Immediate Rejection

I'm pretty sure it's reasonable to toss someone's resume out of consideration for a writing position because there's a misspelling in their cover letter. Is that too harsh?

Posted on Sep 21, 2004

Comments

Not harsh at all. A cover letter is part of the first impression, along with the resume. If nothing else, those two documents should be error-free.

Posted by Jim Johnson | Tuesday, 21 Sep 2004 at 4:25 PM

I read freelance editing applications right up to the point where I encounter the first misspelling or grammatical error. Then I send them a "thanks anyway" note.

The occasional and obvious ytpo I can forgive, being somewhat dysqwertic myself. However, it doesn't endear an applicant to me, either.

Posted by Andrew Hackard | Tuesday, 21 Sep 2004 at 6:35 PM

Not in the least. Sack all mispellers!

Posted by Peter Hentges | Tuesday, 21 Sep 2004 at 10:37 PM

I agree completely. If you can't get it right when you have no time limits for proofreading and can have all of your friends review the letter, there really is no excuse. Also, if the typos are funny, please tell me because I save humorous examples for my students.

Posted by Stacey | Wednesday, 22 Sep 2004 at 9:48 AM

I would be more lenient. I am in legal publishing, where we try to pay a lot of attention to details (and everyone still misses a few from time to time).

I agree with Stacey that, given the time available to an applicant, the resume and cover letter should be error-free. A misspelling certainly puts the applicant closer to the rejected pile. But, I would not necessarily exclude an applicant with a spelling error.

Before soliciting applicants for a position, your business should have built a profile of the desired candidate. Both generally for your business and specifically for the open position (they sometimes vary a bit). I am not convinced that you help your business by automatic exclusion, for a misspelling, of individuals who otherwise meet the profile.

Perhaps your job profile is defined to require complete accuracy. But, complete accuracy is probably not possible from a single individual and, I would suggest, the job profile is not realistic.

Posted by Steve Anderson | Wednesday, 22 Sep 2004 at 10:18 AM

For an editor position, absolutely, nix'em right off. If the person can't do the editor job on their own, they won't do it for you. For a writing position, hrm. I would nix for a grammar flail, malapropism, or spelling mistake indicating ignorance, but maybe not a typo. A typo certainly doesn't help one's chances but I think it can be defeated by an eyepopping set of other qualifications and a stellar interview. But the other things had better be A- mazing. As a matter of fact, probably even G- or H-mazing.

On the other hand, I defer to Stacey. She knows more about these things than I do.

:)

Posted by | Wednesday, 22 Sep 2004 at 4:10 PM

Uhm, yeah, that last one was from me. Clearly, living in my cement-block home, I should set about casting stones immediately.

Posted by Betsy | Wednesday, 22 Sep 2004 at 4:12 PM

Speaking as somone who has sent out important documents with small typographical errors despite proofreading from myself and trusted others, I might be inclined to let one typo slide. On the other hand, I think in practice on the other side of the fence, 1) typos do not endear me, and 2) I usually assume for every error I catch on casual reading, I've missed at least one.

Posted by Margaret | Thursday, 23 Sep 2004 at 2:00 PM




Remember me?

(You may use HTML tags for style)


Powered by coffee, English, and Movable Type
Content and design ©2001-7 Jeff Tidball