(Disclaimer: This is my perspective at a current trending news on social media in Vietnam. Link to post: Kenh14 – an online newspaper that is truly popular in Vietnam for youth with the same reputation as… Teen Vogue. 😉 )
1. CV
CV is like ‘ a parking ticket’ and has been always a hot topic in Vietnam to find a ‘common successful formula’ to eventually, ‘replicate’.
As a person who has been working in Human Resources for 5 years, I can confirm that the ticket is not everything.
A bit of story time:
I knew a junior. My junior has a cool website. In that website, the junior’s learning journey and experiences during 4 years of college were all captured in a comprehensive way: major lessons through competitions, activities; thoughts on the content she read.
I followed this junior and had always been a fan of her writing. Hence, I am always ready to introduce her to positions related to her experience. She has (more than one) job thanks to that website.
I also knew a senior. My senior participated in a competition. The senior’s performance in the competition was so good that the judge immediately offer my senior to work together.
A good CV is a ‘good ticket’ for you to land the job, but it’s never the only ticket.
Huong “Jean” Truong – yes, it’s me. 😉
But what makes a ‘good ticket’?
2. Student clubs
When scrolling through Facebook, I saw 14 shared posts that quoted a super-senior HR professional, like a CEO of a headhunting company in Vietnam saying:
“Among the CVs that I have read, the ones filled with club activities and contests are the lowest-rated type, even lower than those who have part-time jobs at bubble tea shops or clothing stores. Because they lack social exposure.”
Quoted from the senior HR professional
As a person who has been involved in club activities (a lot), took part in contests (a lot), worked part-time at a coffee shop (a lot), sold clothes at a youth cultural house fair (a little), and evaluated CVs to make interview decisions (a lot-lot), I can assure you that:
- one, no experience is more valuable than another, what matters is how we use or learn from that experience.
- two, society is a vast entity (like Tinder). meanwhile, enterprises or organizations are a very small, distinct, and different component (like Tinder users). And at the end of the day, you only need one suitable match.
Joining student clubs or contests are not wrong. Bubble tea and clothing are not wrong. It will only be a concern when we made decision mindlessly, without considering what our ‘desired destination’ needs.
3. Writing on Web 1.0 or short content
But I think what the senior HR Professional has her point, it’s just missing context.
One of the reasons I hate short content is its lack of necessary context to understand the full picture and objective of the statement in order to accommodate the timing.
One of the reasons I hate Web 1.0 is its lack of extended conversation to clarify on those contexts.
Considering this example:
“Don’t eat a lot of oranges, oranges are not good.”
and,
“It’s night time, i’m worried that if you’re suffering from acid reflux, don’t eat a lot of oranges, they contain a lot of acid and are not good.”
The latter sentence definitely clarifies the context, emotion, and purpose of the writer and may end up with less unnecessary debates.
But let’s not just blame Web 1.0, they are not the only ‘culprit’ in heated debates ‘thanks’ to this kind of editing style, but also the audience.
4. Writing on Web 2.0
In a recent conversation between me and a Founder working on a knowledge community product, I confided to her my fear of writing short content.
When writing short, I have to cut (much) context.
Without context, the content will (easily) become biased and subjective.
When biased, I will be (frequently) scolded as dumb.
And yes, there is nothing that scares this little Vietnamese girl more than being called dumb and acting improperly in public places.
But the Founder reminded me of something important: as humans, we are all subjective.
Subjectivity, surging emotions, fear of judgment, and so forth, all these things make us human instead of a machine.
And the issue is – this subjectivity and bias are not only present in the writer but also in the reader – the audience.
In the context of Web 2.0, the possibilities to meet our subjective audience is just – endless.
With that, the subjective audience (easily) scolds the writer as dumb instead of asking why the writer speaks like that, the context, intent, and goal of the writer.
And so, writers or content creators started to fear writing, fear speaking in public, causing knowledge to stagnate within them like a stagnant pool of water, instead of continuously moving to stay fresh, bringing more value to us all.
So, what?
A subjective thought of mine is that:
- To become a cooler writer, we need to pay more attention to the context, emotion, and objectives of what we are saying on Web 2.0. Putting a disclaimer, declaring our background, experience or most-benefitted audience may also help.
- To become a cooler reader, perhaps we should develop a habit of ‘co-creation’: sharing perspectives, asking constructive questions, providing yourself as a pattern or outlier data to the perspective.
In this way, everyone wins: the topic is spread on a larger scale, and we have more meaningful conversations and knowledge exchanges.
Huong, sometimes Jean's journey with the flaws 