Here’s a sampling of the headlines:

The Perfect Salary for Happiness: $75,000 – The Wall Street Journal
After $75000, Money Can’t Buy Day-to-Day Happiness – BusinessWeek
What does it take to be happy? About $75000 – Los Angeles Times

These headlines seem to say extra money beyond $75,000 isn’t really that important. It raised my skepticism so I decided to take a closer look at the study.

I found two things. First, the study doesn’t really say well-being levels off at $75,000. Second, the study suffers from some methodological constraints that limit its power.

Let’s explore the study closer to see why.

About the study

One of the strengths is how reputable the study is.

The study was headed by Princeton University’s Daniel Kahneman, a 2002 Nobel economics laureate, and colleague Angus Deaton. It was published in the prestigious Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the official journal of the United States Academy of Sciences. In my eyes, this is as credible as a study can get.

The study relies on data of over 450,000 responses from the Gallup-Healthways Well Being Index, which is a daily survey of 1,000 US residents. A regression was done to explore income and the two main traits of life evaluation (how you feel generally about life) and emotional well-being (how you’re feeling day to day, like sad or joyful).

The entire study is interesting and nuanced, and I encourage you to read about it in this pdf.

The part about income and happiness

The part that caught everyone’s attention was a sentence in the summary:

Emotional well-being also rises with log income, but there is no further progress beyond an annual income of ∼$75,000.

This was largely translated into the press as “$75,000 is the magic salary for happiness.” What it really means is that daily emotions of stress or joy don’t appear to improve after a certain income level, as a general trend. And this is not surprising: stress from daily events isn’t really going to be improved by extra money in the bank account.

But with more money you’d probably still feel better about life. And that’s the second statement in the study that is under-reported. Life-evaluation, how you feel about life generally, simply gets better the more money you have. To quote the study:

When plotted against log income, life evaluation rises steadily

So if your daily well-being levels off at $75,000, but your life evaluation steadily rises, then the net result is you’ll feel better with more money. In short, your overall well-being rises with more money. There is no magic number at which it stops.

Issues with the study

As I said before, I truly respect the authors and the journal of the study. I put my faith that they did the best scientific investigation with the available data.

But that’s not to say the study is without flaws.

The first issue is with the data collection. Note the study is based on a phone survey of 1,000 daily Americans. Busy and wealthy people are not likely to respond to a phone survey. Heck, even I’ve passed on my share of Gallup surveys. I would love to hear how many people making $1 million salary actually responded to this survey. But they probably can’t tell me: the largest income group appears to be “$160,000 and higher.”

The second issue is the self-reported data. The income data is based entirely on people reporting their income group. How many people will actually tell the truth? The authors were aware of this issue and even tried to correct for it. Here’s what they said:

The three lowest categories—0, <$60, and $60–$499—cannot be treated as serious estimates of household income. We deleted these three categories (a total of 14,425 observations out of 709,183)

Okay, so maybe a small portion of data was thrown out. No big deal to delete 2 percent of the data points.

But here’s the rest of the sentence:

We deleted these three categories…as well as those respondents for whom income is missing (172,677 observations).

Look at how many observations are missing income! Almost 25 percent of the 709,183 survey observations is missing income data. This seems like a big issue to me. It raises the question of how honest anyone answered the income question.

The paper gives the following defense:

Despite the sampling limitations, available evidence suggests that the estimates of population parameters were not compromised; for example, the survey predicted recent election results within an acceptable margin of error

I stay skeptical since the very wealthy are an increasing small fraction and are probably under-represented in the study.

In conclusion

The final discussion in the paper has a proper summary of the results, qualified for their shortcomings:

Our data speak only to differences; they do not imply that people will not be happy with a raise from $100,000 to $150,000, or that they will be indifferent to an equivalent drop in income. Changes of income in the high range certainly have emotional consequences. What the data suggest is that above a certain level of stable income, individuals’ emotional well-being is constrained by other factors in their temperament and life circumstances

And there you have it. There’s no magic salary number for happiness, so go be rich and be happy.

A grade is just a measure of performance–often subjective–in a class. So to get good grades requires the far less impressive skill: being able to perform well in a class.

At Stanford, I learned a few tricks to be a better student (I finished with 40 A’s and 3 B’s, for a GPA of 3.97). In the spirit of sharing, here are a few suggestions to get better grades and help you in getting straight A’s in college:

Be self-motivated: grades can matter
No one has ever told me the most important part of college was grades. Frankly, I’d be scared to meet such a person.

The college experience is so vast and enriching that grades are not always the most important thing. I knew people that were training for the Olympics. I knew other people that started businesses and were meeting with venture capitalists. I knew other people that devoted time to relationships–some of these couples are now married–and I’d say that this was probably a better use of time than grades given how happy they are.

But I also know a lot of people who under-performed in class and regret it.

Grades do matter for jobs, more than I would have thought. This is certainly true in government jobs, some of which have specific GPA requirements. One of my good friends had a 2.96 GPA that prevented him from getting a job with a 3.0 GPA minimum (the recruiter was not amused when he asked if they would “round up” his GPA).

A lot of consulting and finance jobs have GPA requirements as well. When I applied, a top management consulting company had a 3.7 GPA cutoff for their first round interviews.

Whether these standards are justifiable is something of a moot argument. They exist and companies believe they matter. The practical reality is grades can open doors at many top notch jobs, and you’d be better off getting good grades.

But to get good grades you have to really want it. College is too full of distractions and other opportunities and no one is going to hold your hand. It’s important to be self-motivated so you can follow through on what needs to be done.

Which brings me to my first tip.

Tip 1: Ask for model papers
I could never tell what a teacher wanted in a writing-based class. I’ve turned in terrible papers that have gotten A’s. And I’ve also turned in highly polished, highly researched papers that have gotten a B minus–the teacher didn’t like my writing style.

Rather than guessing what they wanted, I eventually learned ways to learn what they wanted.

The turning point for me was a freshman writing class. We were supposed to compare and contrast the morality lessons in two short-stories. A younger me would have just tackled the assignment the way I saw fit. But I realized it would be better to admit I didn’t know what I was doing.

I realized I had never written anything like this. My high school English department was good. But we never had to write big essays comparing works. Our assignments were always literary criticism of one text at a time–the more you hyper-analyzed a work of Shakespeare, for instance, the better.

So I just admitted this to the instructor. I told her I didn’t know what I was doing and I asked to see a model paper.

We met a day later at the humanities department. She went to some old file cabinets and retrieved model papers from previous years. She photocopied a couple for me to take home.

I read over these essays several times. I tried to emulate both the style and the structure of the papers. I paid particular attention to how the thesis was formed and how the authors cited textual evidence.

I carried these lessons when writing my paper. I received an A grade and the teacher commented how well I did, saying I picked up the style and it seemed quite natural for me. And to my ultimate astonishment, she then asked if she could use my paper as a model!

And I can honestly say I was surprised because I was not the best writer in the class. Not by a longshot. There were people who majored in English and History in my class.

But I did well because I knew what the teacher expected in a paper. I was the only student to ask for examples of model papers.

Tip 2: Get old tests
Just as a model paper can help you in a writing class, an old test can help you in a technical class.

An old test can give you an idea of the structure of the exam and the types of questions that will be asked. While a professor is unlikely to ask the same exact questions, it does happen from time to time. This is especially true when the professor is a new person and is too lazy to write new exam questions. I always made sure I could solve these old exams cold.

Some professors were nice enough to give us old tests. In this case, the strategy was slightly different. I was pretty sure the professor would not repeat the same exam material, so I focused a bit more on other topics. I still spent good time learning these questions–after all, what is more embarrassing than missing a question when the teacher gives it to you in advance!

The biggest payoff is when you can get a copy the professor does not release to the class. It helps here to know people who just took the class (my friend’s business fraternity cataloged exams of popular classes). These questions are gold can you can try them in a mock exam setting.

Tip 3: Read other textbooks
I never understood how professors picked textbooks. Some professors picked textbooks they owned. Others picked textbooks a previous professor used for consistency.

The thing I learned is that textbooks were not always chosen because they were the best. It stunned me that in a college setting, where students shelled out so much money, the educational material could be sub-par.

Some of your confusion could be your textbook! There were many times I was confused in economics and math courses about basic theorems and definitions. I tried my best to understand them from the book. But when that failed, I tried something else.

I remember a time I was really confused in differential geometry. The book had defined something and it seemed very vague to me. The professor had only recycled the same examples in class so I was lost.

I knew this was an important topic so I figured I had to learn it. I went to the math library and looked up books on differential geometry. There were two and I promptly looked up the same topic in them. Within minutes I came across a graphic and an example that made perfect sense to me. The resulting problem set was a breeze and I was very comfortable with the concept going forward.

I admit I was lucky in finding the right books. But there were times I could not find alternate textbooks to explain things. And that’s when I tried the next tip.

Tip 4: Review course material from another university (or from another prof)
If you can’t understand your professor, try someone else.

There’s a decent chance your same class material is being taught at another university. It’s often possible to find that course material using Google searches and go through the lecture notes, the problems, and the discussions.

I especially needed this during an advanced game theory course I took where the majority of the class was second year PhD students. The statistics were over my head and I was lost many times. I found course material for both the statistics and the game theory portions and pieced together the information.

This tip works very well for introductory classes, like linear algebra and introductory physics as virtually every university offers these classes.

BORING stuff I did to get good grades
While those four big tips helped give me the edge, they weren’t the only reason I got good grades. I did a lot of the basic things people talk about all the time. Here are a few of the mundane habits I kept.

Plenty of sleep
I am a stickler about getting a full-night’s rest. This is a personal thing, though I have heard sleeping is important to learning. At a minimum it helped me stay relaxed and I was never irritable like those people on 4 hours sleep.

Studied 4-6 hours every day
I studied most days. The routine for me was to study in the afternoons and just after dinner. I often studied from 3pm-6pm, took an hour from dinner, and then from 7pm-10pm. It would of course change when I had errands or wanted to play basketball, but it was generally a routine.

Scheduled in a daily planner
I always wrote down midterms and finals from the start of the class. I always wanted to be prepared and it’s why I rarely did things at the last minute. Many times I would plan my days out hour-by-hour so I could have a plan and stay focused.

Went to office hours if needed
I knew too many people who tried to figure things out by themselves. Learning isn’t just about sitting with a book and hacking away. It’s a dynamic process and discussion can often help. If I spent more than a day trying to figure something out, I’d go to to the professor or teaching assistant and ask for some pointers.

“Memorized class notes” and problems by final exam
I figured course notes and material were a good guideline of the testing material. I made sure to have this material down pat. For math classes I made a list of theorems and definitions and got those down cold. Most of the test was variations on these concepts, so just knowing them gave me a huge advantage.

Self-explanatory tips
These really should go without saying, but I of course did these things:

• Went to tutors
• Picked professors and classes wisely
• Read the syllabus
• Completed course material
• Studied at the library

Kept balance with exercise, other clubs, friends
It’s easy to burn out on academics. I always made sure to schedule 2 or more hours in a day to free time with friends and/or exercise.

Tips I didn’t do
There are a few commonly accepted tips I did not follow.

I never ate a traditional breakfast
I usually just had a banana while heading to morning class. Since I didn’t spend much time on breakfast, I could wake up a bit later and personally I was happy with the sleep. Though I do know many people that swore by their morning meal, missing this did not ultimately affect my grades.

I skipped sections, and sometimes class
There were some professors and teaching assistants that managed to confuse everyone. One of my statistics teacher showed a slide of a Venn Diagram with overlapping circles and claimed the events were “mutually exclusive.” When a student pointed out there was an intersecting area–the non-mutually exclusive part–the professor merely said “oh that’s a typo” and told the class to ignore it. What followed was the most confusing and convoluted example I’ve ever heard. Attendance in the class was optional and I never went again (I was one of the few that got an A+).

What are your tips?
If you’re a good student I’m sure there are a lot of people who could benefit from your advice.

Did you get good grades? Did it matter after you graduated? What are your tips on getting good grades?

Warren Buffett once wrote: “Managers that always promise to ‘make the numbers’ will at some point be tempted to make up the numbers.”

What to do? A new game-based study addresses this very question. The study is “Are you paying your employees to cheat?” (pdf) written by C. Bram Cadsby, Fei Song, and Francis Tapon, at Ryerson college (via Meena Thiruvengadam at WSJ’s Real Time Economics blog).

The study expands on previous work that shows bonuses encourage cheating versus no bonuses at all. This study takes an extra step by comparing three types of performance structures and analyzing the results of each treatment.

The conclusion may indicate that other types of performance bonuses encourage less cheating and could be preferred methods of compensation.

Different kinds of bonus structures

There are many ways to structure a bonus and each creates different incentives.

In this study, three different incentive structures were analyzed: target-based, tournament-style, and linear pay for performance. They are roughly characterized as follows.

Target-based bonuses sound like this: “anyone who makes 50 sales or more this year will get a $5,000 bonus.” It’s the sales or production goal that defines this compensation type. Someone who sells just one item less and misses the goal will lose out on the bonus. Clearly there is an incentive to lie as one gets close to the target.

Tournament-style bonuses are very similar to target-based. The bonus is a “jump” at a particular level. The difference is tournament style bonuses are based on relative performance: “anyone who makes the top 30 percent of sales this year will get a $5,000 bonus.” There is certainly an incentive to lie about performance, but it’s harder because the goal is relative to other employees rather than a specific sales number.

Linear pay for performance structures are different and are graduated. They sound like this: “each sale will be rewarded with a $100 bonus.” The pay structure is graduated unlike  target-based or tournament-style. There is incentive to lie here too, as each misrepresented sale leads to profits, but it does not focus around a single point as in the other bonus structures.

Note the graph is only meant to be illustrative. It’s not true that linear bonuses pay the most, or that tournament bonuses are higher than target-based ones. The exact targets and bonus levels can vary.

The defining characteristics are the “jumps” in bonus for target-based and tournament-style, the absolute goal for target-based versus the relative goal for tournament-style, and the gradually rising slope of a linear pay-for-performance.

The study’s experiment word game

The study was a controlled experiment of over 200 students at Ryerson University. The students played various rounds of a word game of creating anagrams. At the end, they graded another subject’s work anonymously, and their own work was returned to verify correct grading. The subjects were then paid based on their performance and the bonus type.

The experimenters were careful to control for things like gender and language skills. That’s the basic idea, anyway, and you can read the paper for all the details if you wish. (link)

The results

The first result was that performance was similar regardless of the bonus structure of target-based, tournament-style, or linear pay for performance. The students were trying hard in each structure to create as many anagrams as possible, and their production was statistically at the same level. This is a good sign the experimenters set the bonuses at good levels so effort was comparable.

The second and important result was the evidence of cheating. Subjects demonstrably cheated more under the target-bonus structure compared to the tournament-style or linear pay for performance. There were a couple of ways they measured this, but I only want to mention one.

One measure was the number of overclaimed words, such as incorrect words. These are words that both the grader and the test subject let slip, i.e., a measure of cheating. The number of overclaimed words varied depending on the bonus structure. Not surprisingly, the highest was for the target-based bonus, which had over 2.5 times more overclaimed words than in tournament or linear structures

All in all, the study confirmed the perverse effects of target-based goals and suggested tournament-style and linear pay for performance bonus structures may be better.

Full study available at WSJ public docs (pdf)

What do you think?

I think this paper makes a great point about the problem of target-based incentive structures. It’s too obvious how to cheat, it’s too easy to find a partner in crime, and it’s too tempting to cheat.

Tournament bonus structures are a little harder to cheat at since the goal is relative. The problem here is people often sabotage other’s work to make their own relatively better.

Linear structures seem to encourage a bit more honesty and reward piecework. Sure, it is tempting to lie for a few sales more, but that temptation is there through and throughout rather than at a specific goal where people lie a lot and fudge numbers big time.

I am hoping there is more work done on this in a business environment to expand on this experimental setting.

I worked on a tournament-style bonus structure and often worried I would miss the mark. I would usually play a little bit of office politics around review time just to remind people of my good work. I would have preferred a linear structure so I didn’t have to waste this effort, but at least I didn’t have a target-based bonus which may have led to many ethical dilemmas.

What bonus styles have you worked under? Which one do you prefer? What do you think of this experiment?

It all started with the first assignment. We were to create an art portfolio case from construction paper. The portfolio would house all of our assignments for the year. And to complete the project, we had to write the teacher’s classroom rules on the cover of the portfolio.

The portfolio was a clever idea. I have preserved it as a memento, and consequently I still have all of my eighth grade art projects. What’s more is that I have my transcription of the classroom rules.

Back then I felt the rules were sensible. And now more than 10 years later, I feel they still capture many important values. These simple lessons have helped me in life and in managing money.

Here is a sampling of some of the rules and lessons from art class:

credit: amagill via flickr

1. 90 percent of my success is effort. Honest, daily effort

I practice this lesson by keeping a daily record of my spending habits in my budget and expense tracking spreadsheet. By recording what I do, I stay conscious of my habits and keep my effort level high.

I can quickly see if my spending is sustainable, and if not, I compensate quickly. I have found that saving is not about making obscene money or spending too thriftily. It is largely about honest, daily effort and maintaining that effort.

2. Rushing your work is not high effort—slow down

I wish we had this rule when I worked in consulting! Seriously, people too often confuse frantic work with productive work.

Good work, like good art, is the result of creativity. I have written before how relaxing can help productivity, and I have also explained why working overtime is often bad. It is important to work in peace and enjoy life.

3. I can’t means I won’t

Perhaps the worst money habit is apathy. Feeling “I can’t save,” or “I can’t invest,” or “I can’t get out of debt” can be very discouraging.

Things often get so emotionally bad that one feels like it’s not even worth trying. But success can only come from trying and from effort. I am reminded of Wayne Gretzky’s quote, “You miss 100 percent of the shots you never take.”

4. I will be prepared with both supplies and ideas

What a novel idea. This applies both for art class and for money management. You need the supplies to enact plans and the ideas to get you moving.

And it is useful to remember the main “supply” for personal finance is not money.

5. I will meet recommended deadlines

This applies for most loans—credit cards, student debt, and mortgage payments. Many financial problems could be helped simply by preparation. Avoiding late fees can help you improve your finances forever.

6. I can always find more to do

In art class this lesson was about not sitting idle and asking the teacher what to do. I apply this lesson to money management by remembering perfection is a concept, not a goal.

I will do a lot and keep busy when possible. But I remind myself that it will never be sensible to optimize all of my spending, from clipping coupons for groceries to learning how to do an oil change. I will take care of the big picture and remember I could always do more, though I will be content to do just a bit less.

And to further this point, perhaps this is a fitting lesson on which to end

These are just a few of the issues involved when writing a resume. Even though there are many experts offering opinions, it is hard to find trusted answers. So I’ve decided to compile the 4 best tips about writing resumes I’ve run across from my days at Stanford to my time in consulting. Do read until the end as I have saved the best resume tip for last.

(And if you haven’t already, check out the complementary article on cover letter tips)

But before I get to the tips, here is one small point about resumes.

The purpose of a resume

Why do you write a resume? It is to impress your employer? Is it to show who you are?

There are a lot of perspectives out there. The one I like the most is utilitarian:

The purpose of a resume is self-promotion. It’s a way for you to show why you deserve an interview or second-look from a company. Nothing more, nothing less.

I know this sounds bland. But from a practical standpoint, a resume is mostly a stepping stone. No one wins writing awards or lands a job per se from a resume. The resume is mostly a stepping stone to getting an interview or connecting with a company.

That said, creating a successful resume is an exercise in bottom-line thinking. This philosophy has several implications:

1. Each job position is different and usually merits a personalized resume
2. A resume should be as short as possible, not longer
3. Accomplishments should be quantified to indicate a sense of scale
4. You only need to update a resume when you apply for a job

As some of these tips are debated, let me elaborate and explain some of the specifics and justifications.

1. One job = one resume

It sounds weird to write a separate resume for each job. But think about it another way. It is not really much work to fine-tune your credentials for each job, and doing so can pay dividends.

Remember, a resume is a first impression, a flirt. You are trying to get a company interested in you. Now what’s better: using a generic pick-up line or crafting your pitch to a company’s interests?

Specialization is even more important in this job market. Many companies are flooded with resumes and recruiters may spend 20 seconds to two minutes on a resume. You don’t have much time to impress. You have to stand out and prepare accordingly.

Now this doesn’t mean you have to create a brand new resume for each job. But it does mean you should take a few minutes to personalize your resume for each job. For instance, you can modify the “relevant coursework” section of your resume if you’re a student. Or you can take time to reorder your accomplishments to match company goals. Whatever the case, you can probably find a few natural ways to craft your resume for prospective employers.

2. Resume should be one page, usually

The length of the resume is one of those hot button topics. Many people insist the resume should be one page, but others believe the resume can be longer if there are appropriate accomplishments.

There are valid arguments to both sides, so I don’t want to belabor the point too much. The point is that most college graduates, and even most new workers, do not have enough to merit more than one page.

The people who do have enough, I believe, by and large know it since they are so active in networking and extra-curricular activities that one of their career advisers will advise them accordingly.

If you are still unsure, Bankrate has a good article on the length of the resume.

Among its main points are: it’s okay to be two pages if merited, spend time formatting font and white space to make it look clean, it is becoming more common to customize a resume for each job.

What if you’re having trouble trimming your resume?

In that case, remind yourself that a resume is just the tip of the iceberg. The resume is a way to tell a story, not to recount details for a police record.

I want to offer an example in this regard. Imagine someone describing their past job in accounting. Now consider which of the following two descriptions would make more of an impact:

Example 1: I once found an accounting error, told my manager, worked with Excel, and saved the company thousands of dollars

Example 2: Saved the company $10,000 by fixing an accounting error

It’s clear the latter example is stronger. It offers just enough detail, and causes intrigue among a reader. What type of error did the applicant find? What skills did he have that others before didn’t?

The items on your resume should be specific enough to tell a story. I like to follow the example of Ernest Hemingway who wrote economically and exemplified the idea that words are just the tip of the iceberg of larger ideas. Be direct and concrete, but be leading so readers are curious and will want to find out more.

3. Quantify accomplishments when possible

This advice is almost universally accepted and offered, so I will not belabor the point.

Quantifying examples is about offering concrete numbers. This strategy demonstrates both how much you did and how much you did compared to other applicants.

The only caveat here is to consider how you quantify. Definitely spend some time considering the metric, such as whether to use percent change or absolute change. For example, I was telling a friend how traffic on this blog has changed during the last year. When the blog started it made sense to discuss change in total pageviews, but now that traffic is more stable, it makes sense to discuss percentage change.

I found a nice article from College Recruiter that offers more opinions: how to quantify your resume.

Some of the article’s major points are: companies care about quantifying the bottom line, be creative in how you measure value, and be specific in how many you supervised, etc.

It’s not necessary to fill your resume with numbers, but it is beneficial to quantify your accomplishments to make them stand out.

4. Update only when applying

I’ve saved my best tip for last, so you’re in for a treat if you’re made it this far.

I know some experts say you should update your resume every month. Others say it is fine to update your resume every three to six months. Personally, I think this is nonsense.

I simply write a resume when I am applying for a job. I avoid having to spend time creating a resume “just in case.” And I also get to learn about a prospective employer before crafting a resume.

Of course, that doesn’t mean I do nothing in between jobs. There is a crucial step in making this all work. It is not exactly a resume tip, though it will help both with creating resumes and getting letters of recommendation. The tip is:

Create a grand list of accomplishments and works in progress. Include dates, names of co-workers and bosses, your specific tasks, the project’s overall goal, and any specifics on the company bottom line.

This list is solely for your own eyes. You don’t have to proofread it or even spell-check it. Just keep it handy.

When you have a working list of accomplishments, it is easy to write resumes. You will have a detailed record of the great things you did, the dates of projects, and the bosses that will back you up as references. Plus, if you ever need a letter of recommendation, you will have no trouble supplying details to the writer. You’ll always be able to get strong recommendation letters.

This list is so easy to create and it has been so useful to me that I want you to enjoy its advantages too. Here is a template I used in consulting that you can copy/paste so you can get started:

Projects worked and accomplishments

Project area (ex. energy projects)
Cases: Case 1 (dates), Case 2 (dates), etc.

Managers and Partners: Name (title), Name 2 (title), etc.

Tasks (examples):
1. Researched energy prices
2. Implemented model of energy delivery costs
3. Improved model for predicting energy costs

etc.

Just continue the list with more tasks and more projects as you go on.

Since the list is very details, I usually update it after each project, or at least every couple of months. This way I write the details down while they are fresh in my mind.

Of course, if you have done something noteworthy, don’t wait! Write down your greatness when it happens. This strategy will help immensely in the future, such as during company evaluations.

What are your tips?

I have summarized the 4 most important resume tips for mes. Admittedly, these may be biased toward technical and economics jobs so I’m asking you to balance it out.

What resume tips do you have? What resume tips did I omit? What resume tips did you disagree with? How would you change the resume tips list for start-ups or freelance jobs?