Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.

Journal Article 1: Schullery, N. M., Ickes, L., & Schullery, S. E. (2009). Employer preferences for résumés and cover letters. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 72, 163-176.

Abstract: This article reports the results of a survey of employers' preferences for résumé style, résumé delivery method, and cover letters. Employers still widely prefer the standard chronological résumé, with only 3% desiring a scannable résumé. The vast majority of employers prefer electronic delivery, either by email (46%) or at the company's Web site (38%), with only 7% preferring a paper copy. Cover letters are preferred by a majority (56%). Preferences regarding résumé style and cover letters were independent of national (USA) vs. multinational geographic range, company size, type of industry, or respondent's job function. Smaller companies prefer résumé delivery by email, and human resources workers prefer delivery using the company's Web site.

Journal Article 2: Amare, N., & Manning, A. (2009). Writing for the robot: How employer search tools have influenced résumé rhetoric and ethics. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 72, 35-60.

Abstract: To date, business communication scholars and textbook writers have encouraged résumé rhetoric that accommodates technology, for example, recommending keyword-enhancing techniques to attract the attention of searchbots: customized search engines that allow companies to automatically scan résumés for relevant keywords. However, few scholars have discussed the ethical implications of adjusting résumé keywords for the sole purpose of increasing searchbot hits. As the résumé genre has evolved over the past century, strategies of résumé “padding” have likewise evolved, at each stage violating one of four maxims of the Cooperative Principle. Direct factual misrepresentation violates the maxim of quality and is of course discouraged, but résumé writers have turned in succession to violations of manner (formatting tricks) and then more recently to violations of quantity and/or relevance with deceptive keywording techniques. The authors conclude by suggesting several techniques to business communication instructors that may encourage students to create more ethically sound résumés.

Journal Article 3: Lipovsky, C. (2008). Constructing affiliation and solidarity in job interviews. Discourse & Communication, 2, 411-432.

Abstract: Success in job interviews depends largely on the interviewers' favourable opinion of the candidates' presentation, and how well candidates have managed to build solidarity with their interviewers. This article explores the ways in which candidates shape their talk to interact interpersonally with their interviewers, so as to construct affiliation and solidarity. Drawing on Systemic Functional Linguistics Appraisal theory, in particular its system of Attitude, this article examines a set of authentic job interviews in French, or French and English. The interview analyses are complemented by the candidates' comments on the impressions they had tried to convey and the interviewers' comments about their impressions of the candidates. The analysis identifies two strategies whereby candidates may construct affiliation and solidarity with their interviewers: expressing their enthusiasm for and interest in their work and profession, and demonstrating their professional ability. It also highlights the damaging effect of expressing negative feelings and opinions.

Journal Article 4: Parton, S. R., Siltanen, S. A., Hosman, L. A., & Langenderfer, J. (2002). Employment interview outcomes and speech style effects. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 21, 144-161.

Abstract: This study examines the effects of powerful versus powerless speech styles on employment interview outcomes, extending and refining research by Wiley and Eskilson. Undergraduate and professional respondents listened to one of eight audiotaped interviews manipulated by speech style, interviewer gender, and interviewee gender and evaluated the interviewees’ dynamism, social attractiveness, competence, and employability on Likert-type scales. Results indicate that a powerful speech style results in positive attributions of competence and employability and that professional respondents evaluated the speech styles differently than did undergraduates. Implications for the employment interview are discussed, and directions for future research are also identified.