Seek & Employ: The Job Seeker’s Ultimate Unsolved Pain Factor
A Case for Reforming Account-Based Applications
When much of the legwork in hiring today is done through automation and resume-scanning bots, why do so many employers require applicants to create an online account to apply for jobs?
The canned answer is that employers hope to weed out less-motivated candidates by putting up an easily surmountable barrier. But that rationale seems mildly sadistic and overly simplistic. So, what’s the real benefit to companies that seem to relish in creating hoops for you to jump through?
For starters, these companies are trying to push your data into their applicant tracking systems. Each seems to partner with another SaaS provider, or have their own proprietary forms for job seekers to fill out.
In any case, these systems are purported to make recruiters’ lives easier by funneling applicants from myriad job boards into a single digital platform, at which point the software would begin to rank candidates based on a host of factors — usually to do with their attached resume.
Applicant Tracking Systems Are Bad for Everyone
Developers of these systems may as well have designed them to strip the humanity from the hiring process because that’s ultimately the result.
Like most things robotic, applicant tracking systems have a singular focus: the keywords in your profile. The moment you hit that big, pill-shaped “submit” button, you’re being reduced to a percentage match between the keywords in your application and those in the job description.
On the surface, it would seem that this technology would be a real boon to recruiters the world over. What hiring manager wouldn’t love to log in to the corporate Workday or BreezyHR account to see a 98 percent match?
The reality, however, is that candidates hoping to stay competitive are forced to bastardize their materials in order to appease a faceless, keyword-hungry gatekeeper. As a result, recruiters are no longer afforded a rigid snapshot of who a candidate is, but rather a fluid sense of who a candidate is willing to be given a particular hiring scenario.
That’s why there are so many people in the job market today with skills an inch deep and a mile wide. We’re all at a karaoke mumbling our way through Piano Man when we know the Fresh Prince theme word-for-word.
What’s the Alternative?
Unfortunately, companies beyond a certain size are unlikely to turn away from their cherished ATS — and that’s for good reason. In addition to sequestering applicant data, these systems are often used to:
- Provide a consistent format: Job seekers in competitive markets are always looking to set themselves apart from the crowd. Oftentimes, a candidate’s first inclination is to personalize their resume through fanciful design and atypical formatting. By homogenizing the information submitted via ATS, hiring managers are better able to mitigate these distractions.
- Offer a clearer picture: Employers are able to deploy ATS to get pertinent information an applicant might not automatically include in a resume or cover letter, e.g., professional references, reasons for leaving previous positions, and salary requirements.
- Asses truthfulness: Applicant tracking systems often enable candidates to e-sign, or attest to the veracity of the information contained in their submitted materials through electronic signature.
- Perform background checks: Digital signatures are also useful for receiving consent to perform background checks into an applicant’s criminal history, credit report, driving record, etc.
- Verify understanding: A candidate may also be asked to acknowledge a company’s policies and procedures related to equal opportunity, non-discrimination, and substance use on the job.
- Request legal data: Most employers are required by federal law to request voluntary self-identification information from job applicants. Questions regarding race, gender, protected status, and military service history are meant to ensure companies adhere to equal opportunity, non-discrimination, and diversity regulations.
Goose, Meet Gander
While the extensive functionality of these systems would leave most recruiters salivating, it makes for a boatload of undue stress for the job seeker. It’s like repetitive motion disorder for the brain: incessantly repeating the same task inevitably leads to job search fatigue and the consternation of real talent.
According to a recent CareerBuilder survey, 60 percent of candidates abandon online job applications before completion. The top two reasons cited were application length and complexity.
These six in ten people who walk away from a given opportunity aren’t doing so because they’re lazy or incompetent. Quality candidates simply realize the value of their own time and know where and with whom to invest it.
Easy as One, Two
Companies aiming to increase conversions on their online job postings would be wise to fold the following rules into their recruitment strategy:
- Keep it short and simple: The latest numbers suggest that applications taking five minutes or less to complete are ideal. Save your prying about references and salary requirements for the interview stage. Asinine prompts like, “Tell us about yourself,” won’t be well-tolerated.
- Optimize for mobile: This one should be a no-brainer. Eighty-six percent of active job seekers begin their search on a smartphone. If your app isn’t mobile-friendly, expect your bounce rate to go up.
A Streamlined Application Is Good for Everyone
Striking a balance between what’s convenient for recruiters and what’s user-friendly for applicants should be the penultimate goal here. Meeting the needs of both candidate and employer in one fell swoop takes considerable restraint on the part of the folks designing these applications.
For the reported 50 percent of employers who still regard a lengthy application experience as a net positive, consider how much you could be blowing up your recruitment costs for the sake of adhering to an antiquated hiring philosophy. Take it from user research expert, Sarah Gregory:
In cost-per-click pricing models, recruiters pay per click, regardless of what the candidate does next. So when completion rates are low because of cumbersome application forms, sourcing costs are commensurately high.
According to Appcast, recruiters deploying ATS could cut cost-per-applicant by as much as 250 percent by reducing completion time from 15 minutes to five. Hiring managers could then parlay those savings into the salary of a more experienced candidate.
And by meeting candidates half-way, employers are more likely to discover talent who organically present the qualities best suited for the job, rather than those who are proficient at manufacturing the appearance of a perfect match.
A Taste of One’s Own Medicine
The most surefire way of addressing a user’s pain points is to put yourself in their shoes. In reforming a painful digital application experience, the task is no different. You’ll need to conduct a thorough audit by completing your online application on mobile, tablet, and desktop screens — making sure to note how long each takes to complete.
If you find yourself throwing your hands up after the third window, or losing interest in the endeavor halfway through, ask yourself how a candidate who’s been on the market for weeks might feel when faced with the same task.
Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to grease the wheels — not to set up roadblocks so as to test the mettle of your prospective hires. The only people you’ll be “weeding out” are quality candidates who value their time more than you do. Eliminate the pain, and pleasure will follow.
