EA/PA CV Tips for 2026: How to Beat AI Screening Systems

There’s a particular kind of frustration that comes with applying for EA and PA roles in 2026. As an EA or PA, being organised, detail-focused, and meticulous is second nature, so naturally, you’ve probably spent a lot of time crafting a CV that’s clear, polished, and thoughtfully put together, only for it to seemingly disappear into the void without so much as a response, let alone a rejection…

It’s easy to start questioning yourself – whether you’ve missed something, whether your CV isn’t polished enough, or your experience isn’t aligned… But more often than not, that isn’t the issue at all; your CV hasn’t really been assessed, it’s simply been processed.

Before a human ever sees it, an AI system – an Applicant Tracking System (AST) has already scanned, sorted and decided whether it’s worth passing on. And these systems aren’t able to detect what makes a great EA or PA. They don’t recognise instinct, judgment, or emotional intelligence. They’re simply scanning for key words.

Which means, even if they’re not able to spot the kind of calm, capable brilliance that defines a great EA or PA, they’re often the first hurdle. So learning how to get past them is just another way of doing what great EAs and PAs already do: understanding how things work, and staying one step ahead.

An ATS isn’t some all-knowing recruiter in the sky.

It’s a software. It takes your CV, breaks it down into data, and then looks for matches – skills, job titles, key words – against the job description.

From there, it ranks or filters candidates on how closely they align. That’s it.

It doesn’t assess potential. It doesn’t think things like: this person sounds brilliant but might be disappointed with the scope for progression. It just checks: Does this CV look like what we asked for?

And if the answer isn’t obvious enough, your CV quietly slips out of the process.

ATS systems tend to work by picking up on keywords - and those keywords usually come straight from the job advert itself.

So if a role talks about things like “Executive Assistant support,” “complex diary management,” or “stakeholder coordination,” it helps if those ideas show up clearly in your CV too.

Not in a forced, copy-and-paste way, but in a way that naturally reflects the language of the role.

Because a strong EA or PA CV isn’t just a long list of what you’ve done; it subtly mirrors how the job is being described, making it much easier for both the system - and the person reading it later - to recognise the fit.

Vagueness is where a lot of strong EA and PA CVs fall down. Both ATS systems and recruiters are scanning your CV to gain clarity on you as a candidate. So the more precise you are, the easier it is for your experience to land.

Instead of:
“Provided administrative support”

You might say:
“Provided 1:1 EA support to CEO, managing complex diary, travel and board coordination”

It’s the same role, except now it’s clear, tangible, and much easier to recognise. And in this context, that visibility makes all the difference.

Job titles carry more weight than most people realise. If you’ve essentially been working as an EA or PA, but your official title was something like “Office Manager” or “Team Coordinator,” there’s a risk that the system (and the recruiter) won’t immediately connect your experience to the role.

A small shift can help bridge that gap:
“Office Manager (EA to Director)”

You’re not changing your role, you’re simply making it easier to understand.

This is often the hardest one to accept. A beautifully designed CV can feel like an advantage… but for ATS systems, it can actually get in the way. Columns, graphics, text boxes - they can all disrupt how your CV is read and processed.
A simpler format tends to work better:

• clear sections
• standard headings
• clean, straightforward layout

It might not feel as visually impressive, but it ensures your experience comes through clearly. Think less “designed,” and more “effortlessly easy to scan.”

Keywords do matter, but only when they’re used well. It’s not about cramming your CV with repeated phrases. In fact, that can have the opposite effect, making it harder to read and less credible.
Instead, focus on using the right language in a way that feels natural:

• reflect the terminology of the role
• build it into real sentences
• keep the tone human

A strong EA or PA CV should still sound like you - just a very clear, intentional version.

There’s no real way around this one. ATS systems are comparing your CV directly against each job description, so the closer the match, the more likely it is to move forward.
That doesn’t mean starting from scratch each time. It’s more about small, thoughtful adjustments:

• shifting emphasis
• aligning key wording
• reflecting what matters most for that role

So that when your CV is scanned, by a system or a person, the fit feels obvious.

AI screening systems are widely used because they’re efficient. They help companies deal with volume. But they’re not especially good at spotting great EA or PA talent.

They can miss people who are brilliant in practice but under-sell themselves on paper. They can favour keyword-heavy CVs over genuinely capable candidates. They can reduce a very human role into a checklist.

And yet they’re still the first gate.