A 1979 study by the Columbia University School of Business found that a woman's attractiveness worked against her when she applied for managerial positions. The authors concluded that if a woman wanted to advance in her career she had to appear unappealing and as masculine as possible .
This result has been confirmed by a recent study, which shows something much worse: being attractive reduces the chances of getting a first job interview by up to 30% , which is not the case with men.
To conduct this study, Israeli scientists sent resumes to more than 2,500 actual job postings. The detail was that they sent two practically identical resumes for each offer, but with only one difference: the photo. In one, the alleged candidate did not send a photo, while in the other a photo of an attractive man or woman or of a common man or woman was sent. Who would the company call for this first interview?
Calls to resumes with a photo of an attractive man were significantly higher than those sent without a photo, and almost twice as high as those with a photo of an ordinary-looking man. In contrast, those of attractive women received fewer calls for that first interview while candidates without a photo were the ones who obtained a higher percentage.
The conclusion is obvious: if you are a handsome man, put your photo on the resume; If you are a beautiful woman, do not put it.
