Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Non-investing personal finance issues including insurance, credit, real estate, taxes, employment and legal issues such as trusts and wills.
Topic Author
DiggleRex
Posts: 248
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:17 am

Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by DiggleRex »

I’ve been looking for a new job. Largely, no matter what job I apply to (and through what site), the experience is the same: I send my resume, I get an automatic response saying the company wants me to take the following assessment test(s) which will take 25 mins or whatever. These tests IMO are nonsense, often unrelated to the job, and whether I do great or terrible, does not indicate what kind of employee I’ll be—only one way to find that out. Doesn’t even necessarily test my knowledge of the subject because in real life, you have more than 60- 90 seconds to answer a question. The company doesn’t even know what questions are on the test. Through Indeed for example, which offers over 100 tests the company can choose from, for security reasons, the company cannot see the actual test questions, only a general description of the test. Ironically, they judge you on the results without knowing what was asked. In my research of this topic, many have pointed out that the person interviewing you likely wouldn’t do any better than you, and possibly much worse. But say I jump through the hoop using my valuable time to take these tests, it often leads to another automated step, such as a generic email link giving you 250 characters to say why they should hire you, or a phone number to call to be asked pre-recorded questions and not speak to a human, which may lead to another step, or radio silence.

In my experience, jumping through all these hoops rarely leads to human contact, let alone a phone call or interview. I get they’re trying to reduce their candidate pool and use automations and AI etc. but that’s not the aspect I’m interested in. There are concepts called “candidate abuse” (largely referring to abusing the candidate's time), “candidate experience” and “application abandonment” (when a person gets so fed up with the barriers in the process they just bail out). I’ve spent hours on message boards reading other people’s experiences both from the candidate POV and HR POV. The overwhelming consensus seems to be along the lines of: If a company makes no attempt at human contact (a phone call at last, if not meeting) but keeps requesting you use your valuable time to jump through hoops (they literally can sit back and do nothing while you potentially rule yourself out), run away. Another person brought up the point of, if this is how they treat you during the application phase (not valuing your time, not investing their own time, and removing the human aspect), imagine what it will be like to work with them, get evaluated, ask for a raise, etc. Others have the mindset that “if a company wants me to do anything for them besides sending my resume, BEFORE speaking to me, I’m moving on."

For example, last Friday I applied to a job that based on the description, I thought was interesting. I automatically got an email asking me to take 2 tests, which I hesitantly did. Then Wed this week, I got what is clearly a copy & pasted email sent to who knows how many people, saying they are reviewing candidates and will be reaching out to qualified ones in the coming days to schedule interviews. It’s followed by multiple paragraphs about the job, and then at the end it requests: please respond with why you would be a good fit for this role outside of anything on your resume, long term personal and professional goals, hobbies etc. I’m now turned off by another hurdle I have to jump through, that I haven’t replied yet. At every step of the process, it’s like “prove you’re worthy of speaking to us” but I want to know, “Why should I work for YOU?” It’s a two-way street, or should be anyway. Part of me wants to answer something along the lines of “I’d be happy to come in and answer any questions in person, but I can’t justify continuing to do a one-sided assessment without a corresponding investment of time from the company.” Of course, a response like that almost guarantees I won’t hear back. And on the flip slide, not replying to their email is possibly another bottleneck to eliminate another round of applicants who don’t reply. Could I just do exactly what they ask for? Of course I could, but I feel like they are not valuing me or my time. They have my resume, they have my test results--they have enough to decide if they want to talk to me.

As a comparison, a couple of months ago, I applied to a job. The HR person looked at my resume, felt there was enough to warrant a convo, and set up a phone interview. After that, she offered me an in-person interview with a different person (the headquarters and the job were two different locations). I had the in-person interview. Ultimately, I wasn’t offered the job but the process was smooth with no BS: someone read my resume, used their judgement and called me, used their judgment again to offer me an in-person, and then made their decision, which I was notified of. I didn’t like the end result of not being their choice, but I can’t complain about the process/experience.
adamthesmythe
Posts: 5761
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 4:47 pm

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by adamthesmythe »

DiggleRex wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 10:36 am I’ve been looking for a new job. Largely, no matter what job I apply to (and through what site), the experience is the same: I send my resume, I get an automatic response saying the company wants me to take the following assessment test(s) which will take 25 mins or whatever. These tests IMO are nonsense, often unrelated to the job, and whether I do great or terrible, does not indicate what kind of employee I’ll be—only one way to find that out. Doesn’t even necessarily test my knowledge of the subject because in real life, you have more than 60- 90 seconds to answer a question. The company doesn’t even know what questions are on the test. Through Indeed for example, which offers over 100 tests the company can choose from, for security reasons, the company cannot see the actual test questions, only a general description of the test. Ironically, they judge you on the results without knowing what was asked. In my research of this topic, many have pointed out that the person interviewing you likely wouldn’t do any better than you, and possibly much worse. But say I jump through the hoop using my valuable time to take these tests, it often leads to another automated step, such as a generic email link giving you 250 characters to say why they should hire you, or a phone number to call to be asked pre-recorded questions and not speak to a human, which may lead to another step, or radio silence.
Maybe the companies are using one of these software solutions for hiring that I hear advertised on the radio?

It appears that the companies you are applying to use this as a screening tool. Are there other small companies of possible interest? Can you network?
User avatar
Blueskies123
Posts: 736
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2014 6:18 pm
Location: South Florida

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by Blueskies123 »

I have hired a hundred professionals over the decades. The number of resumes you get is overwhelming and many are just fishing for a huge offer and many are not qualified, they are just blasting out resumes in mass. These tests weed out the unqualified and the fishermen and women.
If the job looks good you should take the test if you are unemployed and need a job.
If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging
Topic Author
DiggleRex
Posts: 248
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:17 am

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by DiggleRex »

adamthesmythe wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 10:41 am Maybe the companies are using one of these software solutions for hiring that I hear advertised on the radio?
It appears that the companies you are applying to use this as a screening tool. Are there other small companies of possible interest? Can you network?
Mostly this happens through sites like Indeed because they offer the employer the option to tack on these tests for free (and then likely profit by selling bulk data). 100% of what I am applying to are small companies. Usually no HR department, just an individual who is tasked with hiring. I do my best to circumvent it by contacting the company directly and sending my resume, or researching who at the company posted the job and contacting them. Sometimes they just redirect you to the listing link to apply to.
KlangFool
Posts: 31426
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2008 12:35 pm

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by KlangFool »

OP,

You have a choice not to waste your time on answering those questions. In fact, I used that as a sign of not wasting more time on the job postings. It is a win-win. It earned an auto-rejection from me.

Ditto, if a recruiter contacted me, I would ask for a job description before I proceed. If they cannot produce one, it is an auto-rejection too.

Create a weed out process to reject useless job posting.

KlangFool
30% VWENX | 16% VFWAX/VTIAX | 14.5% VTSAX | 19.5% VBTLX | 10% VSIAX/VTMSX/VSMAX | 10% VSIGX| 30% Wellington 50% 3-funds 20% Mini-Larry
Topic Author
DiggleRex
Posts: 248
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:17 am

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by DiggleRex »

KlangFool wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 11:02 am You have a choice not to waste your time on answering those questions. In fact, I used that as a sign of not wasting more time on the job postings. It is a win-win. It earned an auto-rejection from me.
KlangFool
Thank you for your opinion. In the past, I used to jumped through all the hoops, and out of all the times I've done it, it only once led to an interview. For example, long time ago, after applying to a job, the company sent me the automatic "take these tests" response. I did it. They called me and set up an interview. They told me I scored significantly better on the tests than anyone else. The next day, they hired someone else. If jumping through all these hoops had a decent track record (for me) of leading to an interview, I'd be more inclined to do it. But based on my experience, 99/100 times it leads to nothing. Someone on a job message board said something alongs the lines of, "there may very well be a real job at the end of a time-consuming, hoop-jumping process that lacks human contact, but how far are you willing to go in that process? Do you respect yourself and your own time? Others have said by the time they got through the process and actually got an offer, they lost interest because of what they went through.
MittensMoney
Posts: 291
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2015 9:59 pm

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by MittensMoney »

Some companies just suck at hiring or have the wrong people coordinating their recruiting efforts. What field / type of job are you going for?
Afty
Posts: 2387
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2014 5:31 pm

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by Afty »

Putting candidates through these automated hoops might be a sign that the company is flooded with applications for that role and needs some cheap way to weed people out. I.e., your chances are low even if you do jump through the hoops.

How badly do you need a new job? How picky can you afford to be?
Topic Author
DiggleRex
Posts: 248
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:17 am

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by DiggleRex »

MittensMoney wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 11:15 am Some companies just suck at hiring or have the wrong people coordinating their recruiting efforts. What field / type of job are you going for?
I agree with you, but based on my own experience, I would have to replace "some" with "most." There's a headhunter who wrote about this topic, and he summed it up really well. He said these are employers that don't know how to recruit job candidates. They want you to do their job (rule yourself in or out) ideally with no time spent on their end. They want you to incur costs before they have to. According to him, they're basically telling you, "You don't want to work here because we don't know how to hire qualified candidates."

I'm looking at various things: manufacturing, office work (data entry, inventory, etc), computer work. The other point I didn't bring up in my original post is that often, you go through (if you choose to) all this effort, and the job listing is offering awful pay. So it's not like you can even say to yourself "well this is potentially worth it because they're offering a good salary."
sureshoe
Posts: 2164
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2019 3:26 pm

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by sureshoe »

Similar to the above question - what is the type of role you're applying for?

Let me give you some context. I hire software engineers. We used to have some hoops to jump through, but what we found is that good candidates didn't do it - they found jobs too easily elsewhere. However, this is a case where I might have 10 open positions and 3 qualified candidates, so we had to adjust the hiring process.

My wife is hiring a marketing manager. She has 1 position and 100 resumes. They simply put an inordinate amount of hurdles in place to weed out the candidates.

I know I'm not helping you directly, and I do empathize. But what type of position are you seeking? Not sure I can help here, but it might enable us to point you in some other direction.
123
Posts: 10387
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 3:55 pm

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by 123 »

It is so easy to apply for jobs that employers get bombarded with applicants if all the applicant has to do is to click and paste a resume. The tests and questionnaires are just additional roadblocks to help the employer screen out candidates who really aren't that interested.
The closest helping hand is at the end of your own arm.
KlangFool
Posts: 31426
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2008 12:35 pm

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by KlangFool »

DiggleRex wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 11:12 am
KlangFool wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 11:02 am You have a choice not to waste your time on answering those questions. In fact, I used that as a sign of not wasting more time on the job postings. It is a win-win. It earned an auto-rejection from me.
KlangFool
Thank you for your opinion. In the past, I used to jumped through all the hoops, and out of all the times I've done it, it only once led to an interview. For example, long time ago, after applying to a job, the company sent me the automatic "take these tests" response. I did it. They called me and set up an interview. They told me I scored significantly better on the tests than anyone else. The next day, they hired someone else. If jumping through all these hoops had a decent track record (for me) of leading to an interview, I'd be more inclined to do it. But based on my experience, 99/100 times it leads to nothing. Someone on a job message board said something alongs the lines of, "there may very well be a real job at the end of a time-consuming, hoop-jumping process that lacks human contact, but how far are you willing to go in that process? Do you respect yourself and your own time? Others have said by the time they got through the process and actually got an offer, they lost interest because of what they went through.
DiggleRex,

1) I do not know your job level. But, in my level, my time is highly valuable. So, if someone is not respectful of my time, it is an auto rejection from me. They are not an employer that I want to work for.

2) Ditto at my job level, everyone knows everyone by one to two degree of separations. The job posting is used to research which employer is looking for someone. Then, I use my LinkedIn to find my contact in that employer. If I am interested, I contact the hiring manager directly.

3) Or, the recruiter would contact me about an opportunity.

4) In general, there is no reason to apply to a job posting.

KlangFool
Last edited by KlangFool on Fri May 07, 2021 11:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
30% VWENX | 16% VFWAX/VTIAX | 14.5% VTSAX | 19.5% VBTLX | 10% VSIAX/VTMSX/VSMAX | 10% VSIGX| 30% Wellington 50% 3-funds 20% Mini-Larry
Topic Author
DiggleRex
Posts: 248
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:17 am

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by DiggleRex »

Afty wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 11:22 am Putting candidates through these automated hoops might be a sign that the company is flooded with applications for that role and needs some cheap way to weed people out. I.e., your chances are low even if you do jump through the hoops.

How badly do you need a new job? How picky can you afford to be?
Right, this is the million dollar question. I tend to be a very principled person in that I sometimes do/don't do something strictly out of principle. I can reply to their email and give them exactly what they are asking for. What's stopping me is the principle of it. I sent my resume, I took half an hour of my time (while they have spent 0 of theirs on me) to take 2 scientifically invalid tests of which they can't even know see the questions I was asked, and now they want more. I could spend X amount of minutes putting thought and effort in to answering their questions and submit it to them. But to your point, I am asking myself if I should.
squirm
Posts: 4239
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 11:53 am

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by squirm »

I'm not sure what your question is???

My wife gets a lot of applications, she says half of them don't even answer the questions correct. The ones that get interviewed, half of those bomb the interview. Those that get through the interview, half of them bomb the reference checks.
User avatar
JoeRetire
Posts: 15381
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:44 pm

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by JoeRetire »

DiggleRex wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 10:36 am I’ve been looking for a new job. Largely, no matter what job I apply to (and through what site), the experience is the same
Simply decline the pursuit of any job as soon as the experience becomes something you don't prefer.

That will limit your opportunities for jobs, but will also limit your frustration. The choice is completely within your control.
This isn't just my wallet. It's an organizer, a memory and an old friend.
KlangFool
Posts: 31426
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2008 12:35 pm

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by KlangFool »

DiggleRex wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 11:25 am
The other point I didn't bring up in my original post is that often, you go through (if you choose to) all this effort, and the job listing is offering awful pay. So it's not like you can even say to yourself "well this is potentially worth it because they're offering a good salary."
DiggleRex,

Why are you applying to the job that do not offer any idea of how much they pay? This should be another item in your weed out process. There is no reason to hide and waste the candidates' time.

KlangFool
30% VWENX | 16% VFWAX/VTIAX | 14.5% VTSAX | 19.5% VBTLX | 10% VSIAX/VTMSX/VSMAX | 10% VSIGX| 30% Wellington 50% 3-funds 20% Mini-Larry
Topic Author
DiggleRex
Posts: 248
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:17 am

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by DiggleRex »

sureshoe wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 11:26 am I know I'm not helping you directly, and I do empathize. But what type of position are you seeking? Not sure I can help here, but it might enable us to point you in some other direction.
It's okay--just venting and looking for various viewpoints. So while my degree was in mechanical engineering a long time ago, I never worked as an engineer. I usually end up in a role as the right hand man to the production/department supervisor, or even owner. While I can do machining, assembly and the like--I'm looking to get away from that--too physical and tedious. I often end up helping someone above me with processing/closing orders, data entry, inventory, organizing, computer work etc. I'm looking for less physical jobs now--office work, computer work.

None of these jobs I'm applying to have a good salary (just the way things are right now here)--so another reason I burn out during the application process when they want more and more of my time without even speaking to me.
bogledogle
Posts: 656
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 4:34 pm

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by bogledogle »

What kind of job are you looking for? Linked-in could be a better experience if your profession has a presence there.
Topic Author
DiggleRex
Posts: 248
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:17 am

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by DiggleRex »

sureshoe wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 11:26 am My wife is hiring a marketing manager. She has 1 position and 100 resumes. They simply put an inordinate amount of hurdles in place to weed out the candidates.
I can understand this aspect. But to your earlier point, some of the best, most qualified candidates may say, "the hell with all these hurdles" and look elsewhere.
Topic Author
DiggleRex
Posts: 248
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:17 am

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by DiggleRex »

KlangFool wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 11:38 am Why are you applying to the job that do not offer any idea of how much they pay? This should be another item in your weed out process. There is no reason to hide and waste the candidates' time.
KlangFool
Sorry that's my fault, I should clarify, most of the jobs (not all) give an indication of salary. Because I want a new job, I sometimes apply anyway, thinking that if i get to the interview, if I'm interested, I'll see if there's wiggle room in the starting pay. But when the process becomes laborious AND knowing the salary isn't even that good, I may bail on the process. When the job doesn't say the salary, I will contact the company and ask for a range. Most of the time, no response, and occasionally they tell you to go through the process and if you're to be considered you'll find out. I want to know upfront because if it's lower than I'm willing to accept, of course I'm not going to waste my time going through the process.
squirm
Posts: 4239
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 11:53 am

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by squirm »

DiggleRex wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 11:45 am
sureshoe wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 11:26 am My wife is hiring a marketing manager. She has 1 position and 100 resumes. They simply put an inordinate amount of hurdles in place to weed out the candidates.
I can understand this aspect. But to your earlier point, some of the best, most qualified candidates may say, "the hell with all these hurdles" and look elsewhere.
My wife (also hiring manager) says, that's part of the process. She said, if you don't give 100% to the application and process, she doesn't want you as an employee.
MittensMoney
Posts: 291
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2015 9:59 pm

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by MittensMoney »

Since the field of work you're seeking is pretty broad, maybe look to see if there're any Temp agencies locally. Then you've got a recruiter working FOR you because they'll get paid if you're hired on - and you'll have a little control over what the job might be and the pay level. For basic jobs a lot of employers will hire from the Temp agency and within 6-12 months hire someone on full-time if they're good. Just a thought.

Anecdotally, my friend just graduated from coding bootcamp and received a job offer after *257* applications. He got about 12 interviews, of which most of them were pretty lengthy multi-round processes. In the end it was worth it but the job-seeking process is absolutely grueling, no doubt.
Afty
Posts: 2387
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2014 5:31 pm

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by Afty »

I understand your frustration with this, and I understand why you're turned off by the hoop-jumping you've described. But what's your alternative? Do you have a job currently that you're OK with, and you're just idly looking around to see if there's anything better? Or are you currently unemployed and really need a job? Can you afford to be picky?

It sounds like you're looking for confirmation that jobs with this hoop-jumping are bad jobs or that the companies that do this are bad places to work. I don't know that that's the case. I'd almost wonder the opposite -- if the company is receiving so many applications that they have to resort to these stupid tests, maybe they're actually a desirable place to work?

Do you know anyone at these companies that you're applying to? Can you get a referral? That can short-circuit some of these processes and get you talking to a human sooner.
Topic Author
DiggleRex
Posts: 248
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:17 am

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by DiggleRex »

squirm wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 11:57 am My wife (also hiring manager) says, that's part of the process. She said, if you don't give 100% to the application and process, she doesn't want you as an employee.
I can understand this too. There's definitely more than one POV to evaluate this from. In regards to that, on some of these job message boards where I have read hundreds of opinions on the matter, others have pointed out in a situation like that, you're not necessarily getting the best candidate, but possibly the most desperate (candidates who NEED a job ASAP, and cannot afford to be picky or principled about the matter).
Topic Author
DiggleRex
Posts: 248
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:17 am

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by DiggleRex »

Afty wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 12:01 pm It sounds like you're looking for confirmation that jobs with this hoop-jumping are bad jobs or that the companies that do this are bad places to work. I don't know that that's the case. I'd almost wonder the opposite -- if the company is receiving so many applications that they have to resort to these stupid tests, maybe they're actually a desirable place to work?
I don't think my POV on the situation is necessarily the "right" one, but I also don't think there is a right one. I'm open to hearing other viewpoints, which is why I've lately spent a lot of time on message boards related to this topic. To your point, I understand the point your'e making, but from what I read/hear, it seems like no matter what the job is, what the pay is, what the field is, that any posting may get a ton of applicants, so I'm not sure that alone has any correlation with if it's a good job or a good place to work. Especially during this crazy year with people losing their jobs or needing more than one, some people just blast their resume. I realize, the flip side of this, one could say, "that's why employers need to put so many barriers in place to reduce the candidates." It's hardly a black and white issue.
Ollie123
Posts: 185
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2016 11:39 am

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by Ollie123 »

I'm increasingly convinced HR is the home of ineptitude in most companies - in part because of things like this. I also think HR systems are a great example of where - for all our talk of how revolutionary machine learning is - it very rarely does nearly as good a job as the tech companies like to pretend it does. There is going to be a reckoning in tech at some point where we realize a lot of what is being done just doesn't work and isn't remotely worth the salaries the software engineers are being paid to create it. And I say this as someone who works heavily with data and machine learning...not just a curmudgeon who doesn't like new fangled things like mobile phones and color television.

First off - as a hiring manager - if its a job I care about I'd much rather flip through 100 resumes myself (or even 300) than trust an HR rep to do it, let alone some software program the HR rep probably doesn't even understand. I might feel differently if we were talking some random part-time retail job where I need to hire 50 people, the qualifications can be summarized as "currently alive" and there is an expected 80% turnover in 6 months. For a role requiring education and someone we're expecting to stay for at least 3-5 years? I'll do the legwork myself, thank you very much. I actually don't know a single manager who feels differently.

I wish I had advice other than just recognize that you can only control your own actions in these circumstances. If you aren't desperate for a job, I think its quite reasonable to skip ones like this. The yield is potentially quite low. A lot of these probably aren't places you want to work anyways.
Last edited by Ollie123 on Fri May 07, 2021 12:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
squirm
Posts: 4239
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 11:53 am

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by squirm »

DiggleRex wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 12:05 pm
squirm wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 11:57 am My wife (also hiring manager) says, that's part of the process. She said, if you don't give 100% to the application and process, she doesn't want you as an employee.
I can understand this too. There's definitely more than one POV to evaluate this from. In regards to that, on some of these job message boards where I have read hundreds of opinions on the matter, others have pointed out in a situation like that, you're not necessarily getting the best candidate, but possibly the most desperate (candidates who NEED a job ASAP, and cannot afford to be picky or principled about the matter).
I'm sure of that. I'm sure the salary that is set for many of the positions she hires for disuades more competent applicants too.
sureshoe
Posts: 2164
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2019 3:26 pm

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by sureshoe »

Ollie123 wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 12:28 pm I'm increasingly convinced HR is the home of ineptitude in most companies - in part because of things like this. I also think HR systems are a great example of where - for all our talk of how revolutionary machine learning is - it very rarely does nearly as good a job as the tech companies like to pretend it does. There is going to be a reckoning in tech at some point where we realize a lot of what is being done just doesn't work and isn't remotely worth the salaries the software engineers are being paid to create it. And I say this as someone who works heavily with data and machine learning...not just a curmudgeon who doesn't like new fangled things like mobile phones and color television.

First off - as a hiring manager - if its a job I care about I'd much rather flip through 100 resumes myself (or even 300) than trust an HR rep to do it, let alone some software program the HR rep probably doesn't even understand. I might feel differently if we were talking some random part-time retail job where I need to hire 50 people, the qualifications can be summarized as "currently alive" and there is an expected 80% turnover in 6 months. For a role requiring education and someone we're expecting to stay for at least 3-5 years? I'll do the legwork myself, thank you very much. I actually don't know a single manager who feels differently.

I wish I had advice other than just recognize that you can only control your own actions in these circumstances. If you aren't desperate for a job, I think its quite reasonable to skip ones like this. The yield is potentially quite low. A lot of these probably aren't places you want to work anyways.
HR is usually a more liberal arts person with less specific, measurable knowledge. The job itself is very hard to measure for success compared to other positions in the company. Engineers? Much easier to measure. Sales People? VERY easy to "scoreboard".

So yeah, in my experience, the HR departments tend to have people who might not be "as sharp" as other areas. This doesn't mean all people, but it's harder to separate out the top from the bottom.

This is why you see recruiting firms/etc. who have really sharp people, and in my opinion - often outperform - internal HR departments. A paid recruiter is a tough gig.

So any HR people on here, don't be offended. It's a tough gig, but it's hard to measure, and you can coast in the right place.
sureshoe
Posts: 2164
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2019 3:26 pm

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by sureshoe »

squirm wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 12:28 pm
DiggleRex wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 12:05 pm
squirm wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 11:57 am My wife (also hiring manager) says, that's part of the process. She said, if you don't give 100% to the application and process, she doesn't want you as an employee.
I can understand this too. There's definitely more than one POV to evaluate this from. In regards to that, on some of these job message boards where I have read hundreds of opinions on the matter, others have pointed out in a situation like that, you're not necessarily getting the best candidate, but possibly the most desperate (candidates who NEED a job ASAP, and cannot afford to be picky or principled about the matter).
I'm sure of that. I'm sure the salary that is set for many of the positions she hires for disuades more competent applicants too.
And welcome to hiring theory :) 1000 different opinions and VERY hard to actually apply empirical proof on the best practice. Tomes have been written.
Topic Author
DiggleRex
Posts: 248
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:17 am

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by DiggleRex »

Ollie123 wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 12:28 pm I'm increasingly convinced HR is the home of ineptitude in most companies - in part because of things like this. I also think HR systems are a great example of where - for all our talk of how revolutionary machine learning is - it very rarely does nearly as good a job as the tech companies like to pretend it does.
THIS! A headhunter who writes on this topic (who comes down on the side of most of the assessment and hoop jumping being BS and that it shows the company doesn't know how to hire) said something related to your point recently that I thought was great. Unfortunately, I don't know if I saved the link to it so I can't quote it exactly. But his point was something like this, "I wonder how much time companies waste with all these hurdles that they think somehow is going to land them the best candidate vs just reading someone's resume, then making a judgment call (going with their gut) on who to speak to and ultimately hire." You may end up landing the better candidate (using less time and resources) with the latter, especially if you're a skilled interviewer.

I personally think no test or hurdle is going to give you a better impression of me than sitting across from me and having a conversation with me. In fact, if it's a casual conversation where you create an environment where I let my guard down, you're more likely to get a much more realisitc impression of me than if you ask me stuff like "where do you see yourself in 5 years, what is your worst quality, etc."--questions where I am going to tell you what I think you want to hear as to not hurt my chances.
KlangFool
Posts: 31426
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2008 12:35 pm

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by KlangFool »

DiggleRex wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 12:26 pm
Afty wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 12:01 pm It sounds like you're looking for confirmation that jobs with this hoop-jumping are bad jobs or that the companies that do this are bad places to work. I don't know that that's the case. I'd almost wonder the opposite -- if the company is receiving so many applications that they have to resort to these stupid tests, maybe they're actually a desirable place to work?
I don't think my POV on the situation is necessarily the "right" one, but I also don't think there is a right one. I'm open to hearing other viewpoints, which is why I've lately spent a lot of time on message boards related to this topic. To your point, I understand the point your'e making, but from what I read/hear, it seems like no matter what the job is, what the pay is, what the field is, that any posting may get a ton of applicants, so I'm not sure that alone has any correlation with if it's a good job or a good place to work. Especially during this crazy year with people losing their jobs or needing more than one, some people just blast their resume. I realize, the flip side of this, one could say, "that's why employers need to put so many barriers in place to reduce the candidates." It's hardly a black and white issue.
DiggleRex,

And, it should be obvious to you now. It is fruitless to apply to job posting. Only people that are desperate enough and do not have a better way do that.

I had applied to job posting. It is totally useless. All my real job offer/opportunity are direct contact by the recruiter. But, we may not be in the same area and/or job level. So, my approach may not work for you.

KlangFool
30% VWENX | 16% VFWAX/VTIAX | 14.5% VTSAX | 19.5% VBTLX | 10% VSIAX/VTMSX/VSMAX | 10% VSIGX| 30% Wellington 50% 3-funds 20% Mini-Larry
Ollie123
Posts: 185
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2016 11:39 am

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by Ollie123 »

sureshoe wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 12:39 pm So any HR people on here, don't be offended. It's a tough gig, but it's hard to measure, and you can coast in the right place.
To further preclude anyone taking offense, it is also probably worth noting I have a bachelor's degree in human resources (though work in a different field now).;)

Should probably watch my tone as I genuinely didn't want to offend, but I do stand by what I said. I also think (right or wrong) it attracts people looking for a more laid back approach to work than folks in other sectors. For whatever reason (and consistent across many organizations now) - HR folks are the ones who seem to never respond to emails until you start CCing their managers. Never have this issue with anyone else, including folks much further up the ladder getting far, far more emails.

RE: recruiters - I feel like those are very hit or miss too. Based on my wife's experience there are clearly distinct classes of them. "Headhunters" are very legit and worth their weight in gold. The modal tech recruiter seems closer to the stereotype of a used car salesman.
Last edited by Ollie123 on Fri May 07, 2021 1:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
SmileyFace
Posts: 9080
Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2014 9:11 am

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by SmileyFace »

When I looked for a job recently I let HR folks come to me - updated my linked-in profile and flipped the "recuiter only" bit over to OpenToWork and several companies reached out to me. I did apply to a few others cold on linkedin (none required a test to apply - and 2 led to multiple converations). But maybe it is all dependent upon job type, level, etc. I did a bunch of networking with former colleagues as well (which is usually the best way to find stuff and get a foot in the door) but ended up taking a job at a place without any internal contacts.
sureshoe
Posts: 2164
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2019 3:26 pm

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by sureshoe »

DiggleRex wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 11:42 am
sureshoe wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 11:26 am I know I'm not helping you directly, and I do empathize. But what type of position are you seeking? Not sure I can help here, but it might enable us to point you in some other direction.
It's okay--just venting and looking for various viewpoints. So while my degree was in mechanical engineering a long time ago, I never worked as an engineer. I usually end up in a role as the right hand man to the production/department supervisor, or even owner. While I can do machining, assembly and the like--I'm looking to get away from that--too physical and tedious. I often end up helping someone above me with processing/closing orders, data entry, inventory, organizing, computer work etc. I'm looking for less physical jobs now--office work, computer work.

None of these jobs I'm applying to have a good salary (just the way things are right now here)--so another reason I burn out during the application process when they want more and more of my time without even speaking to me.
I hear you. You have a valuable degree, I think you just have to work through it. The only other advice I might have is finding the companies you're applying to and trying to track down the HR department and hiring manager directly. Some people might find this annoying, but you might get a breakthrough.

I've had people track me down, and I've tried to help them.

As a side note, I saw you write this on another item: I tend to be a very principled person in that I sometimes do/don't do something strictly out of principle.

Take this for what's it worth (and I'm taking you out of context) - as someone who has lead pretty large orgs, "principled people" drive me insane. This doesn't mean I want corrupt people or lemmings who obey without thought, but sometimes I get employees who dig their heels in and make noise about things that aren't worth it. There's a point where I don't want to constantly explain myself and want people to go with the flow. We literally termed someone not too long ago and the guy is STILL emailing people at our org about how clueless we all are.
OnTrack2020
Posts: 1413
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 10:24 am

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by OnTrack2020 »

squirm wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 11:57 am
DiggleRex wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 11:45 am
sureshoe wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 11:26 am My wife is hiring a marketing manager. She has 1 position and 100 resumes. They simply put an inordinate amount of hurdles in place to weed out the candidates.
I can understand this aspect. But to your earlier point, some of the best, most qualified candidates may say, "the hell with all these hurdles" and look elsewhere.
My wife (also hiring manager) says, that's part of the process. She said, if you don't give 100% to the application and process, she doesn't want you as an employee.
OP, if it is frustrating for you, then you have to consider the time expended doing these tests. A friend mentioned decades ago when applying for jobs that companies act as if they are hiring rocket scientists or brain surgeons. The simple matter is they are not--unless they are actually looking for a scientist/surgeon :) . HR departments have taken the human aspect out of the process to the point where it is a joke and then wonder why they don't get good candidates. Anybody who is remotely intelligent simply will not do these tests for any extended period of time. Best of luck in your search.
rich126
Posts: 4453
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2018 3:56 pm

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by rich126 »

Sadly companies are outsourcing the job search and buying into various tests/screenings/etc. which I think are mostly bogus.

Your most valuable resource are your employees and you need to allocate time and effort into the search for a quality employee. I know when I dealt with the FAANG type companies they were very organized, screened employees and then had serious of technical questions (at least for technical positions). When I was dealing with various large contractors they reminded me of the federal government because they were not well organized, wanted you to reformat your resume since their parsing tool was marginal at best (i.e., you uploaded a resume and the parsing tool would try to reformat it but failed miserably), etc.

Fortunately I'm in the technical field where the employee has a lot of control over things but I know people searching for jobs in other fields and the whole application/interview process seems broken.

I've tried indeed, monster, etc. but found the experience not worth my time. You get hammered by recruiters who clearly don't read your resume, always want you to send them a resume (uh, guys it is already there online!), etc.

I've decided if a company has too many hoops for you to jump through then they don't really need me and aren't really serious about hiring people.
----------------------------- | If you think something is important and it doesn't involve the health of someone, think again. Life goes too fast, enjoy it and be nice.
KlangFool
Posts: 31426
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2008 12:35 pm

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by KlangFool »

DiggleRex wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 11:42 am
It's okay--just venting and looking for various viewpoints. So while my degree was in mechanical engineering a long time ago, I never worked as an engineer. I usually end up in a role as the right hand man to the production/department supervisor, or even owner. While I can do machining, assembly and the like--I'm looking to get away from that--too physical and tedious. I often end up helping someone above me with processing/closing orders, data entry, inventory, organizing, computer work etc. I'm looking for less physical jobs now--office work, computer work.

None of these jobs I'm applying to have a good salary (just the way things are right now here)--so another reason I burn out during the application process when they want more and more of my time without even speaking to me.
DiggleRex,

1) You have a mechanical engineering degree. So, you have common sense and ability to think.

<<None of these jobs I'm applying to have a good salary>>

2) Have you ever consider that you are applying to wrong jobs? Aka, you should apply to jobs with good salary instead? What is the salary range that we are talking about here? 60K to 80K? 80K to 120K? 120K to 150K?

3) With (1), you should be able to find jobs with good pay. For example, jobs dealing with project management.

KlangFool
30% VWENX | 16% VFWAX/VTIAX | 14.5% VTSAX | 19.5% VBTLX | 10% VSIAX/VTMSX/VSMAX | 10% VSIGX| 30% Wellington 50% 3-funds 20% Mini-Larry
User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
Posts: 95466
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 4:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Contact:

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by LadyGeek »

This thread is now in the Personal Finance (Not Investing) forum (career guidance).
Wiki To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.
stoptothink
Posts: 15368
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2010 8:53 am

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by stoptothink »

DiggleRex wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 12:42 pm
Ollie123 wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 12:28 pm I'm increasingly convinced HR is the home of ineptitude in most companies - in part because of things like this. I also think HR systems are a great example of where - for all our talk of how revolutionary machine learning is - it very rarely does nearly as good a job as the tech companies like to pretend it does.
THIS! A headhunter who writes on this topic (who comes down on the side of most of the assessment and hoop jumping being BS and that it shows the company doesn't know how to hire) said something related to your point recently that I thought was great. Unfortunately, I don't know if I saved the link to it so I can't quote it exactly. But his point was something like this, "I wonder how much time companies waste with all these hurdles that they think somehow is going to land them the best candidate vs just reading someone's resume, then making a judgment call (going with their gut) on who to speak to and ultimately hire." You may end up landing the better candidate (using less time and resources) with the latter, especially if you're a skilled interviewer.

I personally think no test or hurdle is going to give you a better impression of me than sitting across from me and having a conversation with me. In fact, if it's a casual conversation where you create an environment where I let my guard down, you're more likely to get a much more realisitc impression of me than if you ask me stuff like "where do you see yourself in 5 years, what is your worst quality, etc."--questions where I am going to tell you what I think you want to hear as to not hurt my chances.
What do you suggest companies do? When I have a spot on my team open, I am getting 50+ applications within the first few days, am I supposed to interview them all? There is a process; people who don't come close to meeting criteria are filtered out automatically, I personally look over the rest of the applications to decide who I will "test" (depends on the job), and then from there I begin interviewing (generally no more than a handful).

Companies aren't wasting time, they have to find some way to weed out the individuals who are not (on paper) a good fit because hiring is so time consuming. As has been mentioned multiple times, if you want to skip this process you have to network
tomsense76
Posts: 1428
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2020 1:52 am

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by tomsense76 »

Do you have former colleagues or friends from college/grad school that you can reach out to? While applying on a website can get you a job (have done it that way), reaching out to your network can often be more effective, more rewarding, and even more lucrative all because you know someone on the inside that can vouch for you. Of course this is hard in part because we may feel uncomfortable asking for help from others (especially if one is unemployed). That said, usually someone you know may be much more willing to help you than you think and you can always return the favor or pay-it-forward. Just a thought :happy
"Anyone who claims to understand quantum theory is either lying or crazy" -- Richard Feynman
User avatar
Michael Patrick
Posts: 349
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 9:25 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by Michael Patrick »

Part of assessing the candidates I've hired is whether they can follow directions correctly. And this is for professional positions that generally require advanced degrees.

You'd be surprised at how many candidates can't even follow a few simple directions in the application process. Things like "Limit your cover letter to two pages, any additional pages will not be read" and then they submit four pages. So beyond the answers you provide in the tests, what you see as hoops to jump through could also just be them seeing if you can read and understand the directions, and then complete them correctly.
Ollie123
Posts: 185
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2016 11:39 am

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by Ollie123 »

stoptothink wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 1:37 pm What do you suggest companies do? When I have a spot on my team open, I am getting 50+ applications within the first few days, am I supposed to interview them all? There is a process; people who don't come close to meeting criteria are filtered out automatically, I personally look over the rest of the applications to decide who I will "test" (depends on the job), and then from there I begin interviewing (generally no more than a handful).

Companies aren't wasting time, they have to find some way to weed out the individuals who are not (on paper) a good fit because hiring is so time consuming. As has been mentioned multiple times, if you want to skip this process you have to network
Not the OP, but I don't take any issue whatsoever with your approach. Automatic filtering on basic criteria (i.e. degree in X with Y years of experience) and looking over the rest seems quite reasonable.

If you haven't been on the job market in a while, it is not remotely uncommon these days for the process to involve:
- Send us your resume
- Type the contents of your resume into these boxes on another page for some reason. Note that copy/pasting will screw up the formatting because our billion dollar company's entire HR department runs off a website one of our executive's teenagers built using an old copy of microsoft frontpage
- Complete this 230 item questionnaire that is basically our version of a facebook "What Disney character best represents your coding style?" quiz but with less validity
- Submit a video using our clunky 90's style interface of you answering a weird series of questions that appear to be about another job that may or may not be reviewed by a human at some point

My wife was looking for a job recently and sadly the above is only a very slight exaggeration (i.e. Disney characters were not explicitly mentioned though may very well have been included in the results). She's a highly qualified professional with two master's degrees applying for 6-figure management positions in mid-large corporations. I'm fortunate to avoid this in my field where everything is done exclusively through the hiring manager and HR isn't really involved until the final paperwork, but it is BAD out there right now....
BillWalters
Posts: 339
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2019 5:21 pm

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by BillWalters »

I have never so much as received an interview from applying to job postings online. I have an Ivy undergrad and two graduate degrees. They’re a total black hole.

Every job I’ve ever gotten was through a personal relationship. You have to mine those if at all possible.

No offense to HR people, but HR is usually a complete joke. If they knew how to run things, they wouldn’t be in HR. I’m sure there are exceptions.
User avatar
ClevrChico
Posts: 3246
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 8:24 pm

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by ClevrChico »

I've had the best luck on Indeed (actually found my current job there). I'd suggest focusing on the really good companies you want to work at to save yourself a lot of time.

Linkedin seems to be a huge waste of time right now, as recruiters try to place any candidate anywhere.
User avatar
Lee_WSP
Posts: 10346
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2019 5:15 pm
Location: Arizona

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by Lee_WSP »

DiggleRex wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 12:05 pm
squirm wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 11:57 am My wife (also hiring manager) says, that's part of the process. She said, if you don't give 100% to the application and process, she doesn't want you as an employee.
I can understand this too. There's definitely more than one POV to evaluate this from. In regards to that, on some of these job message boards where I have read hundreds of opinions on the matter, others have pointed out in a situation like that, you're not necessarily getting the best candidate, but possibly the most desperate (candidates who NEED a job ASAP, and cannot afford to be picky or principled about the matter).
That may well be true, but the employer knows they definitely want to work there. As opposed to someone who says, "no, I'm not going to take your silly test".

Depending on the test, there may not be a great way of screening for the skill in the resume. If there's no way to screen for the skill, what do you do as an employer? Make the candidate take the test after the interview? That makes no sense from the employer's perspective, you just have everyone take the test beforehand and then look at the resumes and then pick.

Honestly it really depends on who has the power in the dynamic. If the employer is highly desirable, they can make candidates jump through all sorts of hoops because they have 1,000 candidates for one position. If on the other hand, they have 100 positions to fill and only 150 candidates or less, the bar is going to be set much lower.

That said, I probably have no clue how things work in your field. I just liken the process to dating. I'd assume the process is passed on to HR managers and firms because the decision maker simply hates the process.
User avatar
anon_investor
Posts: 15111
Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2019 1:43 pm

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by anon_investor »

KlangFool wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 11:02 am OP,

You have a choice not to waste your time on answering those questions. In fact, I used that as a sign of not wasting more time on the job postings. It is a win-win. It earned an auto-rejection from me.

Ditto, if a recruiter contacted me, I would ask for a job description before I proceed. If they cannot produce one, it is an auto-rejection too.

Create a weed out process to reject useless job posting.

KlangFool
+1. It might be my field or level, but I would never put up with a bs test.
KlangFool
Posts: 31426
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2008 12:35 pm

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by KlangFool »

Lee_WSP wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 6:29 pm
That may well be true, but the employer knows they definitely want to work there. As opposed to someone who says, "no, I'm not going to take your silly test".
Lee_WSP,

And, why is that a good thing? Aka, employer is only interested in candidates that are desperate enough to put up with the BS.

I guess it is a good thing.

A) Only candidates that are desperate enough will apply.

B) This employer do not deserve any better candidates that could go some where else.

Aka, they deserve each others. It is a perfect match!

KlangFool
30% VWENX | 16% VFWAX/VTIAX | 14.5% VTSAX | 19.5% VBTLX | 10% VSIAX/VTMSX/VSMAX | 10% VSIGX| 30% Wellington 50% 3-funds 20% Mini-Larry
amitjadhav
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2017 12:20 am

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by amitjadhav »

I have a different perspective on it. Major companies and common job titles receive quite a few applications. Early on in my career I just choose to stay with small companies with some specialized job profile. There are lot of small companies who don't get as many applicants as big names. This is specially true in tech jobs.
User avatar
quantAndHold
Posts: 10141
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2015 10:39 pm
Location: West Coast

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by quantAndHold »

A suggestion, that you can take or leave. It sounds like you’re currently trying to make a change, and you’re applying to office jobs as a generalist. Are you working now? If you’re not currently working, how about doing some general office temp jobs? I have a couple of siblings that changed careers multiple times by working as temps. You get to try out companies. Companies get to see what you can do. If they like you, you’ll be the one they think of when they have an opening.

Cuz yeah, you’re right, trying to get hired as a generalist is horrible.
User avatar
Lee_WSP
Posts: 10346
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2019 5:15 pm
Location: Arizona

Re: Frustrating candidate experiences in job search

Post by Lee_WSP »

KlangFool wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 7:09 pm
Lee_WSP wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 6:29 pm
That may well be true, but the employer knows they definitely want to work there. As opposed to someone who says, "no, I'm not going to take your silly test".
Lee_WSP,

And, why is that a good thing? Aka, employer is only interested in candidates that are desperate enough to put up with the BS.

I guess it is a good thing.

A) Only candidates that are desperate enough will apply.

B) This employer do not deserve any better candidates that could go some where else.

Aka, they deserve each others. It is a perfect match!

KlangFool
Well, my experience is limited to low skilled or entry level hiring.

All I can say with certainty is that the process is unpleasant for most people and both sides.

As an applicant all those years ago they didn't have indeed and their easily administered skills tests. One employer gave me an IQ test....

Honestly, I thought it was a great idea to weed out people who had the ability, but not the resume for attention to detail and ability to follow directions.
Post Reply