The chronological resume seems to be the format of choice these days. That's where everyone makes a list, starting with the most current, of the jobs held and the main duties involved. It's factual; it's consistent; it is a terrible way to sell oneself.
Of course most folks seeking to hire aren't trained how to read a resume either - so if the resume writer can't tell a good story and the resume reader can't infer one... opportunities are lost.
Use the accepted chronological format but ask yourself a few questions as you write it:
- Do I want to only be seen as capable of doing a job I've done before? If no, then what skills and accomplishments can I highlight in each section that will let the reader see how my experience transfers neatly to this new role I'm seeking?
- Does each bullet point below each job title tell a story? Does it create an opening line for conversation around a skill or an accomplishment?
- What line merely reflects the table-stakes...the basic expectation of the job title above it...and do I really need to explain or include it?
- Have I included lots of adjectives or have I given concrete, unadorned examples of my skills and accomplishments?
Most of all, a resume should reflect the professional "you" that can be substantiated and enthusiastically endorsed ... first and foremost by your own stories and insight.