When applying for a job, I think a CV should be targeted to the role being advertised. In the role I recently advertised I wrote that the applicant must have a keen interest in manufacturing. There wasn't a single applicant who mentioned manufacturing in their application.
Now you might argue that saying they were interested in manufacturing is pretty meaningless unless they can prove it. Without proof it's just words. But I used the job requirements as a signal to see if they are able to read my instructions and follow my commands. I effectively asked them to mention manufacturing and they didn't bother. So in a work situation, I can't trust them to follow my e-mail request and perform a job exactly as I requested. They're sloppy. They only do 80% of what I ask. However good they are at IT, I won't be happy with them failing to listen to my request fully.
Old man rant:
When I first graduated it was pre-internet. When applying for a job I would cycle to the public library in order to look up the company I was applying for in various business directories to get as much background as I could. It took ages. Now you can look up our company in 30 seconds, but still it's clear that most applicants can't be bothered. Most people just seem to just upload their CV to Monster.com and sit back and relax.
OK, now it may be that the role I'm offering isn't very attractive. So maybe applicants aren't really bothered about getting an interview. But in that case, why bother applying in the first place? It's just waiting my time and theirs.
True story:
A recent applicant at my place was called for interview and e-mailed the HR Manager and asked her for directions in text speak. Something like "Can u tell my how to get to your office". Failed on two counts:
- Use of text speak to the HR Manager
- Inability to Google directions.
Kids today, huh?