Roughly 200 applications through the one-click flow, four rejections, and silence on everything else. Some of the postings have been up for six months and reappear with a new date. I have twelve hours a week for this and I would rather put them somewhere that produces a conversation. Where are you finding roles now, and does anything about the big platform work if you use it differently?
I tracked source-to-screen for four months because I was going mad. One-click applications: 140 sent, 3 screens. Applications direct through company sites: 46 sent, 9 screens. Roles found through a person: 11, 7 screens. Same resume throughout. Since then I use the big platform purely as a listings index and never apply inside it, and I stopped applying to anything more than about five days old.
I burned three months on volume and the worst part was not the wasted applications, it was that I felt busy. Twelve applications an evening feels like work and produces nothing, so you never make the harder change. If I could go back I would cap it at five applications a week and spend the rest of the time emailing people who do the job I want.
Flipping the platform around is what worked for me and it is the opposite of applying. Rewrite the headline so it says what you do rather than your last job title, turn on whatever open-to-work signalling you are comfortable with, and post something short about your actual work once a week. I had four recruiters approach me in two months after eighteen months of nothing, purely because I stopped treating it as an application form and started treating it as a searchable profile. It feels ridiculous. It worked.
Agreed, with a caveat: this works far better in some fields than others. In mine, recruiters search the platform constantly. A friend in manufacturing got precisely nothing from the same effort.
Niche job boards are underrated and take ten minutes to find. Every industry has two or three, usually run by a trade body or one obsessive person, and the postings there get a fraction of the applications. My last two roles both came from a board with an ugly website and about forty listings.
Twelve hours a week is the constraint that matters. Spend two on finding roles, two on applying properly to the four best, and eight on talking to people. Everyone does this the other way round.
@gramgrader_gus · last mo. · 3 replies
I have been on the hiring side for volume roles and the honest explanation is unglamorous. A one-click flow attached to a popular posting produces hundreds of applications in the first two days, most of them from people who did not read it, and the team reviewing them is one person doing it between meetings. Nobody is discarding you maliciously; they stopped reading at fifty. The applications that got looked at were the ones that arrived through the company's own careers page or with a name attached from inside. That is not a trick, it is just a much smaller pile.
Reply
Report
@gio_castellan · last mo.
The stale reposting thing has an equally boring explanation: some are genuinely open and slow, some are req numbers held open for pipeline, and some are agencies collecting resumes. You cannot tell them apart from outside, which is the actual problem.
Reply
Report
@lena_arbogast · last mo.
Applying via the company careers page even when I found the role on the platform is such an obvious move and I have not been doing it. That is going to be the first change.
Reply
Report