Can AI Write a Good CV? What It Can Do and What It Still Gets Wrong
Can AI Write a Good CV? What It Can Do and What It Still Gets Wrong
The question is no longer whether professionals are using AI to write CVs.
They are.
I use AI too.
The issue is not whether the tool is being used.
The issue is the expertise and judgement sitting behind it.
Do you need a different CV for every role?
Yes.
It can improve grammar, rewrite clumsy sentences, organise information, analyse a position description and produce polished language very quickly.
Those are valuable capabilities.
But polished language and strong professional positioning are not the same thing.
This is where people get caught.
They provide twenty years of career history and ask AI to “make it sound executive”.
The language becomes more impressive.
The CV becomes full of phrases such as “strategic transformation”, “cross-functional leadership” and “operational excellence”.
But the actual value can become less clear.
What does AI struggle to understand about a senior career?
AI does not inherently know what you are underestimating.
Imagine an executive casually mentions that they inherited an underperforming business unit and returned it to profitability.
They may give that achievement one sentence because, from their perspective, it was simply the problem they were employed to solve.
An experienced professional reviewing the career would ask questions.
What was happening before you arrived?
How significant was the issue?
What changed?
What decisions did you make?
How long did the turnaround take?
What happened to the team?
The value lies in the judgement about what deserves to be explored.
Regional experience requires context too
AI can also struggle with context when job titles do not neatly indicate scope.
This matters in Cairns and other regional markets.
A “General Manager” in one organisation may operate across an extraordinarily broad remit.
A seemingly modest title may carry responsibility for operations, commercial performance, people, community relationships and government stakeholders.
If the tool is only analysing the title and duties provided, it may miss the significance of that breadth.
The same problem works in reverse.
A senior professional relocating from a large corporate environment may have a prestigious title but a much narrower remit because specialist functions sat around them.
Good CV writing looks beyond title prestige and asks what the person actually did.
What about ATS optimisation?
Applicant tracking systems matter.
Your CV needs sensible structure and terminology.
But a CV is not strong simply because software can read it.
The ultimate purpose is still to communicate your suitability to people.
Obsessing over “beating the ATS” can lead to a document that technically contains the correct language but has very little substance.
Should you use AI to write your CV?
Use it intelligently.
Use it to challenge wording.
Use it to reduce repetition.
Use it to analyse a job description.
Use it to test clarity.
But keep asking:
Is this accurate?
Does it sound like me?
Would I confidently stand behind this statement?
Does this communicate the true scale of my experience?
Is this important, or does it simply sound impressive?
AI is a tool.
Professional judgement is still the differentiator.
For more on tailoring AI-supported applications properly, read Should You Tailor Your CV for Every Job Application?
For more on what should actually appear in a senior CV, read What Makes a Great CV for an Experienced Professional?
