Acronym

Like Jory, I believe we will in the not-too-distant future get to the point where the absence of any personal online presence will actually be a net negative in finding a good job. You can only learn so much from a resume and 2-3 interviews.

Here you can find additional information on how to write a perfect resume:

http://www.cvtips.com/resume_cover_letter.html

I definitely see things heading in that direction, too, Ben. But I wonder how the use of online archives to vet potential employees is going to change the tone of discussions online. Will people self-censor, just like they do in a job interview, since they know potential employers will be reading their online contributions? Or will people just use pseudonyms for more personal or controversial writing?

Admittedly it's a different situation, but consider the bloggers who were hired by the Edwards campaign. On the one hand, the campaign hired them because of their blogs and their connections in the left side of the blogosphere. On the other hand, their past posts came back to haunt them big-time.

I don't have a good sense of how things will play out; I'm mostly just curious to see how the increased reliance on online archives will change the nature of blogging and other online communication ...

I noticed a little factoid in this month's Fast Company that relates to this discussion: According to indeed.com, the percentage of online job listings using the word "resume" dropped from 27% in February 2005 to 20% in December 2006. Clearly this isn't definitive, but I thought it was an interesting bit of information.

When reading this post and the article, I was reminded of Nick Corcodilos work. For many years, Nick Corcodilos has written a weekly e-zine, "Ask the Headhunter," (http://www.asktheheadhunter.com) as well as a book by the same name. I've used Nick's techniques in both looking for jobs and contracts as well as when hiring employees. One of the main themes of Nick's approach is to provide prospective employers with a value proposition rather than a resume. I can certainly see how today's use of social media can play a very important role in building a case for what you can provide a prospective employer. I see a bigger challenge as a hiring manager of being able to leverage the vast blogosphere to find employees who could benefit an organization.
I could certainly envision some of the major job sites evolving in the next few years from a place to post your "resume" and expanding to a place to inventory your relevant work published through blogs, wikis, podcasts, etc. Personally, I think this would be very helpful. A hiring manager could have a multidimensional view of a candidate rather than a flat page that has been scanned for a few key words.
There's talk about the possibility sabotaging one's career through previous post activities. I have to think back in time that there have been many activities that people have engaged in during their past that may or may not be relevant to their current philosophy or capabilties. I've worked with many individuals, over the years, who tell tales of participating in civil protests to war or other social issues. Some of their recounts of those times include being arrested or having their picture in the media. I can imagine that in the time right after those events occurred, it may have sabotaged their ability to find work. A decade, or less, later these events have had very little impact on their career advancement. I have to wonder if social media posts may have a similiar impact on careers. While current posts may have a more direct impact. As time passes, society's acceptance of past posts will not weigh as heavy on a current decision.
Thanks for posting...got me thinking!