Computer Skills
Listing "Microsoft Office" and "email" as computer skills was reasonable advice twenty years ago and is now actively harmful. It signals that the writer thinks basic literacy is worth mentioning, which invites the question of what else they overestimate.
What still counts is anything the average applicant would not have: depth in a tool rather than access to it, and any system specific to the work.
What to cut and what replaces it
The exception across the whole left column: if the posting names it, include it. A posting asking for Microsoft Office proficiency is telling you the term will be searched, and matching it costs nothing.
| Do not list | List instead, if true |
|---|---|
| Microsoft Office | Excel — pivot tables, XLOOKUP, Power Query |
| Nothing; it is assumed | |
| Internet research | A named database or research tool you actually use |
| Typing | A tested WPM, but only for roles that measure it |
| Windows / macOS | Nothing, unless you administer them |
| PowerPoint | Building decks for a named audience, evidenced in a bullet |
| Social media | Named platforms with a management tool and a result |
Describing spreadsheet ability so it means something
"Excel" is the least informative word in this section, because it spans everything from typing numbers into cells to building financial models with Power Query and DAX.
Name the features instead. Pivot tables, lookup functions, conditional formatting, Power Query, macros or VBA, array formulas, data validation — each is a specific capability a reader can calibrate against.
Better still, evidence it: "Built the Excel model the regional forecast now runs on — Power Query pulls three source systems and the pivot refresh takes under a minute." That is a claim with a shape, and it is far more persuasive than any level descriptor.
The systems that actually distinguish you
Notice the pattern: what distinguishes you is not the software, it is the depth of relationship with it. Using a system is common; configuring or migrating one is not, and saying which you did is the entire difference.
- The industry-specific system your field runs on — an EHR, an ERP, a case management platform, a POS, a CAD package.
- Anything with a vendor name a recruiter would search for, in that vendor's spelling.
- Data tools beyond spreadsheets — SQL, Tableau, Power BI, Looker.
- Collaboration platforms where you administered rather than used them.
- Any tool you configured, migrated, integrated or trained others on.
- Accessibility, security or compliance tooling, where the role touches it.
Roles where basic computer skills genuinely count
There are real exceptions, and dismissing the whole category would be wrong. Some administrative, clerical, warehouse, care and trade roles hire people whose computer use is genuinely limited, and demonstrating comfort with routine systems is a differentiator there.
In those cases, be specific about the actual task rather than the software: "Entered and reconciled 200+ orders a week in the warehouse system" says something; "proficient in computers" does not.
The signal to read is the posting. Where it lists basic software as a requirement, it is telling you the bar and you should meet it explicitly. Where it does not mention software at all, listing basic tools is pure loss.
Certifications, and which are worth the line
A vendor certification with a real exam behind it is worth listing in the certifications section. A completion certificate from a short online course generally is not, and a long list of them reads as a substitute for experience rather than as evidence of it.
The filter worth applying: would somebody in the field recognise the name and know roughly what it required? If yes, list it. If it needs explaining, it is probably not doing work for you.
Two relevant credentials read as focus. Twelve read as searching, and they actively weaken the two that mattered by burying them.
Keeping the section current
Computer skills date faster than anything else on a resume, and an outdated entry is worse than a missing one because it places you in time. A tool the field abandoned years ago suggests the last time you learned something new.
Review the section whenever you update the resume, and be willing to remove things that were once impressive. The list should describe what you use now, not what you have ever used.
Where a genuinely old system is still relevant — and in finance, healthcare and government it frequently is — keep it and say so plainly. Maintaining something legacy is a real and scarce skill, and it reads very differently from having failed to move on.
The distinction a reader is drawing is between someone who maintains legacy technology deliberately and someone who simply stopped learning. Naming one current tool alongside the old one settles that question in a few words, which is a cheap way to remove a doubt you would otherwise never hear about.
Frequently asked questions
Only if the posting names it, in which case matching the term costs nothing. Otherwise replace it with what you actually do — "Excel — pivot tables, XLOOKUP, Power Query" is a claim; "Microsoft Office" is basic literacy.
Name the features rather than a level: pivot tables, lookup functions, Power Query, macros, array formulas. Better still, evidence one — "built the model the regional forecast runs on" calibrates itself.
The industry-specific system your field runs on, anything with a vendor name a recruiter would search, data tools beyond spreadsheets, and anything you configured, migrated or trained others on rather than merely used.
Only where someone in the field would recognise the name and know what it required. Two relevant credentials read as focus; twelve read as searching, and they bury the two that mattered.