Viewed in Harvard Business Review
Attitudes toward resume gaps are evolving, but the change is complex and nuanced, as highlighted by Boris Groysberg and Eric Lin in their Harvard Business Review article.
Historically seen as a red flag, these gaps are now more openly discussed, influenced by the pandemic, generational shifts, and social media. LinkedIn’s 2022 survey revealed that nearly two-thirds of respondents had taken a career break, and the platform introduced a “Career Breaks” feature to reflect this trend.
Despite this growing openness, resume gaps still carry a stigma.
A 2019 ResumeGo study showed that callback rates decline significantly with longer gaps, even when reasons are provided.
Training and education as gap reasons mitigated this effect slightly, but gaps still impacted job prospects. A 2023 LinkedIn poll of over 400 managers found that 61% still viewed resume gaps negatively, citing concerns about reliability, motivation, retention, and skill atrophy.
These perceptions also extend to compensation.
Data from the Great Recession era indicates that while executives with resume gaps received a 14% pay raise when switching jobs, those without gaps saw a 22% increase.
This gap in pay is particularly pronounced for younger executives and in larger firms. Moreover, women with resume gaps face a consistent 9% pay penalty across employers, while for men, the penalty appears primarily during job transitions.
Take-aways
In summary, while resume gaps are more common and openly discussed today, they still negatively impact hiring and compensation, especially in larger firms and for early-career professionals.
The stigma is persistent, suggesting that employers continue to view these gaps as signals of lower candidate quality, with implications for hiring practices and pay equity.
Why have we selected this article? This HBR article offers fresh, insightful perspectives on resume gaps, making it an essential read for professionals at any level in the workforce.
