Best Practices: Do you still need to put your physical address on your resume?

From a recruiting standpoint I fully understand wanting to see the physical location listed on the resume that shows where someone is commuting from. On the other hand, without fully realizing it, we end up discriminating and knocking qualified candidates out of the candidate pool because of distance they will "have" to commute to work. Another way to look at it would be the distance they are "willing" to commute in order to work at your perspective company. I might be wrong, but I believe if a resume catches your attention with the skills and experience listed you probably owe it to yourself, and the candidate, to at least test the waters with a quick phone interview. You might find out they are an excellent fit for the position, or that they are wanting (needing) to relocate but have to find a job in your area in order to do so. After that you can make the decision if you are interested on bringing them in for a full in person interview or go on to the next candidate.

A physical address is something that I've considered a staple in a model resume. I don't see a new and compelling reason to eliminate this yet. In fact, it may be necessary to know how local someone is for some positions - such as a job that requires at least 3 years experience with new york real estate on a local level. If I saw a resume from California doing real estate in California, I most likely wouldnt interview based on the requirements of the job. In addition, I know many people don't send out hand written notes any more, but I've sent portfolio's back home to applicants that haven't gotten a job with us because I know they spent money and time preparing this.

I strongly agree with Dave on the addition of electronic/social media address. This shows that there is involvement and some kind of understanding of this new era of communication.

It should be case by case based on the positions location. Personally, when i am hiring I like to know the individual lives reasonably close to the office. This way I know traffic will not be a major factor in performance.

Thank you for this interesting question. As a human resources professional, I think it is a best practice for candidates to include their city, state, and zip code at a minimum. The professional screening the resume may believe there is something missing from the resume if this is left off, and the candidate may be eliminated from consideration. Hiring managers appreciate the opportunity to know the commuting distance or at least expenses for bringing candidates in for interviews if it is a far distance. If the person is looking to relocate and have access to a temporary local address in the city and state they are targeting, they could include their permanent address and temporary address to show they have access to move quickly. This is often a technique for college students which enable them to apply to jobs in their home towns and in their college towns. I agree with some of the posts that recruiters should look at candidates skills and abilities first, but this does not make it a best practice to leave off location. My recommendation would be to include that information, As an HR Professional, I like to see that information.

I would ask whether anyone thinks that omitting one's address would assist in getting the interview. Personally, I would wonder why a person whose resume I received would omit his/her address. Some may assume (especially if no moving expenses would be reimbursed) that the applicant was tryuing to hide the fact that he/she lived out of commuting range.

I would still put city and state on the resume. More important though to start to integrate key pieces of information that show familiarity with social media tools and a broad network. Linkedin profile and recommendations are a perfect starting point.

I think a location of some sort is an essential, the employer should be able to at least determine where you are to be able to make decisions around practicality of interviewing, relocation etc.

I don't think you need a street address anymore, but I don't think it hurts either.

I can understand why some people don't want to list their street address for safety and identity theft concerns. I do appreciate at least a city and zip code.

I tend to put my city and state, but not street address. The street address can be placed on an employment application later, either in print or on-line. Having an e-mail address and/or a LinkedIn.com profile address is probably much more value-added.

I agree with Dave above.
It is although entirely not necessary to give the full street address in the resume, having city and state will be relevant when people are searching for local candidates.
http://resume-template.net/

I definitely think it should be included. Why leave any information off of your resume that might unintentionally remove you from consideration. Many recruiters use address info to pre-qualify candidates for location. Also, many ATS and/or ERP systems "grab" this information to store in their systems, thereby eliminating the need for unnecessary data entry. And, believe it or not, some companies actually still send rejection/acceptance letters via snail mail.

Yes, I belive that physical address should be put on the resume as it saves the recruiter lot of time, specially in the current market where employers do not have relocation budget.

I recently was supporting a lot of folks with preparing their CVs. They are entering the job market and relocating to different cities for job opportunities. Thus, it was necessary to add the city where they are from and where they are presently based.
I think the art is of accomodating the address in a manner that doesnt block a lot of space on the resume.
I think that a direct contact number is necessary, the rest can be clarified if needed.
Social network addresses are only to facilitate understanding the match between the person and the organizational culture.

Well, I don't know what's the practice in the US, however in Europe the address is important to understand how easy/difficult would it be for the potential candidate to commute to work.

The answer is yes. I currently recruit globally and sometimes having a local candidate is what is needed due to the fact of 1) not paying relocation costs 2) it is an 'immediate' fill and someone that is not local will need time to relocate and 3) need someone that is familiar with local market practices. When I am recruiting the first couple of things I look at is physical addresss. Those that do not have a physical address I wind up asking where they live.

Claud

I would have to agree with those who suggest including city, state and zip, although I see no benefit to providing an actual street address unless a candidate wishes to do so. Without knowing the location of a candidate, an employer can waste a good bit of both their time and the candidate's if the candidate gets far enough along in the interview process that both are excited about the opportunity, only to find out the candidate will require re-location assitance which the company may or may not be willing to provide. In this economic climate many companies are electing to hire local candidates only in order to minimize the cost of hiring.

As with many situations in employment the answer to this question is, "It depends."

If a company is hiring remote IT support then whether the mailing address is Denver, Dubai, Denmark, or Des Moines does not matter. But in most cases someone's physical location can be a factor and employers still consider it as a part, albeit a minor one, in the candidate assessment process.

For example, if an applicant lives a substantial distance away from a company's location, the company may favor someone who lives closer because the longer commute would likely create the possibility, if not the probability, that the person might continue to seek employment closer to home.

So, yes, including at least the city and state is helpful (street address information serves no useful purpose).

Melanie Shong Helm

I have seen a variety changes to resumes such as changes in formats, websites added, debates over Professional Objectives, certainly email addresses have been added and of course mobile phone information. The obvious reason to have at least the City and State is for the employer to determine if they are interested based upon their relocation policy or if they have a local office, they may initiate the interview process there, rather than have the applicant travel.

Most online applications I have noticed are starting to make the physical address optional, but not the city and certainly not the state. In fact, not one of over 400 corporate career websites I have reviewed fails to require the applicant to designate the country they reside in. In our global society this piece of information is becoming more important, rather than less.

You never know - maybe the hiring manager is from the town you live in and you just made it to the top of their list of people they want to talk to. Recruiters and hiring managers all want to look for something that attracts them to you on paper. If the majority of the acceptable resumes have the required experience and education, then they look for little things that differentiate a candidate. It may not be logical, but it happens.

Interesting question... and no right answers at all! It depends on the country / culture where you live (something that it is pretty normal in US could be completely different in Germany, UK or Spain), but I think most important than anything else is to consider:
A. Professional profiles where location is an added value (real state, some sales positions,...), including city / state / zip code would be the best option. Otherwise, it is not necessary.
B. Are you willing to move / change location? Do not include your current location in your resume... or do it, but also write an application letter explaining your willingness to move and specify desired locations if you want.
C. Do you have restrictions to commuting / prefer to work close to your home? So, include your city / zip code and save time both for the recruiter and you!

I agree with the majority of the responses. I think it is great and a benefit to list the social media avenues used by the applicant but would prefer to still see the physical address. As many mentioned before, this information is useful when considering time of commute, whether the applicant might request relocation monies, and etc.... Great Question!

I don't believe a physical address is necessary anymore.

Too many assumptions can be made as a result - some already expressed here - such as commute time to work, or the ability to attend work at all in the case of someone relocating. If my resume shows that I live in another city, state or province, will you read past that information to where I've indicated I'm relocating locally in two months time? There may also be socio-economic assumptions made based on a person's address. I prefer to focus on experience, skills and results when considering a resume. If they are the best person for the job we'll figure out the logistics. I think it's time to add this one to a growing list of irrelevant recruiting information such as marital status, children/child care, ability/disability, age, etc.

I'm surprised only the last response included mention of economic profiling. The very fact that so much emphasis is put on the physical address by some people is reason to worry about the all too human judgements being made based on the look of the house/neighborhood from google earth or their neighborhood's status. Economic profiling is real; why is it not being addressed here?

The economic profiling issue is an interesting point but, like some of the other reasons for not including a street address it rather suggests that those reviewing CV's might not able to suppress what may be false assumptions about a candidate.

In the UK I think it would be quite unusual to receive CV's without physical addresses but increasingly common to get additional information such as LinkedIn or Facebook or Blog references.

I always use the street address to work out the potential net worth of an individual to see how well they manage their finances and gauge their financial success in life. I can then match this to the salary to see if it correlates , if not then i need to know why someone is applying for a $75,000 salary but living in a 4 million dollar house and or vice versa :why they are applying for a $250,000 salary and living in a $500,000 home. Things need to tally up.

Ian, Warren Buffett is (as of 2010) the third wealthiest person on the planet and probably the most successful businessman in history. He lives in Omaha, Nebraska, in a house assessed at US$700,000.

On topic, I believe there is little reason to withhold one's address on a resume. It seems to me that economic profiling would likely indicate an employer that is accustomed to making poor hiring decisions. However, if that is a legitimate fear, I would omit only the street address from my resume.

Steve Bowman, SPHR
http://linkedin.com/in/stevebowman

I agree with the many folks who say city and state are enough. Yes, it is important to know approximately where an applicant resides, but the street address is not necessary. Being in HR, I would prefer to have as little personal information at that stage of the game as possible, particularly when many people will have access to the resume as interviews begin.

Also, as for profiling, in the Portland area, living in a place like Lake Oswego might put a whole different light on your resume, depending on who is reading it. L.O. is known as an affluent neighborhood and could rub people the wrong way from BOTH sides of the track. What's the point...?

It's an excellent question and recently I have advised candidates not to put their address on their resumes. The person I was working with currently lives in one community but wants to relocate to another - as soon as they saw his address he was told that they are searching their geographic location first. I personally think that just as over the years we have removed things such as age, marital status, etc., we don't need to eliminate ourselves or allow for any unintentional limitations.