions
Similar clients or customers
Similar tools or systems
Similar regulatory environments
Similar team structures
Similar problem types
Similar pace, pressure, or complexity
For example, if a company is hiring for a customer success role in SaaS, they may prefer someone with SaaS experience. But a candidate from telecommunications or financial services with strong account management, retention, onboarding, and stakeholder communication experience may still be relevant if the resume explains the overlap clearly.
This is where positioning matters.
A resume should not simply document what you have done. It should translate your experience into the language of the role you want.
That does not mean lying. It means choosing the most relevant evidence and making the connection obvious.
In recruitment, we often reject resumes not because the candidate lacks transferable experience, but because the resume does not translate that experience properly. The candidate understands the connection in their head. The recruiter does not have access to their head. Very inconvenient, I know.
Recruiters and hiring managers often read resumes differently. Understanding that difference helps you write a stronger resume.
Recruiters usually screen for fit, clarity, risk, salary alignment, availability, and whether the candidate is worth presenting. Hiring managers tend to look more closely at technical depth, team fit, problem solving, industry knowledge, and whether the person can actually perform in the role.
A recruiter may think:
Can I confidently shortlist this person?
Does this resume match the job requirements?
Will the hiring manager understand the value?
Are there any obvious concerns?
Is this candidate worth a screening call?
A hiring manager may think:
Has this person handled similar work before?
Will they need too much training?
Do they understand our tools, clients, or environment?
Are they operating at the right seniority level?
Can they solve the problems this role exists to solve?
Your resume needs to satisfy both audiences.
For recruiters, make the resume easy to screen. For hiring managers, make the experience credible and specific enough to prove you can do the job.
This is why surface level resumes often fail after the recruiter stage. They may contain the right keywords, but they do not show enough operational depth for the hiring manager to feel confident.
A recruiter friendly resume is built around clarity, relevance, and proof. You do not need gimmicks. You need sharp judgement.
Start with a clear headline that matches your target role or professional identity. Then write a short summary that gives useful context, not generic personality traits. Your summary should explain what kind of professional you are, your level, your strongest areas of experience, and the types of environments you know.
Your work experience should focus on the roles most relevant to your target job. For each role, give enough context for the reader to understand the scope. Do not assume the company name explains everything. Not every recruiter knows every employer, especially in a diverse Canadian market with local businesses, global companies, startups, public sector organizations, nonprofits, and industry specific employers.
For each role, aim to show:
Scope of responsibility
Core duties aligned with the target role
Tools, systems, or processes used
Stakeholders, clients, teams, or departments supported
Achievements, improvements, or measurable results
Promotions, expanded responsibilities, or leadership indicators
Your skills section should support the resume, not replace it. Skills listed at the top need to be proven in the work history. If you list Salesforce, I expect to see where you used it. If you list budgeting, I expect some budget context. If you list leadership, I expect team, project, or stakeholder leadership somewhere.
A resume is strongest when every section agrees with every other section.
Resume length causes too much anxiety and not enough judgement. The real question is not “Should my resume be one page or two pages?” The better question is “Does every part of this resume help someone evaluate me for this role?”
In Canada, two pages is common and acceptable for many professionals, especially if you have several years of relevant experience. One page can work for students, early career candidates, or professionals with a very focused background. Three pages may be acceptable in some senior, academic, technical, government, or project based contexts, but it needs to earn the space.
What does not work is a resume that is long because the candidate could not decide what matters.
A recruiter does not reward length. We reward relevance.
A two page resume with clear, targeted evidence is stronger than a one page resume that hides important qualifications. But a two page resume full of outdated duties, repeated bullets, and generic claims feels unfocused.
The best resume length is the length required to make a strong hiring case without wasting attention.
Think of your resume as a business document, not a personal archive. Not every job deserves equal space. Not every task deserves a bullet. Not every achievement matters for this application.
Editing is not removing value. Editing is making value easier to see.
A resume gets read when it creates confidence quickly. It gets skipped when it creates confusion, doubt, or extra work.
Here is the practical difference.
A resume that gets skipped often:
Starts with a vague summary
Uses broad claims instead of evidence
Hides relevant experience under unclear job titles
Lists duties without scope or results
Includes too much irrelevant history
Has formatting that slows down screening
Does not reflect the language of the target role
Makes the recruiter guess what the candidate actually wants
A resume that gets read usually:
Makes the target role clear
Shows relevant experience early
Uses specific examples and context
Connects skills to real work
Explains career changes or gaps when needed
Presents dates and titles clearly
Makes the candidate easy to explain to a hiring manager
That last point is important. Recruiters do not just find candidates. We often have to explain them. If I send a resume to a hiring manager, I need to be able to say why this person is worth reviewing.
A strong resume gives me that language.
If I have to build the whole argument myself from scattered clues, I may still do it for an exceptional candidate, but most resumes do not get that luxury. The resume should carry its own case.
Before sending your resume, review it the way a recruiter would. Do not read it emotionally. Screen it.
Ask yourself:
Can someone understand my target role within 10 seconds?
Does my most relevant experience appear early enough?
Do my job titles and summaries match the level I am targeting?
Are my bullets specific, or could they belong to anyone?
Have I shown scope, tools, stakeholders, and outcomes?
Are my skills proven in my work history?
Are there gaps, short roles, or transitions that need brief context?
Would a recruiter be able to explain my fit to a hiring manager?
Does this resume match the Canadian role I am applying for?
The most useful question is this:
“Would I shortlist this person if I only had this resume and no extra explanation?”
That question is uncomfortable, but it is powerful.
Many candidates rely on what they know about themselves. Recruiters can only work with what is on the page. Your resume needs to represent your judgement, not just your history.
Trust is underrated in resume writing. A recruiter needs to believe the resume is accurate, coherent, and professionally self aware.
You build trust by being specific, consistent, and realistic.
Specific means you provide enough detail to support your claims.
Consistent means your summary, job titles, skills, and work history all point in the same direction.
Realistic means your language matches your actual level of experience.
This does not mean underselling yourself. Many candidates undersell themselves because they confuse professionalism with blandness. But overselling creates a different problem. If the resume sounds more senior than the actual experience supports, recruiters become cautious.
Strong positioning sits in the middle. It presents your experience confidently and clearly, without pretending every task was a strategic transformation.
For example, not every improvement is a “transformation.” Sometimes you improved a process, reduced errors, trained new staff, handled a difficult client portfolio, supported a system rollout, or kept operations stable during a messy period. Those things matter. Hiring managers value practical impact, not just dramatic language.
The best resumes sound like they were written by someone who understands their value and understands the job. That combination is rare, and it stands out.
Written by Simar Malhi, a recruiter and headhunter with international recruitment experience. I write about CVs, job applications, hiring decisions, and the reality behind recruitment processes. My goal is to help candidates understand more honestly how employers, recruiters, and hiring managers actually select candidates.
Upload Resume
Import from Linkedin