Advertisement
Losing the Resume Battle
Get articles like this
in your inbox
The longest running and most trusted source of information serving talent acquisition professionals.
Advertisement
Related Articles
These days, the proliferation of resumes has reached overwhelming levels?? and the finger pointing at the perceived causes of the problem is everywhere. This wasn’t the case just a few of years ago, when resume flow was down to a trickle for most positions. Now ask recruiters, and most say they don’t have enough time to review all the inbound resumes they receive?? let alone notify candidates if they are unqualified. But one of the major causes of resume overload is the candidates themselves. Most candidates no longer read job descriptions. Job ads have become a lot like horoscopes: every applicant thinks the job description describes them perfectly. Even if there isn’t a fit at all, many job seekers proscribe to the philosophy, “If I’m not right for this position, maybe there’s something else within the company that I’m good for.” Armed with an Internet connection, a list of job boards, and a Word document of their resume, a job seeker can crank out about a 100 job applications in less than four hours. This is especially true in the current market, where mass layoffs and bankruptcies only add to candidate desperation and leave them with plenty of time on their hands to increase resume submittals. Still, I think blame also rests with the corporate HR departments. Poorly written, overused, and outdated internal job descriptions keep candidates guessing. What the heck are they looking for? Corporate America has a tendency to write confusing job descriptions and use cryptic company acronyms that make it difficult for the job seeker to decipher who or what a company is seeking. Often the companies themselves don’t even know what they want: when HR checks back with an employee after her first month on the job, she’s likely to say the position is very different from the job description. The Numbers Just how many unqualified applicants will submit their resume to your job postings? How much time do recruiters spend sifting through unqualified resumes that don’t fit the jobs their sourcing for? My company conducted an independent study to answer these very questions. We tested some job advertisements on a variety of websites, and used a specific set of criteria to screen and rank the resumes we received in response. These were real open positions within recognizable companies, and represented a cross section of different job functions (sales, technical, finance, etc.). The resumes we received in response were divided into three categories:
Here’s what we learned. First of all, approximately 70% of resumes submitted to a job advertisement fell into the bottom tier. That means 7 out 10 resumes that we sifted through were unqualified. A lot of unproductive time was spent screening and qualifying the wrong candidates. The following job is an excellent illustration of our overall findings. We posted a project manager position on the major job boards and various other free sites. The job ad ran for three weeks for this particular job. Below are the actual number of applicants and the time spent screening and ranking candidates:
| # of applicants | % of total | # of hours to screen | |
| Top Tier Applicants | 43 | 6% | 1.1 hours |
| Middle Tier Applicants | 74 | 11% | 1.8 hours |
| Bottom Tier Applicants | 537 | 82% | 13.4 hours |
| Total Applicants | 654 | 100% | 16.3 hours |
As you can see, about 8 out of 10 candidates were not at all qualified for the job. Our screener spent over two days sifting through the pile. And that’s just for one job opening. On average, our screener spent only about one and a half minutes per resume. What does this mean? Ultimately, the task of processing resumes robs the recruiter of time that’s better spent doing in-depth assessments, negotiating offers, and closing the right candidates: the very core and fun of the recruiter’s job. We asked recruiters in our study how much time they spend in their day reading resumes, and there was a wide range of responses: between 25% to 80% of recruiters’ time was spent reading resumes, with a median of 45%. That’s a lot of wasted time. How To Win the Resume Battle Now, the real question: what can you do about it? There are several ways to handle and process the deluge of resumes hitting your desktop and minimize the time you spend processing resumes. As you can see, there is an excellent opportunity here to increase your productivity and save time and money. The highly administrative but ultimately necessary task of processing resumes can be improved dramatically by implementing some or all of the following ideas:
Most of these search technologies do little more than scan word phrases and key concepts from the applicant’s resume, compare these against the job description, and then rank the resume based on fit. But this next generation really does represent a quantum leap past the “keyword search,” and it’s often much easier to use than Boolean search techniques. Most recruiters nowadays are comfortable with keyword searches, but we also complain incessantly about them?? and for good reason. A search string like “manager and java and MBA” can result in a relatively large number of results that frequently cannot be filtered down to a manageable level. Conclusion Technology can’t replace the fundamentals of recruiting, like building candidate relationships or understanding the hiring needs of your organization. But it can help automate much of the grunt work and allow you to spend your time on more effective tasks, like getting on the phone and talking to people. Ultimately you can’t stop unqualified candidates?? but at least you can learn how to place them, very nicely, at the bottom of the stack.