ResumeWorld

Screening guide

How to Screen Marketing Resumes

Marketers write persuasive documents for a living, and their resume is the one with the highest personal stakes. Growth numbers are real but rarely attributable to one person; channel expertise is claimed broadly and held narrowly. The screening job is to work out which part of the described outcome this candidate actually moved, and whether the stage of company they did it at resembles yours.

Signal

What actually matters on these resumes

Attributable contribution

"Grew traffic 300%" is a company outcome. Look for the specific lever this person pulled.

Channel depth

Paid, SEO, lifecycle and content are separate crafts. Breadth across all four at a junior level usually means depth in none.

Stage match

Building a channel from zero and optimising a mature one need almost opposite instincts.

Budget scale

Managing a £5k monthly spend does not prepare someone for £500k, and the resume rarely distinguishes them.

Strategy versus execution

Both are legitimate hires. Confusing them at screening stage is how a role gets filled wrong.

Noise

Red flags worth a second look

None of these is disqualifying on its own. Each is a reason to ask a question rather than assume an answer.

Every metric expressed as a percentage with no absolute base

Channel list that reads like a tool directory

Results claimed from a period the tenure dates do not cover

No portfolio, samples or live work for a role that produces public output

Rubric

A screening rubric for marketing roles

Write the criteria down before you look at anyone. An undocumented standard drifts, and it cannot be audited afterwards.

01

Primary channel

Demonstrated depth in the channel the role is actually about.

02

Stage and motion fit

Experience at a comparable company stage and go-to-market motion.

03

Attributable results

Outcomes described with enough specificity to trace to the candidate's own work.

04

Budget and scope

Spend and team scale in the range the role requires.

05

Evidence of output

Portfolio, published work or samples where the role produces public artefacts.

Next step

Questions that separate the shortlist

Ask the same ones of every candidate. Comparability is the whole point.

  • Which part of that result was yours, and how do you know?
  • What did you try that did not work, and what did you learn from it?
  • What was the budget, and what was the constraint on spending more?
  • Show me a piece of work you would put your name on publicly.

FAQ

Screening marketing: common questions

How do I screen for marketers when everyone claims growth?
Score attributability rather than magnitude. A rubric that rewards specificity — the lever, the baseline, the mechanism — ranks the candidates whose claims are checkable above the ones whose claims are merely large.
Should a portfolio be required?
For roles producing public output, ask for it in the application form rather than checking for it after screening. Collecting it at intake means the signal is there for the first pass.

Apply this rubric to your marketing pipeline

Define the criteria once, screen every application against them, and get a ranked shortlist with the reasoning attached.