Here’s something we don’t talk about enough: the resume was invented in the 1400s — and not much has changed since.It was Leonardo da Vinci’s idea, actually. A handwritten summary of skills to win over a patron. Six centuries later, we’re still doing the same thing. Only now we upload it to an ATS and pray it survives the keyword filter. We live in a world of hyper-adaptable startups, AI copilots, behavioral data, and billion-dollar upskilling markets. And yet, we still ask people to prove their potential with bullet points. Why? Because most hiring systems today are built on two flawed assumptions: That a person’s past neatly predicts their future.
That what fits in a one-page PDF somehow represents who they really are. That a person’s past neatly predicts their future. That what fits in a one-page PDF somehow represents who they really are. Spoiler: it doesn’t. Resumes reward formatting, not capability Let’s be honest — resumes aren’t neutral. They’re carefully curated documents designed to pass through filters. They reward people who know the system. People with linear careers, brand-name credentials, and clean narratives. But the best hires I’ve seen? They’re often non-linear. They’ve switched industries. They’ve failed, recovered, and adapted. They lead not because of their title — but because of how they show up under pressure. A resume can’t tell you that. And yet, for most companies, it’s still the first gate. If you don’t make the cut there, you’re invisible. We’ve mistaken formatting for fitness. Buzzwords for behavior. And we’ve scaled that mistake using automation. We’ve mistaken formatting for fitness. Buzzwords for behavior. And we’ve scaled that mistake using automation. We’ve mistaken formatting for fitness. Buzzwords for behavior. And we’ve scaled that mistake using automation. Filters don’t fix the problem — they speed it up To deal with the volume, we added ATS systems. Then AI screeners. Then auto-responses that never come. Now people apply to 100 jobs and never hear back once. Companies complain about talent shortages. Candidates feel ghosted and demoralized. And here’s the twist: there’s no shortage of talent. What we have is a measurement failure. there’s no shortage of talent If your system is trained to match keywords, you’ll miss everyone who doesn’t speak the same language — literally or professionally. If you filter for credentials, you’ll miss the ones who learned by doing. If you interview for polish, you’ll overlook people who think more than they perform. So what do we end up with?High attrition. Poor team fit. A cycle of frustration that feels increasingly unfixable. But it’s not unfixable. We just need a better lens. What actually predicts success in today’s workplace?It’s not your degree. It’s not your last job title. It’s how you learn. How you communicate. How you operate in chaos. How you deal with failure. These are behavioral traits. They don’t show up on a CV — they show up in motion. in motion This is why some companies are experimenting with behavioral assessments, simulations, and game-based evaluations. Instead of asking people to write about what they’ve done, they’re watching how they think. They’re measuring what actually matters. A person’s behavior under uncertainty tells you more than a list of achievements ever could. A person’s behavior under uncertainty tells you more than a list of achievements ever could. A person’s behavior under uncertainty tells you more than a list of achievements ever could. Gen Z gets it. They’re just not waiting for us to catch up. This is also why Gen Z is losing faith in traditional hiring.They grew up online. They’re used to feedback loops, personalization, and learning through experience. When they apply to a job and get ghosted by an algorithm? They don’t call it a challenge — they call it broken. And they’re right. We built hiring systems for an old world. A predictable world. A world where pedigree signaled potential. But we don’t live there anymore. Now we need to build for the messy, fast, human side of work — where adaptability beats accuracy and curiosity beats credentials. So what now? We stop over-valuing the resume.We stop building systems that reward polish over potential.We start building ones that ask:How do you solve problems? How do you learn? How do you behave when things don’t go your way? How do you solve problems? How do you learn? How do you behave when things don’t go your way? I’m not saying we throw everything out. But if we want better hires, stronger teams, and more trust in the system — we need to start measuring the things that matter. measuring the things that matter We’ve had 600 years of resume logic. Maybe it’s time to see what happens when we start with behavior instead. By Dmitry Zaytsev, Founder of Dandelion Civilization By Dmitry Zaytsev, Founder of Dandelion Civilization

This story contains new, firsthand information uncovered by the writer.

The Resume Is a 600-Year-Old Mistake — And We’re Still Using It to Judge People

About Author

Comments

TOPICS

THIS ARTICLE WAS FEATURED IN

Related Stories

AI Won’t Kill Jobs First. It Will Kill the Way We Educate for Them.

The Noonification: How Often Do NFTs Pass The Howey Test? (1/13/2023)

Darwin's Hybrid Intelligence to Align AI & Human Goals for Startups & VCs

The Noonification: White Man (11/26/2022)

The Noonification: The Metaverse is a Sh*tshow (11/2/2022)

100 Days of AI Day 1: From Newsletter to Podcast, Leveraging AI for Audio Transformation

AI Won’t Kill Jobs First. It Will Kill the Way We Educate for Them.

The Noonification: How Often Do NFTs Pass The Howey Test? (1/13/2023)

Darwin's Hybrid Intelligence to Align AI & Human Goals for Startups & VCs

The Noonification: White Man (11/26/2022)

The Noonification: The Metaverse is a Sh*tshow (11/2/2022)

100 Days of AI Day 1: From Newsletter to Podcast, Leveraging AI for Audio Transformation

Light-Mode

Classic

Newspaper

Minty

Dark-Mode

Neon Noir

Minty

HN StartUps