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.
ATS keywords matter, but they are not what gets candidates interviews. Keywords help your resume pass an initial filtering step, but recruiters and hiring managers ultimately decide whether your experience looks credible, relevant, and worth a conversation. A resume stuffed with keywords but lacking measurable impact, clear positioning, and evidence of results often gets rejected after a quick human review.
This is where many job seekers misunderstand the hiring process. They optimize for software instead of optimizing for decision makers. Modern hiring is not "beat the ATS and win." It is "pass the system, then persuade humans." The resumes that consistently generate interviews use keywords strategically while also showing outcomes, business value, role alignment, and clear evidence that the candidate can solve real problems.
Many candidates think:
"If I include enough keywords from the job description, I’ll get more interviews."
That sounds logical. It is also incomplete.
Keywords help with:
ATS parsing
Search visibility in recruiter databases
Matching against required skills
Initial relevance signals
Keywords do not guarantee:
Recruiter interest
Hiring manager confidence
Interview invitations
Perceived fit
Strong positioning against competitors
A resume can technically match an ATS and still fail in under ten seconds during human review.
That happens every day.
Most people imagine ATS software scoring resumes like a robot judge assigning percentages.
Reality is messier.
Modern applicant tracking systems primarily help companies:
Store applications
Organize candidates
Parse resume content
Enable recruiter searches
Filter basic requirements
Surface matching applicants
Recruiters often search databases using combinations of:
Job titles
Skills
Certifications
Industries
Experience levels
Tools and software
Geographic requirements
Keywords increase discoverability.
But recruiters rarely say:
"Resume scored 88%. Schedule interview."
Instead they ask:
"Does this person look capable of succeeding here?"
That distinction changes everything.
Recruiters are not scanning for isolated words.
They're looking for evidence.
Consider these two resumes.
Weak Example
"Project management, Agile, stakeholder management, Jira, leadership, communication, Scrum, collaboration."
Keyword rich.
Low credibility.
Good Example
"Led cross functional Agile teams across six product initiatives, reducing release delays by 32% and improving stakeholder satisfaction scores."
Fewer keywords.
Far stronger candidate signal.
Why?
Because recruiters evaluate:
Scope
ownership
impact
credibility
business outcomes
career progression
Keywords without context feel artificial.
Context creates interviews.
Candidates often copy massive portions of job descriptions into resumes.
They add every skill they can think of:
Leadership
Strategy
Communication
Collaboration
Project management
Problem solving
Microsoft Office
Team player
The result becomes unreadable.
Recruiters notice immediately.
Common signs of keyword stuffing include:
Long skill sections with no supporting evidence
Repeated phrases across multiple jobs
Experience bullets with vague wording
Unnatural language patterns
Generic accomplishments
Inflated terminology
Hiring teams see thousands of resumes.
Pattern recognition becomes extremely fast.
When a resume feels engineered for software instead of written for humans, trust drops.
Trust matters more than keyword density.
Candidates frequently optimize for volume.
Recruiters optimize for relevance.
These are not the same thing.
A resume succeeds when it answers:
"Why should this person interview for this exact job?"
Not:
"How many matching terms can I fit on one page?"
Strong resumes align:
Experience with job requirements
Results with business needs
Skills with real application
Career story with role expectations
Think about keyword use like seasoning.
Too little creates problems.
Too much ruins the meal.
Most candidates underestimate how quickly recruiters review resumes.
Initial review windows can be extremely short.
Recruiters often assess:
Have you done work similar to the target role?
Did your work improve outcomes?
How large were projects, budgets, teams, or responsibilities?
Have responsibilities increased over time?
Do accomplishments feel believable?
Can someone understand your value quickly?
Notice what is missing:
Keyword count.
Keywords support these evaluations.
They do not replace them.
The strongest resumes combine ATS optimization with human persuasion.
Winning resumes usually contain:
Job title alignment
Naturally integrated skills
Quantified accomplishments
Clear business outcomes
Relevant industry terminology
Strong action language
Positioning around employer needs
Recruiters think in risk reduction.
Interviewing candidates costs time and money.
Hiring managers ask:
"Does this person look like a safe, credible bet?"
Keyword lists do not answer that question.
Evidence does.
Many top candidates accidentally follow a pattern recruiters consistently respond to:
Relevant skill + action + business outcome
Examples:
"Built automated reporting workflows that reduced processing time by 45%."
"Managed a $2.5M account portfolio while increasing client retention rates."
"Implemented cloud migration initiatives across enterprise systems."
Notice what happens:
Keywords exist naturally.
But they support proof.
They are not the entire strategy.
There is another hidden problem.
Candidates optimize resumes for ATS systems while ignoring competitive positioning.
Hiring is relative.
You are not evaluated in isolation.
You are compared against:
Internal candidates
Employee referrals
Industry specialists
Candidates with stronger narratives
Applicants with clearer experience alignment
Two resumes may contain similar keywords.
One gets interviews.
One does not.
The difference often comes down to:
Stronger positioning
Better examples
More relevant accomplishments
Better storytelling
Clearer value proposition
Keywords create entry.
Positioning wins competition.
Using exact terminology from target roles naturally
Matching job titles where appropriate
Showing quantified outcomes
Demonstrating ownership
Using industry language
Tailoring based on role priorities
Supporting skills with evidence
Copying entire job descriptions
Keyword dumping skill sections
Repeating identical terms excessively
Generic accomplishment statements
Prioritizing software over humans
Optimizing for ATS only
Recruiters notice the difference immediately.
Five years ago, beating ATS systems was a larger concern.
Today, most candidates already use basic ATS optimization tools.
That changed the competitive landscape.
The differentiator is no longer:
"Did you include keywords?"
The differentiator is:
"Did you convince humans?"
Strong candidates combine:
ATS compatibility
recruiter psychology
hiring manager expectations
positioning strategy
evidence of results
clear relevance
That combination consistently produces interviews.
ATS keywords are necessary but incomplete.
Think of keywords as an admission ticket, not a job offer strategy.
Resumes that generate interviews do not simply repeat skills from job descriptions. They prove capability through context, outcomes, and relevance.
Pass the software.
Persuade the recruiter.
Reduce hiring risk.
That is what actually gets interviews.
Upload Resume
Import from Linkedin
