Resume + LinkedIn
Four of our packages are built out of the same two documents, and people mostly pick between them by price, which is the wrong axis. So the comparison goes first, before we make any case for this one.
Nobody reads only one of them
Almost every screening decision runs this sequence, and the middle step is the one people never prepare for — because it is the only one that leaves no trace.
- Step 1
The resume earns the screen
Parsed, keyword-scored, then skimmed. Built here against twenty to twenty-five live specs in your market, with impact-first bullets and a structure a parser cannot mangle.
- Step 2 · the invisible one
The profile confirms it or kills it
Before anyone replies, they open your profile. If the story there contradicts the file, the safe decision is silence — and you never learn that this is what happened.
- Step 3
Shortlist, or silence
Two documents that agree read as one person with a track record. Two that disagree read as a risk, and a screener with forty other files does not investigate.
Five contradictions we go looking for
These are the five that turn up most often. None of them is a lie; all of them are two versions of the same fact, written years apart.
Job titles
“Product Lead, Nordwind” — the market title you use when applying.
“Senior Specialist II, Nordwind” — the internal grade from three years ago.
One title on both, market-readable, with the internal grade only where it adds something.
Dates
“Mar 2021 — Jan 2024”, to the month.
“2021 — 2023”, because you updated it late and rounded.
Identical months and years everywhere. A rounded year reads as a gap being hidden.
The numbers
“Cut churn by 20% over two quarters.”
“Significantly reduced customer churn.”
The vaguer sentence does not survive next to the precise one. Both carry the figure.
The vocabulary
Written for a parser: dense, keyword-first, every term taken from the specs.
Written for friends: warm, general, almost none of the same words.
One keyword map for both, phrased for a person on the profile and for a machine in the file.
The case story
The migration is a cost story: “saved €240k a year”.
The same migration is a leadership story, with no money in it at all.
Two angles on one event, deliberately — but the same event, the same scale, the same year.
$180, line by line
- ATS-Optimized Resume$90
- LinkedIn Transformation$90
- Total$180
There is no bundle discount, and we would rather say so here
Each part costs what it costs on its own; the total is the sum. What you save is not money but a second intake: one questionnaire, one target, one keyword map, and the two documents come out agreeing with each other. Bought separately a month apart, they usually do not.
One intake. Both surfaces. Three days.
$180 · Deliverables in 3 days. Send the resume and your profile link; the contradictions are ours to find.
Not ready to decide, or not ready to pay it all at once?
Two doors, and both are open. Neither costs you the price of the service.
Still weighing it up
A free intro call, no obligation. We look at where you are, say plainly whether this service is the right one, and tell you if it is not.
Book the intro callDecided, but not all at once
You can pay in parts and spread it over months. The parts add up to the same price exactly — no interest, no fees, nothing added for paying this way — and work starts as soon as the first one clears, not after the last.
How paying in parts worksThe exact split depends on the price and on where you are. What you see here is what your own order will show — before anything is charged.