Web 2.0: The next generation of World Wide Web

I really think Web 2.0 is a very strong concept that helped in building the new architecture of World Wide Web. It has evolved new business models and strategies for various companies which really helped in boosting their businesses. Many companies evangelized this Web 2.0 concept into their businesses which resulted in reduction of man power and increase in cost cutting strategies.
Web 2.0 has shown its influence not only on the Dot-com companies but also on the common person, i.e. the Internet user. The Web 2.0 helped each user creating a unique identity. Today, people can create their own customized websites; share their opinion with the whole world. People share media like blogs, videos, mp3s with others over the Net. Many people earned money and fame doing this. Hence, we can say that Web 2.0 has created a revolution over the Internet.
There is an increase in the online shopping as people prefer to buy products online instead of going to the stores. Online trading companies like Amazon.com, e-bay.com share this data with other companies. This data has become a commodity to most of the companies. Now, the companies market products based on the interests of people. Thus, Web 2.0 became a trademark to most of the businesses. Paradoxically, Web 2.0 application does not focus on what the customer wants. But, actually maintains its focus on why the customer wants? Many Market Analysts think that this could be a beginning of another Dot-com bubble which previously burst in late 2001.
Because of Web 2.0, innovation and open source projects hit an all time high. More collaboration between people on the Web started to occur. This has helped in creating a more intelligent, participatory Web. Loads of data started to flow over the Internet.
Yet, Web 2.0 has its own limitations. The Web 2.0 applications are not that effective when there is less bandwidth in the Internet. They completely rely upon Broadband Internet.
All countries in the world don’t have Broadband Internet except for developed countries. Such countries really can’t enjoy the richness of Web 2.0. However, they can still access Web 2.0 websites which does not require much bandwidth to access like Gmail, blogs etc.
Therefore, I conclude this blog saying that Web 2.0 has influenced our day to day lives. Even though, there is no standard definition for Web 2.0, one should really understand the Web 2.0 concept clearly.

Web 2.0 Application Genres

Many people think that, it’s only the technology that helps in building Web 2.0 application. But it isn’t true. There are several Web-based services that play an important role in laying the foundations of Web 2.0 architecture (Paul Anderson, 2007, p.7). But, what is a web service? What is their role in building the Web 2.0 architecture? Let us know about it first.
W3C defines a web service as “a software system designed to support interoperable machine-to-machine interaction over a network. It has an interface described in a machine process able format (specifically WSDL). Other systems interact with the Web service in a manner prescribed by its description using SOAP messages, typically conveyed using HTTP with an XML serialization in conjunction with other Web-related standards” (World Wide Web Consortium[W3C],2003). The Web 2.0 concept is implemented using these Web services. Paul Anderson (2007) identified these Web services and enlisted them as follows:

1. Blogs : A Blog is an alias for a web-log. It is a service provided by a website which allows you to create your own web pages. The user can post his opinions on any issue on a blog. The blogs created also depend on kinds of opinion they want to write about. It allows a user to add videos, pictures, or links to other blogs. These posts are arranged in a chronological order. Thus, helping in the letting people all over the world know about your opinions. Posting blogs over the Internet is also called as blogging (no author, Wikipedia ,Blog, Retrieved November 3, 2006).
Each user gets a unique link generated by the blogging website called a Permalink. The blogging website also provides a service, so that the user can customize the web page according to his taste. User can post tags related to a particular posting of a blog. These tags help in searching for a particular blog. Blog also allows other users to add comment on a post ( Paul Anderson,2007,p.7).

Blogging has become a way of communication between most of the Internet users. Many people became famous just for posting their blogs. This blogging culture is followed by common Internet users to politicians, celebrities, Company CEOs. For Instance, if a Company CEO wants to arrange a meeting. Instead of sending an e-mail to each and every employee in the company, he just posts it in his blog. Everyone receives the notification of the blog through RSS feeds.
Some of the famous blogging websites are http://wordpress.org/, http://www.sixapart.com/typepad/ , http://www.blogger.com/ , http://www.wetpaint.com, http://radio.userland.com/ , http://www.bblog.com, (Paul Anderson,2007,p.7).

2. Wikis : A Wiki is a software when used in a web application allows its users to create, edit and manage the webpage. These Wiki websites are generally designed to collect data by collaborating with its users. These websites generally have a common goal to fulfill. Wikipedia, an online Encyclopedia is so far the best Wiki site ever. Its success can be determined by the list of topics it has. This number is 12 times greater than general encyclopedias. A simple example for a Wiki webpage is: if your professor wants to list down the projects in a class. He can just give the link of the webpage to the students and tell all of them to update the list on the Webpage.
Some of the popular Wiki-sites are http://www.twiki.org/, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page, http://www.wikihow.com . (Paul Anderson,2007,p.8).

3. Multimedia sharing: The Web 2.0 Websites which offer sharing of the multimedia like pictures (Flickr), videos (YouTube) and podcasts ( Odeo) are becoming intensely popular. Youtube always stands in the top 10 of the most visited Websites list. One thing to notice is that all the content in these Websites is user generated following the Web 2.0 principle. Some of the famous multimedia sharing websites is http://www.audblog.com/ , http://odeo.com/ , http://www.youtube.com , http://www.flickr.com . (Paul Anderson, 2007, p.12).


4. Social networking: Social networking websites are Web 2.0 applications which are built on Web 2.0 Design Pattern, “The Architecture of Participation” (O’Reilly, 2005). These Websites can be for professional as well as personal uses. There is a report that users spend hours on these Websites everyday. The common goal behind these websites is making friendships, joining communities and find people who have the same interests as yours. Some of the famous Social networking Websites are www.myspace.com , www.facebook.com , http://www.zoominfo.com/ , http://www.bebo.com/ , http://www.orkut.com . (Paul Anderson,2007,p.12).



5. Data 'mash-ups': These Applications provide a better user experience by integrating services of other Web 2.0 websites. The content is these Websites is mostly third party which can be done by using Open APIs (as explained earlier) by other websites. RSS feeds and Screen scraping are some of the other techniques to mash up data. This can be told as a standard example for “Data is the Next Intel Inside” ( O’Reilly, 2005). http://technorati.com/ , http://www.digg.com/ , http://www.blogpulse.com etc. are good Websites that suit for this genre.

6. Tracking and filtering content: These Web 2.0 applications are very unique in the way they work. The services of this genre keep track of blogs, multimedia of other websites and they filter the content; bring all important data to a single webpage. The User can also search for various content through these Websites. Some of the common applications in use are http://technorati.com/about/ , http://www.digg.com/ , http://www.blogpulse.com . (Paul Anderson, 2007, p.15).

7. Replicate office-style software in the browser: This kind of Web 2.0 applications are getting popular these days. Now users can create documents online not only by themselves but also collaborating with other users. Each document has its unique link. We can use services like creating as well as managing word processor, presentation, spreadsheet, Web conferencing and many more. They are generally RIAs using Web 2.0 technology. They provide great experience to its users. http://www.zoho.com, http://www.stikkit.com/ http:/docs.google.com/ etc. (Paul Anderson, 2007, p.15).



8. Outsource work directly to the Internet crowd: The whole idea behind these kind of applications is “using the wisdom of the crowd” (O’Reilly, 2005, p. 3). Users target other users of the Web to out source their work or find a solution to their problem. In this way they can find a better solution and also in an easy way. http://www.rentacoder.com , http://www.innocentive.com . are the Web 2.0 applications that are in major use of this genre. (Paul Anderson, 2007, p.15).
Therefore, all of the above are the major genres that I observed where most of the Web 2.0 applications fall in.

Web 2.0 Design Patterns

In software design, Design Patterns (it is a proper noun) are the solutions to solve a problem that occurs repeatedly. They can be in the form of a description or a template. As they are the solutions for design, there is no sense in having an algorithm to describe it. Algorithms are used to solve computational problems. As the design patterns don’t have a distinguished algorithm, they cannot be converted to code. O’Reilly (2005) has identified very interesting design patterns for Web 2.0. One can really understand the Web 2.0 concept very easily with these Design Patterns.

He enlisted the design patterns as follows:

1.The Long Tail
Chris Anderson (2004) was the person behind coining the phrase “The long tail”. The long tail, a trend in Internet business, evolved in 1998, identifies the metrics of the product sales of a business. At that time no one particularly identified the importance of it, until Amazon.com came up with a new business model of their application. Ironically, the long tail is a crisis rather than a solution. What O’Reilly meant was that Web 2.0 applications must overcome this niche.
To understand this concept clearly, let us analyze the graph below. Chris Anderson (2004) analyzed product sales in the market both at retail stores and online stores. He sketched a graph (fig.1) with products on X axis and popularity of that product on Y-axis. The results were very clear that products which were new and popular had huge sales. While the products which were old and less popular, had very less sales.



fig 1: graph explaining the Long Tail ( Chris Anderson , 2004)


Chris Anderson (2004) has analyzed the anatomy of “The long tail” graph by comparing sales of products at retail stores to online stores. The results were astonishing. The sales of new products at retail stores were on an average of 65%. While online sales were only 34% on an average. Why is this so low? This is because online customers could buy old products and also less popular products. Where as, retail stores could not provide these products as they are cost effective to their business and wastage of physical space. Also, it is a hassle for the retail customers to search their product physically. Where as, they can find the product they want to buy online instantly with online search (Chris Anderson, 2004).
Chris Anderson (2004) identified from the “Anatomy of The long tail” (fig:2 ) graph that products lying in the long tail region were hugely available online and sales were also satisfactory. Let us have a look at the graph. The yellow part represents the long tail region.



fig 2: Anatomy of The long tail(Chris Anderson, 2004)

From the graph, it clear that the range of products available online is very huge compared to retail stores. Also, sales of yellow region are high for online stores as these products are not available in retail stores.
Hence, from the above analysis it is proved that the Web 2.0 applications should overcome the Long Tail crisis to be successful. Otherwise, there is no purpose of it being a Web 2.0 application.
"Overture and Google's success came from an understanding of what Chris Anderson refers to as "the Long Tail," the collective power of the small sites that make up the bulk of the web's content." (Tim O'Reilly, 2005, p. 3)

2. The Perpetual Beta

Tim O’Reilly (2005) describes this Design Pattern as a trend that was set in the software design of Web applications, with the advent of Web 2.0. Generally, a software product is always packaged which follows a traditional “design-develop-test-ship-install cycle” (O’Reilly, 2005, p. 2). Every time when an upgrade is made to software, the version number changes. Most of the Web 1.0 applications were based on this software design.
But, Web 2.0 application has put an end to the software release life cycle. There will be no version numbers, software updates or packaged software. Software here came out as a service which keeps improving constantly. The developers can add an upgrade to the software without any notification to users. Additionally, they can even make use of users as co-developers and testers in a real time environment. In this way developers trust the users.
Developers design a framework to capture how users are using the application. So, software releases come for the Web 2.0 application hourly, daily, weekly or even monthly but not yearly. For instance, compare the software releases of packaged software like Microsoft windows and Beta Web application like Flickr (John Musser and Tim O’Reilly, 2007). This can be understood from the following figure:





Fig 3: software releases of Microsoft Windows and Flickr during 2004 and 2006 (John Musser et al., 2007)

It is clearly understood from the figure that Flickr had made so many upgrades to its application during 2004 – 2006; Where as, there was not a single release from Microsoft Windows during that period. This explains the whole concept of the Perpetual Beta. In this, the software keeps on improving at a very quick pace. When ever developers feel to add a new feature they just add an API or add an object to the user interface (UI) of the Webpage. Some of the famous Beta Web applications are www.gmail.com, www.flickr.com, www.zoho.com and their logos are shown below respectively.




fig : Examples of Web 2.0 application logos (no author, web2logo, Retrieved November 8 , 2007)
An interesting fact observed from this is that there is a term beta included in all of these logos. Most of the Web 2.0 applications have beta, alpha or test terms embedded in their logos. So, whenever a new feature is added, the user will come to know of that upgrade (O’Reilly, 2005).
3. Data is the next Intel Inside
Tim O’Reilly (2005) figured out that the data played a crucial role in the Web 2.0 applications. He observed the design of Web 2.0 application was in such a way that the data manages to drive the application. Users upload the data to Web application and in return the other users use the same data several times. Companies like Google, YouTube etc. have designed their applications in such a way that they can collect and manage user data, resulting in the formation of huge databases. To them, database management plays an important role in their applications. In this way the Google’s database is hundreds of peta (1015) bytes of public information and it gets added by thousands of terabytes daily (Paul Anderson, 2007).
Likewise, every company creates its own database like the MapQuest’s database of maps, the Amazon’s database of products and sellers and the list goes on. Much of this data is collected indirectly from users and aggregated in to a database. The developers create the application services in such a way that they learn from the actions they perform. For example, assume a user buys a book from the huge database of book collection from Amazon.com. The application is able to function in such a way that when ever the user returns, it will provide recommendations on the user’s page according to the user’s taste. This is a very good marketing strategy followed by Amazon (Tim O’Reilly, 2005).
What will companies do with all these databases? This information is provided to other companies for their entrepreneurial activity thus increasing their business intelligence strategies. The data they collect is used as a commodity to improve their business according to customer satisfaction (Paul Anderson, 2007).
Also, this information is provided to other developers to build applications that can integrate different databases. This process of combining is also called mash-ups. For instance, housingmaps.com has built their application integrating the Google Maps’ maps database and the Craigslist’s flats availability database. This made life easier to users using the website as they could actually locate the location of the flat on a map and the directions to that place from their current location (Tim O’Reilly, 2005).
Hence, Tim O’Reilly (2005) was correct saying that the Web 2.0 applications must be data driven. There is still a debate going whether to make this data public. Some say that it should be made public for general purposes. While others argue that it affects the privacy of an individual if the data is made public.

4. Architecture of Participation

O’Reilly(2005) has discovered that there was participation and collaboration between both software developers and users of the system, in developing Web 2.0 application. A Web 2.0 application is designed in such a way that the service gets better, the more users use it. They are built using techniques that make the users and developers take part in collective activity to reach a common goal. O’Reilly (2005) called this as “harnessing collective intelligence” (p. 3).
For example, open source software project is a licensed product available open to all users. They can modify and use the software for their own purposes. They can also try to improve it. Any new code is immediately integrated in to the source code so as to reduce bugs. The product is always user generated content. Some of the popular open source projects are Linux, openoffice.org. These open source projects have revolutionized the way people live by making software available to everyone, free of cost. This is what collecting the people’s wisdom mean. Another good example is the online encyclopedia, Wikipedia where the whole content is a collection of user’s wisdom.

To understand the Architecture of Participation concept better, let us have a look at the picture (fig: 4) below. O’Reilly (2005) observed that the Web 2.0 application had exponential network effects with the growth of the audience. The users were the main creators and distributors of the content. Web 2.0 Application uses techniques like allowing users to send e-mails and invitations of its content to other users, increasing the audience; resulting in a network effect.






fig: 4 >.Picture describing the Architecture of Participation (Dion Hinchcliffe, 2006)
What is a network effect? A network effect (in terms of website) can be defined a characteristic where addition of a new user has deep impact on the whole application to the benefit of it. i.e., users add value to the application. For instance, the online auction Website ebay is not useful, if there is no competition for bidding a product which is indeed sold by a user. Because of the competition in bidding a product, the users can get the amount they expected for the product. They later recommend this website to another user. Thus, increase in the audience increases the value of the website. (no author, Wikipedia, Network Effect in software, Retrieved November 8, 2007)
From this, Tim O’Reilly (2005) observed that “Users add value to the application both implicitly and explicitly” (p. 5).
Another good example is Bittorrent. Using this software, users can share digital data with other users via the Internet. Users can set bandwidth for each upload of data. The whole concept behind this is Peer to Peer (P2P) sharing. The more the users upload at good bandwidths, the faster the download. This results in better performance of the software. That’s the reason why Tim O’Reilly (2005) said that “the service automatically gets better the more people use it”.

5. Software Above the Level of a Single Device
The Web 2.0 application should not limit to a single platform like Personal Computer (PC). It should be able to work on a cross platform environment like handheld devices, PCs, and internet servers. According to Tim O’Reilly (2005), “Applications that are limited to a single device are less valuable than those that are connected” ( p. 5). Hence, the design of a application should be in such a way that it uses common frameworks that can work in a cross platform environment by integrating services. Depending upon the richness of the application, applications utilize intermediate modules that can be shifted between client and server transparently (Kurt Cagle, 2006).
Good examples of this kind of software are Apple’s iTunes and Google Maps. Customers can download iTunes by buying them online. They can also convert mp3s to iTunes using desktop software and can play these songs on both PC and Apple Ipod. This shows that iTunes are multiplatform ( no author, Wikipedia , iTunes, Retreived November 10, 2007).
Now let us discuss about Google Maps. The application is compatible for both mobile platform as well as desktop browser. This shows that there are many Web 2.0 applications coming in the future that can work on diverse platforms.

Web 2.0 Technology and Standards

The advancement of the World Wide Web and increasing demand for online transaction based web sites from the customers have lead to evolution of new web based technologies like RIA(Rich Internet Applications) to help serve there customers better with much lesser response times then ever and browsing experience. RIAs do not require any software installation and they run on the client machine in a secured environment called Sandbox (Paul Anderson, 2007, p.27).
The Current technologies for delivering the RIA today are AJAX, Adobe Flash, ActiveX Controls. Additionally, Open APIs (Application Programming Interface) and RSS ( Really Simple Syndication) brought a revolution to the Web 2.0 based websites. Each of them have there own demands based on the business models. Let us discuss about them in detail.


AJAX
AJAX is an acronym for Asynchronous JavaScript and XML. AJAX is not a technology. It is more like a technique which uses other technologies. Ajax attempts to capture both an approach to working with the Web and the use of a specific range of technologies. This Technology helped in over of the biggest hurdle the HTML based web sites faced i.e. Spending more time for reload and refresh of the pages.
One of the main reasons for the success of AJAX is that it requests only the specific amount of data to and from the server which allows only a small portion of the web page to be reloaded dynamically once the initial page has been loaded. It gives the user a more “Desk Top Application Type” experience.
AJAX runs on an AJAX engine which is an intermediary sitting with in the client’s browser and assisting asynchronous communications with the server of smaller items of information. Before making any really necessary referrals back to the server, AJAX engine processes all the actions that require turnaround back to the server for a page reload,. AJAX success depends on the ability of the client browser to accurately and efficiently handle the JavaScript and XML.
HTML/XHTML, Cascaded Style Sheets (CSS), Document Object Model (DOM), XML, XSLT, XMLHttpRequest, JavaScript are some of the technologies used by AJAX depending on the requirements of the application. (Paul Anderson,2007,p.27)
Adobe Flash
Adobe Flash is software, when embedded in the browser creates an environment to the user by implementing animation and various Web components. They even allow to integrate videos into the Flash player. We can also build RIAs just using Flash.
Many advertisements over the Internet are created using Flash. The Flash files generally have .wsf format (no author, Wikipedia, Abobe Flash, Retrieved November 8, 2007).

Open APIs
An API provides the developer with a mechanism that provides functionality to a set of modules of the source code. When these APIs are made publicly available to access for free without requiring a license, then they are called open APIs (Paul Anderson, 2007, p.31). Open APIs allow Mash-up ( is explained in the next section) of services between Websites.
This really helps in creating rich experience to the user while using the Website(Paul Anderson, 2007, p.27).

Comparison between Web 2.0 and Web 1.0

Table 1: comparison of Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 based on the business area (Dharmesh Shah, Ilana Davidi, Yoav Shapira & Robbie Allen, 2005).


The standards of Web 2.0 are not derived from Web1.0.
Web 2.0 deals with more about business models that support Web 2.0 principles or Design Patterns (O’Reilly, 2005). Most of the Web 2.0 application support social interaction. An interaction which makes the application stronger the more users use it.
The participation of the first Web 2.0 conference in October 2004 has assembled examples of Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 applications and software. Then they came to a decision that Web 1.0 is “read only web” and web 2.0 is “wildly read-write web” (Paul Anderson, 2007, p. 4). After a long brainstorming session, they have come up with the above table.

Dharmesh Shah et al. (2005) have differentiated Web1.0 and Web 2.0 based on business areas. From the table above, you can clearly differentiate them. For example, Doubleclick is Web 1.0 in which you choose the content to put on your website. Google Adsense is Web 2.0 where Adsense reads your content in your site and then recommends Ads for your site based on your websites focus. Likewise, Kodak express is Web 1.0 where you upload your pictures to Kodak so that they can print them out for you. Flickr is Web 2.0 in which users upload and share digital photos with the Flickr community (Dharmesh Shah et al.,2005). All the Web 2.0 Websites follow certain Design Patterns, which will be explained in the coming sections.

Bubble 2.0!! When will it burst??

During 1995-2001, there was an incredible rise in the number of Internet based companies like Yahoo.com, Amazon.com, because of increased usage of Internet in that period. As a result, Internet sector has become a part of the country’s economy. Also, this growth had a profound impact on the stock markets of modern countries. This Information Technology (IT) boom was also called as “Dot-com bubble” by most of the business experts. The Internet created much of the hype in stock markets during that period.
As you can see from the above graph, market share values plummeted from March, 2000. One of the primary reasons for this drop was that the Dot-com companies were concentrating more on Y2K switchover than doing business. This sudden drop in the market was called Dot-com bubble burst. After the Dot-com bubble burst, many of the newly established internet-based companies could not survive the market and some of them even had to close. Also, many of the market analysts started saying that the Web was over hyped. (no author, Wikipedia, Dot-com bubble. Retrieved November 7, 2007)
Later, many new web technologies like public web services (APIs), AJAX, weblogs, wikis (are explained in the following sections) emerged. The Web usage also started increasing as exciting new web sites and applications like Google Maps, Flickr, MySpace, Bittorrent took birth. All of these applications were built using Web as a platform. This increase in the Internet usage started a debate in most of the technology groups as they thought that this could be the beginning of another Dot-com bubble. Many people thought that this was an evolution of the World Wide Web. Thus, there were many Web development conferences held on Web 2.0 from then.
It was during a brainstorming session between O’Reily media and MediaLive international, the term “Web 2.0” took birth. It was coined by Dale Dougherty, a vice-president of O’Reilly Media Inc. Dave suggested that the Web is in a renaissance with changing rules involving business models (O’Reilly, 2005). Initially, they used this word for naming Web Development conferences. Many people felt that this could be used for Web applications which tend have Web 2.0 features. The term has become so popular that every web application which incorporated any new technology was referred as a Web 2.0 application. Consequently, World Wide Web was retroactively phrased as Web 1.0 (O’Reilly, 2005).
When anyone hears the term “Web 2.0” for the first time, it may sound like a software upgrade version number. For example, music software called Winamp, which had a version number 5.4 has upgraded its software to Winamp 5.5. But, it’s not true for this case as there were no technological upgrades to the current World Wide Web. Indeed, it is a combination of current technologies like AJAX, XML, RSS feeds, wikis (will be explained in the further sections) etc. That’s the reason Tim O’Reilly called Web 2.0 as a meme. According to Wikitionary.com, Meme means “a cultural unit (an idea or value or pattern of behavior) that is passed from one generation to another by non genetic means.” (no author, Wikitionary, meme)

In the following sections of this paper, I will compare Web 2.0 and Web 1.0 so that you can easily understand the factors that differentiate them. After that I will discuss technologies and standards that play a key role with in the Web 2.0 concept. I will discuss about various Web 2.0 Design Patterns which are the underlying principles that Web 2.0 applications are built on. Finally, I will categorize the Web 2.0 applications which are really playing the big game on the Internet today based on certain characteristics.

Is it appropriate to lie in your resume?

Most often job seekers will lie on a resume to cover up something they feel is a deficit, such as a lack of experience. Overstating one’s qualifications on a resume has always been tempting to some. They do this so as to enhance their chances of getting the job in an easier way. But, lying is just being dishonest to their employers which most of the employers wouldn’t prefer.

Although lying on resumes today is less common than it was a few years ago, employers have become more cautious because of concerns like negligent hiring, workplace violence etc. The Company’s Human Resources are going through a lot of time and expense by doing background checks, pre-employment testing, and other screening methods. They are doing all these procedures for not only just guarding themselves from disgruntled employees but also from avoiding the mistake of recruiting an unqualified person for the job.

One of the main reasons for lying on a resume is the person’s desperation to seek the job. Another reason can be the frustration that aroused because of his/her being unemployed for a long time. So, the above are the reasons that increase a person’s incentive to lie on a resume.

People who lie on a resume may end up doing more damage not only to themselves and but also to others. The employees who lied know that they are not qualified for the job. This rapidly decreases the confidence level in them to do the job which results in a lesser quality service than expected from a qualified candidate.

For instance, a survey in the Software industry revealed that most of the employees they recruit lie about the skills that are required for the job. Because of their less knowledge in developing the software using tools they really are unable to perform according to the expectancy of the company. This resulted in a waste of expense on the employees. Sometimes the project may even fail due to lack of team work from the employee.


So I conclude saying that lying in your resume is not only immoral but also it can get you fired or even sued. Instead of lying, we must consider a process or problem that we faced in our resume. Also, the action we took to address it and the result it had on the company. Today, employers are looking for factors like this in our resume. The more specific we are, stronger the resume. One of the good ways to present in our resume is to start with an outline of our strengths and achievements, and place less-glowing areas toward the end.