How to write a resume for professionals going through a mid-life crisis?

In the past (resume 1.0) was like web 1.0, it was static.  It described your education, experience from year 0 to current, awards, and had an objective statement something like “I need a challenging job where my under-utilized brain can thrive”  – Great, but if you saw one resume you saw them all.

Today the resume (2.0) is not about what you have done but what you can deliver.  While relevancy of experience to your objective is important, it is also how well you have put your knowledge together to deliver what the market wants.

So before writing a resume, study what the market needs (X).  Sit back and ask yourself what your true strengths (Y) and weaknesses are, and equally important, what you want to do (Z).  Synergy across these three axes is essential to getting your career on the right path.

Ideally you want to go after careers that fit all three axes (XYZ), and your resume should focus on XYZ (eliminating all other contents).  If your strengths strongly overlap what the market wants (XY), then you are in a very strong position to get a job, but it may not be what you want to do.   In such cases you need to focus on rebuilding your strengths.  A simple rule of thumb (for the experienced professional):  if your resume is under a page, then you have harmony in all three areas (XYZ), if your resume is about two pages it is either XY, XZ or YZ.  More than two pages is a good indicator of lack of synergy across the three axes.

One of the best examples of a resume was from a friend of mine who is a CIO in a Consumer Packaged Goods industry.  His entire resume was under half-a-page.  His resume read something like a CIO with 15 years relevant experience in the CPG industry and 10 years as a PM developing ERP systems for the CPG industry.  Even in a tough market he landed a position within weeks.

How do CIOs feel about outsourcing in today’s rough job market?

Although the IT market has started to show signs of recovery, the high rate of unemployment has all of us pondering on the impact of outsourcing.  Most confuse outsourcing with off-shoring, although a majority of the outsourcing firms use the blended (on-shore+off-shore) delivery models.  I gathered opinions from CIO’s using several sources:  1) Linkedin Discussions;  2) Blogs; 3) Articles in magazines; and of course, Uncle Google.

The results I will share here are not “academic strength”, i.e. it will not pass the technical publication test, but represents a summary of the various opinions that surfaced.  I assumed that all responders are equal in terms of knowledge, so I did not weight the quality of the responder.  However, I did apply a weight to the specific quality of the article.  Responders who were very coherent in their analysis were included in the tally, the others simply ommitted from consideration.  The results are shown in parenthesis:

Group A:  Responders who felt that IT outsourcing was beneficial (30%)

Group B:  Responders who felt that IT outsourcing was beneficial but had serious short comings as well (50%)

Group C:  Responders who felt that IT outsourcing was harmful (20%)

The results show that about 80% of the CIOs still favor outsourcing.  I wonder what the results would be if the responders were all IT professionals in transition.