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 ResumeMany people discover these problems only after applying to dozens of jobs with little response. The issue is not necessarily your experience. It is often the workflow. LinkedIn exports are designed around profile portability, while recruiters evaluate candidates using very different expectations. Understanding where these exports fail can save significant time and improve application outcomes.
The appeal is obvious: speed.
Users already spent time building a LinkedIn profile, so exporting it into a resume seems efficient. For many people, the thought process looks like this:
•Profile already exists
• Experience is already entered
• Resume appears instantly
• No formatting work required
• Easy one-click workflow
From a productivity perspective, this sounds ideal.
But users often confuse data availability with resume readiness.
A LinkedIn profile and a high-performing resume serve different functions.
Your LinkedIn profile is:
•Broad
• Discoverable
• Networking-focused
• Long-form
• Passive
A resume is:
•Targeted
• Position-specific
• Short-form
• Decision-driven
• Designed for rapid recruiter scanning
This distinction creates most export-related problems.
This is where competing articles usually stop. They mention formatting issues and move on.
The deeper issue is workflow architecture.
LinkedIn structures information around profile completeness.
Recruiters evaluate information around:
•Relevance
• scan speed
• prioritization
• keyword alignment
• decision confidence
Those are not the same goals.
LinkedIn asks:
"What information should exist?"
Recruiters ask:
"What information matters immediately?"
That mismatch creates friction.
Formatting is one of the most common complaints.
Users often assume exported resumes maintain professional visual hierarchy.
In reality, exports frequently create:
•Large blocks of text
• Weak spacing systems
• Generic heading structures
• Limited visual emphasis
• Poor readability balance
• Little differentiation between sections
Recruiters scan resumes extremely quickly.
Many hiring professionals spend only a few seconds during initial screening.
Weak formatting increases cognitive effort.
When hiring teams need to process hundreds of applicants, friction matters.
Weak Example:
Software Engineer
ABC Company
Worked on development projects and software applications for clients.
This creates almost no scanning advantage.
Good Example:
Software Engineer | ABC Company
•Reduced deployment time by 42% through CI/CD workflow automation
• Built internal dashboard used across three departments
• Improved API response performance by 28%
The difference is not visual styling alone.
The difference is information prioritization.
LinkedIn exports frequently miss that distinction.
Recruiters repeatedly see resumes generated from the same systems.
When layouts become predictable, candidates lose differentiation.
Users underestimate how much sameness affects perception.
Common LinkedIn export patterns include:
•Similar typography
• Similar spacing
• Similar section order
• Similar visual structure
• Minimal personality
This becomes a branding issue.
Hiring decisions are not purely analytical.
People remember candidates who are easier to process visually.
Professional identity matters.
LinkedIn profiles encourage descriptive content.
High-performing resumes prioritize outcomes.
This creates another workflow problem.
Many LinkedIn exports pull information exactly as written.
But profile language often includes:
•responsibilities
• role summaries
• duties
• broad descriptions
Recruiters want evidence.
Specifically:
•impact
• metrics
• ownership
• business outcomes
Managed customer onboarding.
Led onboarding redesign that reduced activation time by 35% and improved customer retention.
The second creates measurable value.
Exports rarely rewrite or optimize language.
That work still belongs to the user.
Many articles create ATS myths.
They imply exported resumes automatically fail ATS systems.
Reality is more complicated.
Modern ATS platforms are significantly better than older systems.
However, problems still appear when exported documents create:
•inconsistent hierarchy
• strange formatting structures
• poor keyword emphasis
• cluttered layouts
• missing context
ATS compatibility today is less about tricking software and more about maintaining clean information architecture.
Recruiters increasingly use ATS alongside AI-assisted candidate filtering and ranking systems.
Resume quality still matters.
A technically readable resume can still perform poorly if its content lacks relevance.
This is one of the biggest workflow failures people ignore.
Modern applications require customization.
High-performing applicants adapt resumes for:
•job descriptions
• industry language
• keyword priorities
• seniority expectations
• role-specific achievements
LinkedIn exports are static.
The moment you export, customization becomes manual work.
Users frequently create one resume and repeatedly send it everywhere.
That creates:
•lower relevance
• weaker matching
• reduced interview rates
Mass application workflows often create hidden inefficiency.
More applications do not always create better outcomes.
Better alignment usually wins.
Profiles and resumes prioritize information differently.
LinkedIn often organizes content chronologically.
That structure can create problems.
Some candidates need:
•skills-first structures
• project emphasis
• portfolio visibility
• consulting layouts
• hybrid career narratives
Career changers experience this issue frequently.
A product manager moving from marketing may need:
•transferable outcomes
• project leadership emphasis
• strategic work visibility
Exports usually cannot restructure narratives intelligently.
People rarely switch because exporting stops working.
They switch because friction accumulates.
Typical frustrations include:
•repetitive editing
• formatting corrections
• customization effort
• generic appearance
• limited flexibility
• inability to stand out
This becomes a productivity problem.
Users start with speed.
Over time they spend hours fixing output quality.
The "fast workflow" becomes slower than expected.
The modern challenge is balancing:
•ATS performance
• design quality
• customization
• speed
• recruiter readability
• personal branding
Historically users had to sacrifice one for another.
Traditional builders optimized ATS.
Design platforms optimized visuals.
Manual tools optimized control.
But each created tradeoffs.
This is where newer workflow-focused platforms are changing behavior.
Platforms like NewCV focus on reducing these compromises by combining ATS-friendly structure, stronger design systems, AI-assisted workflows, and faster editing without requiring users to manually build everything from scratch.
For users frustrated by LinkedIn exports, the larger issue is not template quality.
It is workflow efficiency.
Many people realize they do not want to spend hours moving between LinkedIn, Canva, ChatGPT, and manual editing systems.
They want a process that remains fast without creating downstream problems.
NewCV also approaches this differently by emphasizing modern resume presentation, portfolio-style identity, customization flexibility, and faster creation workflows. Starting around $2 with access to unique templates, users avoid many manual design limitations that often make platforms like Canva slower and more labor-intensive.
The advantage is not simply aesthetics.
It is reduced workflow friction.
A stronger workflow usually follows this process:
•Use LinkedIn as a profile source
• Extract core information
• Rewrite achievement language
• Customize for target roles
• optimize keywords naturally
• improve formatting hierarchy
• tailor visual presentation
• review recruiter readability
LinkedIn becomes an input source—not the final output.
That distinction matters.
You may be experiencing resume workflow problems if:
•applications generate few interviews
• formatting feels difficult to modify
• resumes look generic
• experience reads like responsibilities instead of outcomes
• every application uses the same document
• your resume feels disconnected from target roles
Many people assume they need better experience.
Often they need better presentation architecture.
The biggest cost is not formatting.
It is opportunity cost.
Imagine:
50 applications
5 minutes extra editing each
Several rounds of formatting fixes
Repeated keyword adjustments
Multiple export versions
Eventually users spend hours fixing something meant to save time.
This hidden productivity loss rarely appears in competing discussions.
Fast creation is valuable.
Fast correction cycles are not.
LinkedIn resume exports solve a very narrow problem: quickly turning profile data into a document.
They do not solve recruiter readability, customization, personal branding, workflow efficiency, or application optimization.
For occasional use, exports can work.
For serious job searches, they often create hidden friction that accumulates over time.
The strongest workflow is treating LinkedIn as a starting point rather than a finished resume system.
That shift alone often improves quality, usability, and application outcomes.
Upload Resume
Import from Linkedin
