Why these mistakes are so common
The CV advice most people receive was written before ATS systems became standard. Formatting guidance from career coaches, university career centres, and online templates often prioritises how the document looks in a PDF viewer — not whether it parses correctly when fed into recruitment software.
The result is a large number of candidates submitting CVs that look professional on screen but produce garbled, incomplete, or blank records inside the ATS. They never know because the rejection email simply says they were not selected to proceed.
The mistakes below fall into three categories: formatting errors that break parsing, file and submission errors, and content errors that affect both the ATS score and the human reader who eventually opens the document.
Formatting mistakes that break ATS parsing
These are the most damaging mistakes because they affect the parsed record before any scoring begins. A CV that cannot be parsed correctly will score poorly regardless of how relevant the candidate's experience is.
Multi-column layouts
ATS parsers read documents left to right, top to bottom — the same way plain text is extracted from a file. A two-column CV gets its columns merged into a single stream of text, which means your skills section ends up mixed into your job titles, your employer names land next to your education dates, and the whole record becomes garbled. The ATS can still score it, but it will score against nonsense.
Tables used to organise content
Tables are a common way to arrange skills or work history neatly in Word or Google Docs. Most ATS systems either skip table content entirely or extract it in an unpredictable order. If your skills are in a table, there is a real possibility the ATS never reads them — meaning you score zero on skills matching regardless of how qualified you are.
Contact information in headers or footers
Putting your name, email, and phone in the document header seems logical — it appears at the top of every page. The problem is that many ATS systems do not parse headers and footers at all. They extract the body text only. Your contact details may exist in the document but be completely invisible to the system processing your application.
Text boxes
Text boxes in Word are treated as floating objects, not document text. The content inside them is frequently skipped by ATS parsers entirely. If you have a summary or key skills block inside a text box, the ATS may never read it.
Graphics, icons, and photos
ATS systems parse text. They cannot read images. A CV with skill ratings shown as filled circles, a profile photo, or decorative icons may look polished in a PDF viewer, but those elements contribute nothing to your parsed record. Worse, if the layout depends on graphics to convey information — such as a visual skill bar that says '85% Python' — that information simply does not exist in the parsed output.
A single-column layout in a standard word processor with no tables, no text boxes, no headers or footers for key content, and no graphics. Fonts should be standard system fonts — Arial, Calibri, Georgia — not decorative or custom fonts that may not embed correctly in a PDF. All information should live in the main document body as plain, selectable text.
File and submission mistakes
Submitting a scanned PDF
A scanned PDF is an image file, not a text file. It looks identical to a real PDF on screen, but when an ATS tries to extract text from it, there is nothing to extract. The entire application becomes a blank record. This happens when people scan a printed CV or export from certain older software. Always export directly to PDF from a word processor — never scan.
Ignoring the format specified in the job posting
Some job postings specifically request DOCX, others request PDF. When a company asks for DOCX, it often means their system or recruiter will edit or annotate the file directly. Sending PDF when DOCX is requested, or vice versa, signals that you did not read the posting carefully — and in some systems, an unexpected format causes parsing errors.
Generic or unhelpful file names
Recruiters who download multiple CVs see the file name before they open the document. A file named 'CV.pdf' or 'Resume_FINAL_v3.pdf' is immediately less professional than 'Sarah_Chen_Product_Manager.pdf'. This does not affect ATS parsing, but it affects the recruiter's first impression before the document opens.
Content mistakes that affect your score and the human reader
Non-standard section headers
ATS systems are built to recognise standard section names: Work Experience, Education, Skills, Summary, Certifications. Creative alternatives — 'My Career Story', 'Where I Have Been', 'Things I Know' — are often not recognised. When a section header is not recognised, the content under it may be ignored or misclassified. Use standard labels.
Missing Skills section
Skills matching is one of the highest-weighted factors in ATS scoring. If your CV has no identifiable Skills section, the ATS may score you zero for skills regardless of what appears in your job descriptions. Many systems look for a dedicated Skills section specifically — they do not always extract skills mentioned in bullet points under job titles.
Abbreviations without the full form
If a job description says 'Project Management Professional' and your CV says 'PMP', some ATS systems will not connect the two. The reverse is also true: if you write 'Project Management Professional' and the job description uses 'PMP', you may miss the match. The safest approach is to include both — 'PMP (Project Management Professional)' — at least once.
Inconsistent date formatting
ATS parsers calculate your total years of experience by reading date ranges across your work history. If some roles use 'January 2021', others use '01/2021', and others use 'Jan 21', the parser may misread your timeline — calculating gaps that do not exist, or miscounting total experience. Pick one format and use it throughout.
Job descriptions written as responsibilities, not outcomes
This one affects the human reader more than the ATS, but it is worth including because it is the most common reason CVs are dismissed once a recruiter opens them. 'Responsible for managing social media accounts' tells a recruiter nothing. 'Grew Instagram following from 4,000 to 22,000 in 14 months through weekly content testing' tells them everything. Every bullet point should answer: what did you actually achieve?
The one thing that covers most of these mistakes
Most of the formatting mistakes above stem from using a template designed to look impressive rather than one designed to parse correctly. The fix is simple: use a clean, single-column template in a standard word processor, export as a proper PDF (not a scan), and keep all content in the main body text.
The content mistakes — missing sections, abbreviations, inconsistent dates, responsibilities without outcomes — stem from applying the same CV to every role without checking what each specific job description is looking for. A CV that lists skills the job description does not mention, and omits skills the job description emphasises, will score poorly even if the candidate is qualified.
This is why tailoring matters. Not as a general best practice, but as the specific fix for most of the content-related mistakes on this list. Each application needs a version of your CV that uses the language, keywords, and structure that application expects.
Before you submit: a quick checklist
Continue reading
How ATS Systems Work: Inside the Machine That Screens Your CV
Understand exactly how ATS parsers read, score, and rank applications.
How to Tailor Your CV to a Job Description
The step-by-step process for matching your CV language to each specific role.
What Is an ATS Match Score?
What the percentage means, what drives it, and where the practical ceiling is.
How JOBVIAN Automates CV Tailoring
See how JOBVIAN finds jobs, scores your CV, and rewrites it for each role.