Common Resume Mistakes and How to Fix Each One

Header photo by Jakub Żerdzicki on Unsplash. A stock photo, not a screenshot of AceDraft or of any ATS.

Common resume mistakes are easiest to fix from what you can see on your own page. Maybe the draft spills onto a page you didn't plan for, the dates won't line up, every bullet opens with "Responsible for", or the phone number vanished in the last round of edits. Each section below starts from one symptom like that and ends on a fix you can make the same day.

The sources I could read for this post are old or undated. Gabriel Sehringer's article for UMass Amherst's Isenberg School of Management was published on 23 September 2014, which makes it old advice by any measure. Sarah K. White's CIO article is dated 16 April 2021 and was first published in 2018, so it's old too, and I treat each of those two as one writer's advice and nothing more. The third, a Harvard Extension School careers page, showed no date at all when I read it on 13 October 2026.

None of these three sources says which mistake a recruiter notices first. None says that any single mistake gets a resume rejected. So I won't rank these by danger. I can't.

I haven't tested any of this on recruiters or on any employer's applicant tracking system (ATS). Where the post says something about resume software, you can check it against a known file: check in presale page for our demo resume and you can verify our claims in the opensource tool we have mentioned there.

AceDraft is pre-launch, with no users and nothing measured about anyone's applications. Every before-and-after sample below is an illustration I wrote, with [square brackets] where your own details go.

Why write it, then? When I pulled Google's US results for "common resume mistakes" through OpenSEO on 13 October 2026, four of the eight organic results were forum threads, and the four editorial pages among them were dated 2016, 2018, 2020 and 2025. I wanted a newer page that starts from the problem on your screen.

Which common resume mistakes can I spot on my own page?

The resume mistakes you can catch yourself are the visible ones: a page that runs long or feels crammed, a layout that makes you hunt, bullets that only list duties, wording that would fit anyone, missing contact details, typos, and gaps with nothing written about them. You don't need software for any of them. You need the page in front of you and some patience.

Harvard Extension School's Office of Career Services lists six top resume mistakes on a page that shows no date (as of 13 October 2026): failing to tailor the resume to the position or industry, spelling and grammar errors, missing contact information, using passive language in place of action verbs, a lack of organization, conciseness or skimmability, and not demonstrating results.

As of 13 October 2026, the heading above that list on Harvard's page says "Top Five". I counted six. Twice.

I read it as one career office's list. Harvard's page (as of 13 October 2026) doesn't say the six are ranked by how often each mistake happens, so I haven't treated the first item as the most frequent one.

I've used Harvard's six as the frame for this post and regrouped them by how close you have to get to the page to see each problem. Length and layout show from across the room. A typo needs a slow read with your nose almost on the paper. Gaps, file format and confidential details aren't on Harvard's list as of 13 October 2026; I added them because the UMass article (23 September 2014) and the CIO one (16 April 2021), both old, cover them.

The table is the short version of how to fix a resume you've already written. The "likely cause" column is my reading of why each symptom shows up, and the last column says where each fix stops working.

What do I do when my resume runs too long or feels crammed?

Cut the content by how relevant it is to the job you're applying for, and give each remaining bullet a single idea, before you touch the font size or the margins. I treat a crammed page as a length problem in disguise, and shrinking the type only hides it.

On length itself, CIO's article dated 16 April 2021, which is old advice now, says the standard guidance is one or two pages, that entry-level candidates usually fit on one, and that seasoned IT professionals may need three. That's one outlet's guidance. I have no data of my own to set against it, so I'm not adding a page count.

The Isenberg article published 23 September 2014, also old and relaying advice from a Google executive's LinkedIn post, says you don't need to stuff a resume with details, because you can go deeper on relevant experience in an interview. I find that the most useful permission in this whole topic. The page is a set of openings for a conversation, and every bullet you cut is still yours to talk about.

Here's how I'd cut a long draft, in this order:

1. Print it, or save it as a PDF, and put the job posting next to it.
2. Next to each bullet, write K, S or C: keep, shorten, cut. Judge each one only against this posting. A bullet you're proud of can still get a C.
3. Shorten the older roles first. A job from years ago can drop to its title, dates and one line, unless it's the best match for the posting.
4. Find the bullets holding two ideas joined by "and" and split them, then merge any two bullets that make the same point.
5. Only now look at spacing. If the page is still over, go back to step 2 and be harsher.

Shrinking the font to get under a page break is the move I'd skip. It keeps every word and makes all of them harder to read, which is the opposite of what a cut is for.

If you're early in your career, the entry-level line in CIO's old article of 16 April 2021 is the one aimed at you, and your problem may be filling the page instead of trimming it. I've covered what goes in the space where a job history would be in a resume without work experience.

How do I fix a resume layout that's hard to scan?

A layout gets easier to scan when every entry looks the same: one date format everywhere, job titles and employers in the same spot, plain section headings, and a clear gap between entries so each one reads as its own block. Harvard's page (as of 13 October 2026) asks for resume language that is easy to scan quickly, and predictable placement is how a page gets there.

A quick test I'd use: glance at the page for a moment, look away, and try to say your last two job titles with their dates. If you had to hunt for them, the layout is doing too little of the work.

The fixes, roughly from most visible to least:

• Dates. Pick one format, such as [Mon YYYY] to [Mon YYYY], and put every date in the same position in every entry.
• Headings in plain words. Experience, Education, Skills, Projects. A clever heading can make a reader stop and work out what it means.
• Bold used for one job only; I'd keep it for job titles. Bold scattered through sentences fights the headings for attention, and then nothing stands out.
• Bullets that start at the same indent and wrap to the same indent, so the left edge of the page reads as a straight line you can run your eye down.

Columns, tables and text boxes raise a separate question: how software reads them, which a person looking at the page can't judge. I keep that question out of this post and cover it in what makes an ATS resume template safe to use.

In AceDraft's free guest editor, there are six templates: Engineer, which is selected by default, then Americano, Paper, Telephone, Straight Forward and Evened. Picking one of them is a layout decision. Everything else in this post is about the words, and no template choice writes those for you.

What do I do when my bullets read like a job description?

Rewrite each duty-style bullet so it opens with what you did and ends with what changed because you did it. Two of Harvard's six mistakes (as of 13 October 2026) meet in this problem: passive language in place of action verbs, and not demonstrating results.

A duty tells the reader what the job was. A result tells them what you did with it, and Harvard's page (as of 13 October 2026) asks for language that is fact-based, quantified and qualified when possible. "Qualified" matters here. If you don't have a number, describe the change in words, such as a problem that stopped recurring or a process someone else could now run without you. I'd rather leave a bullet with no number than one I can't explain, because that's the line I'd expect a follow-up question on.

Two pairs, both illustrations I wrote. The brackets stay empty until you have the real detail.

Illustration, before. Responsible for customer emails and the support inbox.

After. Answered [N] customer emails a week in [tool] and wrote [N] reply templates that [the team] now uses for [the most frequent question].

Illustration, before. Helped with social media for the college fest.

After. Planned and posted [N] [platform] updates for [the fest] over [N] weeks; [what changed, such as sign-ups for (event) closing early].

Look at what changed in the first pair. "Responsible for" became "Answered", the inbox got a size, and the templates turned a duty into something that outlasted the person who wrote them. The second pair swaps "helped with", which hides how much you did, for the two things you actually did.

Picking the verb is its own small job. I've grouped resume action verbs by kind of work in a separate post.

Heads up. If a figure came from a guess, the bracket stays a bracket. Write the bullet without the number, and add it only once you can say where it came from.

How do I fix a resume that reads like it could be anyone's?

By swapping each general claim for something specific from your own work. Where the job posting names a skill you really have, use the posting's word for it. Failing to tailor the resume to the position or industry is the first item on Harvard's list (as of 13 October 2026), and the same page asks for language that is specific rather than general.

Try the swap test. Put a classmate's or colleague's name at the top of your resume and read it again. Every line that still holds true is a line that isn't telling anyone about you. A summary like "motivated professional seeking growth" fails this test on the first read; my resume summary examples show what a specific one looks like.

The fix for a resume that could be anyone's is mostly tailoring, which I've written up step by step in tailor a resume to a job description. Finding the posting's words is covered in my post on resume keywords, so I won't repeat it here.

What basics are easy to miss in the contact details and sections?

The contact block and the section labels are the basics to re-check item by item before each application, since a header written once can go stale without anything on the page looking wrong. Missing contact information is one of Harvard's six mistakes (as of 13 October 2026). Neither the UMass article (23 September 2014) nor the CIO one (16 April 2021), both old, covers contact details at all.

Here's the check I'd run on the header, slowly, against the exported file:

• Your name, spelled the way it appears on your other documents.
• A phone number with the country code if you're applying across borders.
• An email address you read every day. If you set up a separate address for applications, set a reminder to check it, or it becomes a place where replies go to wait.
• Your city or region, if the posting asks where you're based.
• Every link you list, clicked from inside the PDF itself. A profile URL that worked last year can break when a username changes.

Section labels have their own small traps. A resume with an Objective heading and a Summary heading saying the same thing twice is one; an empty heading left over from a template is another.

In AceDraft's guest editor the sections run in this order: Basics, Professional Summary, Social Profiles, Skills, Languages, Education, My Experience, Volunteer Details, Publications, Awards, Certificates Earned, Interests, Projects and References. That's fourteen, and I built all of them, but I'd only fill the ones you have something true to put in.

There's no separate Objective section. If you want an objective line, it goes in the Professional Summary box, and resume objective examples covers when it's worth having one at all. Each Skills entry asks for a category, a proficiency level and comma-separated keywords; how to fill those is in my guide to the resume skills section.

How do I proofread a resume properly?

Proofread the exact file you're going to send, reading it from the bottom up first and then giving it to a second reader. I'd do both, because they work on different things: one changes how you read, the other changes who reads.

The bottom-up tip comes from the Isenberg article published on 23 September 2014, an old piece passing on a Google executive's advice: reading from the bottom up lets your brain isolate words more easily, so spelling and grammar errors stand out. My guess at why: when you read top to bottom, the sentence carries you along and you see what you meant to write.

The second-reader tip comes from CIO's article dated 16 April 2021, also old, which suggests having a trusted colleague review the resume because fresh eyes catch errors the author misses. I'd give that reader one instruction: circle anything you had to read twice. A line someone stumbles over is worth fixing even when it's spelled correctly.

A spell checker lets these resume errors through, so they need a human pass:

• A real word in the wrong place: "form" for "from", "manger" for "manager".
• Employer and product names, which a dictionary doesn't know.
• The same tool spelled two ways in two sections, such as JavaScript and Javascript.
• Dates that disagree between your experience entries and your education.
• Tense drift, where a past job's bullets slip into the present tense halfway down.

Read it aloud as a final pass. Saying every word out loud means you have to say the missing one too, or notice that you can't.

And read the exported PDF, since that's the file you'll send. A page break only shows up in the exported file, so that's where to look for a heading stranded at the bottom of page one. For the software-side checks before you press apply, I keep a pre-apply ATS checklist separate from this one.

What about gaps, a PDF file, and confidential details?

A gap in your dates doesn't have to be explained on the page, and anything confidential or untrue should come out before you send the file, which I'd send as a PDF unless the posting asks for something else.

Gaps between jobs

CIO's article dated 16 April 2021, old guidance by now, says you don't have to explicitly include gaps in your career history, and recommends presenting time away in terms of the skills you gained. I have nothing newer on gaps, and I haven't seen anything that shows how a gap gets read.

If you do choose to write the time down, keep it as plain as any other entry. An illustration:

Illustration. Career break, [Mon YYYY] to [Mon YYYY]. Cared for [a family member]; completed [course] in [subject].

In AceDraft, a course from that time can go under Certificates Earned, and unpaid work under Volunteer Details. There's no section built specifically for career breaks.

Sending a PDF

The Isenberg article of 23 September 2014, old but still the only source I have on file format, says to save your resume as a PDF to avoid formatting inconsistencies across different computers and devices. A posting or an application form can still ask for a different file, and its instructions win.

After you press Save in AceDraft's guest editor, the progress screen offers a free ATS-ready plain-text PDF with no sign-up, no payment and no watermark; on the web it opens your browser's print dialog, where you pick Save as PDF. I've written about why that free option exists in what a free builder should include, and the step-by-step is in save your resume as a PDF from the AceDraft editor.

There's also a paid polished export, which the AceDraft table further down describes. Both exports are PDF only, with no DOCX, so if a form insists on a Word file, AceDraft can't produce one today.

Confidential and untrue details

The same Isenberg article (23 September 2014), old as it is, suggests a "front page of the Times" test for confidential information, and says not to include false information. Put plainly: if you wouldn't want a line printed in a newspaper with your employer's name next to it, take it out.

The lines I'd check against that test are client names covered by an agreement, internal revenue or budget figures, and unreleased product names. Try describing the same work by its size and type, such as "a [sector] client" or "a [N]-person rollout", without naming anything you shouldn't. False information doesn't need a test. It comes out.

Does AceDraft find these mistakes for me?

AceDraft can help with one symptom on this list at most, the resume that could be anyone's. The table lists what each part of AceDraft does next to the place where it stops, in the same row.

The scan compares your resume with that one pasted job description using my own scoring. It isn't any employer's ATS, it has no access to one, and nobody has checked its score against Workday, Greenhouse or any other named system. I also haven't re-tested how well it pulls keywords out of a job description in this batch of posts, and an earlier batch recorded scans that came back with zero keywords.

If you do run it, how to read your scan explains each part of the results, and ATS myths, checked covers what a score like that can and can't mean.

Author's take. I'd point the scan at one symptom only, the resume that could be anyone's, because comparing a resume with a posting is the job I built it to do. The other symptoms in this post I'd fix by hand with the table and a printout. It's slightly odd to write that about my own product, and it's still what I'd do.

What haven't I tested?

I haven't tested any of this on recruiters or on any employer's ATS, so nothing here tells you which fix changes what happens to an application. The full list of what I haven't checked:

• No outcome data. I haven't measured any fix in this post against what happened to an application afterwards.
• Nobody has read the before-and-after illustrations, not a recruiter and not a hiring manager.
• Whether AceDraft's free scan flags length, typos or layout (the section above lists its other limits).
• Templates. I haven't run each of the six guest-editor templates through a parser test, so I won't call any of them ATS-proof.
• Whether reading bottom-up catches more errors for you than reading top-down. The tip is from the old Isenberg article of 23 September 2014, and I'm passing it on untested.

For the resume-software claims, there's a file you can check without trusting me: check in presale page for our demo resume and you can verify our claims in the opensource tool we have mentioned there.

That tool is ATS Screener (ats-screener.vercel.app). As of 13 October 2026 it describes itself as open source, simulates Workday, Oracle Taleo, iCIMS, Greenhouse, Lever and SAP SuccessFactors, and says it isn't affiliated with any of them. A simulation is somebody's model of those systems, which is the same caveat I put on my own scan, and I haven't recorded any scores from it.

Use this guide if you have a full draft and want to go through it symptom by symptom, with the diagnostic table open and a printout on the desk.

Skip it if you haven't written a draft yet, or if what you need to know is how one particular employer's system handles your file. Nothing in this post can answer that.

Sources

• Harvard Extension School Office of Career Services, HES: Create Impactful Resumes and Cover Letters. No date shown on the page (footer copyright 2026); read 13 October 2026.
• Gabriel Sehringer, 20,000 Resumes Later: Common Resume Mistakes and Quick Fixes (UMass Amherst Isenberg School of Management). Published 23 September 2014, an old article; read 13 October 2026.
• Sarah K. White, Common resume mistakes and how to fix them (CIO). Dated 16 April 2021, originally published 27 March 2018; read 13 October 2026.
• OpenSEO, Google US results for "common resume mistakes" (checked 13 October 2026).
• AceDraft, AceDraft presale page. Read 13 October 2026.