TOP 10 CAREER OBJECTIVES THAT CAN ADD UP IN YOUR CV OR RESUME

Feb 5, 20158,254 views10 Likes4 Comments

The Curriculum Vitae, CV, or resume is one of the most important documents for a
professional. Whereas the resume is so important because it tends to be a single
document that informs everyone interested about all the facts related to the
professional life of the individual. Some companies prefer hard copy or soft copy but
most of the well reputed MNCs prefer your resume inform of both hard copy as
well as soft copy.

As a fresher, what do you need to highlight in your CV or what interviewer expect?

So, I hope that this article helps you: how to present career objectives? That
provides with good examples of career objectives that you may use it while making
CVs or Resumes. In fact, the resume should contain only information that is critical
and relevant to the professional. One of the most important aspects of the resume
is the career objectives that are firstly checked by the professionals of your
interviewers in interview or interview session.

THESE ARE THE COMMON MISTAKES THAT I FOUND IN MANY RESUMES AS I AM A

MBA (HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT) ALSO GOOD IN RESUME CORRECTION AND
CAREER BUILDING: The basic common mistake of freshers making while him/her
attending an interview or interview call or phone interview session or video
conference session. Just have a look on these career objectives which were copied
and pasted in many resume with completely narrow-minded.

1. I am seeking employment with a company where I can grow

professionally and personally.
2. I seek challenging opportunities where I can fully use my skills for
the success of the organization.
3. I want to succeed in a stimulating and challenging environment that
will provide me with advancement opportunities.
4. I want to excel in this field with hard work, perseverance and
dedication.
5. I want a highly rewarding career where I can use my skills and
knowledge for organizational and personal growth.
6. I am seeking a company where I can use my experience and
education to help the company meet and surpass its goals.
7. I want to succeed in an environment of growth and excellence to
meet personal and organizational goals.

I am seeking a competitive and challenging environment where I can serve your

organization and establish a career for myself.
Listen carefully; Career objective are differs from hierarchy levels in the organization
a.k.a FIRST LEVEL MANAGERS, MIDDLE LEVEL MANAGERS, TOP LEVEL
MANAGERS & CEOs. A hidden secrecy that even CEOs have CV or rsum or
profiles before their merger or acquisitions - Acquisitions are often made as part of
a company's growth strategy whereby it is more beneficial to take over an existing
firm's operations.

TOP 10 CAREER OBJECTIVES:

For Top - Level Managers:

To keep up with the cutting edge of technologies.

(Technology is the collection of tools, including machinery, modifications,
arrangements and procedures used by humans.)

To keep up with the cutting edge of methodologies.

(Methodology is the systematic, theoretical analysis of the methods applied to a
field of study. It comprises the theoretical analysis of the body of methods and
principles associated with a branch of knowledge.)

For Middle - Level Managers:

To use my skills in the best possible way for achieving the companys goals.
(Company Goals & Strategies: Goals and strategies drive a company's success.
Goals give an indication of where a company is headed, while strategies indicate
how the company is going to get there. Goals aligned with the company's mission,
vision and values and strategies aligned with goals are important elements in the
successful achievement of both.)

For First - Level Managers:

To enhance my professional skills in a dynamic and stable workplace.

(The Professional Knowledge and Skills Base (PKSB) can be used by both individuals
and employers to identify development needs and develop ideas for training and
continuing professional development opportunities as such as Ethical values,
honesty, core values, sincerity, and dedication.)

For Freshers:

To solve problems in an effective/creative manner in a challenging position.

(To obtain a position that challenges me and provides me the opportunity to reach
my full potential professionally and personally utilizing my abilities and years of
experience in your organization that is progressive intellectually and technically and
one in which practices collaborative leadership, integrity and honesty.)

To secure a challenging position that utilizes my years of experience, while allowing

me the opportunity to grow professionally.
(To secure a challenging position that utilizes my years of experience, while allowing
me the opportunity to grow professionally. I offer strong interpersonal skills to
develop global customer solutions with thought leadership and integrity, excellent
interpersonal, oral and written communication and presentation skills, functioning
well both independently and collaboratively with an outgoing personality. My goal is
to become a valued asset.)

Seeking a responsible job with an opportunity for professional challenges.

(Professional challenge is a positive activity and a sign of good professional practice,
a healthy organization and effective multiagency working.)

If you were are applying for highly qualified jobs: (you need to change according the
company information. Here interviewers check your skills orally only so, careful
about what they ask from your qualifications which you have studied until now)

To gain employment with a company or institution that offers me a consistently

positive atmosphere to learn new technologies and implement them for the
betterment of the business.
To join a company that offers me a stable and positive atmosphere and inspires me
to enhance and therefore to innovate the work culture for the betterment of all
parties concerned.

To join an interactive organization that offers me a constructive workplace for

communicating and interacting with customers and people.
(Note: Highly qualified jobs - Career Objectives are fully based Psychometric tests
typically consist of numerical reasoning, verbal reasoning and diagrammatic
reasoning tests. Situational judgment tests are increasing in popularity and are used
as an initial screening method for the biggest graduate scheme employers.)

Hence, Career Objectives can be anything and everything that a professional seeks
in a professional relationship. There is a very good chance that the company will try
to offer you whatever you have stated in the career objectives paragraph.

A Small Note: As this is my 1st article in LinkedIn, if there any mistakes. Please
comment in a positive way.

Thanks for reading!

Kindly share your thoughts and comments below, Im sure someone out there will
find your story useful.

Written by
Maddali SwethaFollow
LikeCommentShare on FacebookShare on Twitter10 likes4 comments
Add your comment

Newest
Sara Lemi
Sales Associate/ RFID Responsible at Zara
Thank you for posting this insightful information.
LikeReply1 day ago

Show More
Photo: Getty Images
David L. Katz, MD, MPH, FACPM, FACP, FACLM Follow
2015 Dietary Guidelines: A Plate Full of Politics
Jan 7, 2016257,445 views697 Likes161 Comments
I wont mince words: in my opinion, the 2015 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, just
released today, are a national embarrassment. They are a betrayal of the diligent
work of nutrition scientists, and a willful sacrifice of public health on the altar of
profit for well-organized special interests. This is a sad day for nutrition policy in
America. It is a sad day for public health. It is a day of shame.

I know, I should tell you what I really think. Maybe next time.

I want to make clear that the scientific report on which these new Dietary Guidelines
for Americans (DGs) were allegedly to be based was outstanding. Perhaps not
perfect what ever is? but truly outstanding.

Thats a position I have asserted before, many times, encompassing the reports
very appropriate inclusion of sustainability. I raise it again now for two reasons.

First, I want to make unmistakably clear that my criticism here is of the political
adulterations of the excellent work of scientists, and not one iota about the work of
those scientists. Second, the 2015 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC)
Report has been subject to unprecedented abuse since the day it was released.
Many in the vanguard of those assaults have pretended it was an effort to
challenge, and thus improve, the quality of the science. It was not. It was foreplay
for this. It was softening up support for the work of true public health scientists so
that politicians could stick it to the American people, and line the pockets of their
influential friends.

There will be indeed, it has already begun a Tsunami of ink (well, electrons,
mostly) allocated to this topic, today and after. It will be parsed in its every
particular. I myself may weigh in again, and get more specific. For now, a rather
high-level critique will suffice.

Where the DGs are good, and there aren't many places in the lengthy document, it's
where they preserved key components of the DGAC report. For example, they

respected recommendations about key nutrient thresholds, such as limiting

saturated fat intake, not limiting total fat intake, and perhaps most importantly,
limiting added sugar. They also preserved the idea, if not a sensible representation
of it, of healthy dietary patterns, and provided examples to show that these are
variations on a theme. I can give this very little bit of credit where so little credit is
due.

Otherwise, as compared to the DGAC Report, the DGs represent a disgraceful

replacement of specific guidance with the vaguest possible language. A term that
recurs often, clearly intended to sound like something while saying next to nothing,
is nutrient dense foods. That replaces reference to specific foods that populate the
original document. It might mean broccoli, it might mean Total Cereal. I guess it
might even mean pepperoni. We cant tell, and that is clearly by design.

There is an astonishing effort to shoehorn in advice to keep consuming all food

groups. When is the last time we have even heard that term? Not only is this
document a display of complete submission to special interests, it is a submission to
special interests stuck in 1950! Seriously, eat from all food groups?

There is a disgraceful backtracking on clear recommendations to eat less meat and

more plants. The report advises particular age groups of men and boys to cut back
somewhat on meat intake, but all this does is highlight the abandonment of the
recommendation in the DGAC Report that less meat was advisable to the general
population for the sake of people and planet alike.

There is overt hypocrisy on display as well. The DGs explicitly, even in the Executive
Summary, emphasize the importance of physical activity. I am entirely in support of
this recommendation, make no mistake. But how is this a dietary guideline?
Congress decided, some months ago, that sustainability would NOT be included in
these guidelines because it was beyond the mandate of the DGAC. Really? The
ability to keep supplying the food recommended is not considered relevant enough,
but a topic that isnt about food at all is? I really dont think you even need to be
able to spell hypocrisy to smell it here.

While the report talks about foods being emphasized over nutrients,
recommendations about what NOT to eat (or, even, what to limit) are entirely cast
in terms of nutrients. We are advised to limit our intake of saturated fat, for
instance- but there is virtually no language, and none featured prominently,
indicating what foods to avoid to achieve that. Much the same is true of added
sugar. Clearly advice about eating less of anything conflicts with the interests of
some big industry sector the federal agencies and their bosses in Congress dont

want to upset. So, somehow, we are left to cut back on our intake of saturated fat
and sugar while washing down our corned beef with Coca-Cola. Good luck, folks.

The DG document is not even internally consistent. There is a specific

recommendation FOR eating meat and poultry, as well as fish, ostensibly in the
service of achieving a variety of protein sources, and eating from all food groups.
Nonetheless, the DG does offer a vegetarian pattern as an example of healthy
eating. This made perfect sense in the context of the DGAC Report, which made it
clear that less meat was a good idea. It looks like lip service and gobbledygook in
the context of a document specifically recommending meat intake. The DG,
shockingly, even carves out space to say it is ok to eat processed meats and
poultry provided that nutrient thresholds are respected. This is absurd in the
aftermath of a WHO report identifying processed meat as carcinogenic, in addition
to its many other established liabilities. It is also another example of hypocrisy in
these guidelines, since we are told the emphasis will be on foods rather than
nutrients, but then told its fine to eat bad foods as long as certain nutrient levels
are vaguelygood.

The 2015 Dietary Guidelines for Americans is, alas, a virtuoso display of linguistic
contortionism to remove from the nations official nutrition policy document the
actionable clarity of the DGAC at every opportunity. Specific advice about what to
eat more of, and especially what to eat less of, has been replaced with the vaguest
possible language about food groups, nutrient dense foods, and the idea that
everything is OK provided a few nutrient thresholds are minded. The DGs include
the topic of shifts, allegedly how to trade up by replacing foods in our diets with
better choices, but here, remarkably, the language itself shifts again from food to
nutrients, so we have no hope of knowing what we shouldnt eat. Perish the
thought- that would be money out of someones pocket. We are left with a very
clear, and genuinely helpful notion that we can probably just eat whatever the hell
we want, and all will be well.

Except it wont. We are awash in preventable chronic disease. We are eating away
our own health. We are eating our childrens health, and their food, and drinking up
their water. We are, into the bargain, devouring our very planet. Yet we are told here
to keep on keeping on. Thats what you get when it is politics, rather than science,
on the plate. Bon apptit.

The good news- and there isnt much this day- is that we dont have to swallow this.
Having chewed on it, and choked on it, we can just spit it out (aim carefully, pleasethere are nice shoes out there).

I call on you to do just that. The 2015 DGAC Report is in the public domain. Our
hypocrisy, thank goodness, has not yet advanced to the level of expunging the work
of true scientists entirely. So, ignore the DGs, and turn to the DGAC Report for
guidance instead. It is accessible to you, and it is about you- not the wealth of
Congressional cronies.

I call upon my colleagues in public health and science, as indeed I have done, to
band together and express our views directly, and in a common voice, cutting out
the political middleman. We have the capacity to do that, and the public has the
opportunity to decide whom to trust.

The bad news is that our Dietary Guidelines are pretty awful. The good news is that
guidance isnt guidance if no one follows- and we dont have to follow where this
national embarrassment leads. We have been betrayed. We have received a plate
full of festering politics as usual. But...we dont have to eat it!

-fin

David L. Katz, MD, MPH, FACPM, FACP, FACLM

Director, Yale University Prevention Research Center; Griffin Hospital

President, American College of Lifestyle Medicine

Founder, The True Health Initiative

Follow at: LinkedIN; Twitter; Facebook

Read at: INfluencer Blog; Huffington Post; US News & World Report; About.com

Politics
Science
Health, Wellness And Fitness
Featured In Editor's Picks, Food & Beverages, Healthcare

Written by
David L. Katz, MD, MPH, FACPM, FACP, FACLMFollow