Ever feel like that quick-apply job application you fired off recently just went into a black hole? You may be on to something.
Anyone who’s applied to jobs in the digital age understands how tedious and time-consuming the process of completing applications can be. Many applicants are likely applying to dozens of jobs.
The Need for Customization
While an employee might have a single resume they can use over and over for each application, cover letters—while not always strictly required, they are generally encouraged—should be at least somewhat employer-specific. For instance, an applicant wouldn’t want to leave in the line about their excitement for the opportunity to work at ABC Corp. when applying to Acme, Inc.
And that resume? Often, online job application portals will allow applicants to upload a resume but then require the applicant to enter all the exact same information manually into the employer’s site.
Enter “Easy Apply”
It’s understandable then why shortcuts like LinkedIn’s “Easy Apply” are popular options for applicants. These tools allow candidates to quickly apply to multiple positions in a very short period.
However, that gain in efficiency isn’t useful if employers aren’t giving those rapid-fire applications the same weight as applications that follow a more traditional and tedious approach.
We reached out to recruitment and employment experts to get their thoughts on the use of quick-apply tools by applicants and how, if at all, recruiters treat such applications differently.
Shotgun Approach
From an employer standpoint, quick-apply options for submitting job applications can help increase the number of applicants for job postings because many potential candidates may be turned off by cumbersome employer-specific application interfaces and choose not to apply. On the other hand, if a candidate chooses not to apply to a job because the application process takes an extra 10 or 15 minutes, some employers wonder, is that someone we want working with us?
As a result, many recruiters and employers associate quick-apply options with applicants who aren’t motivated or aren’t necessarily particularly interested in a given role. They’re just interested enough to fire off an application if it only takes a few seconds away from other, seemingly, more important tasks.
Impact on Volume of Applications
The fact that applicants can spend less time and effort filling out a quick-apply online application contributes to higher volumes of applications. While some companies have begun experimenting with AI to help sort through it all, many employers would simply prefer to limit the applicant funnel to just those applicants who are truly interested and who represent good fits.
“Quick apply options have made recruiting very, very difficult. People can apply without much thought at all, and so recruiters are overwhelmed with applications, and thus applications get less review this way,” says Michael Trust, JD, MPA, SPHR, PHRca, SHRM-SCP, of Michael Trust Consulting. “Some people use this to quickly apply just for the purpose of showing their state Unemployment Department that they ‘applied’ for the requisite number of jobs. So, while LinkedIn has made it easy for applicants, which is good, it’s had the reverse effect on recruiters, which ends up being bad—for everyone.”
Given the impact of quick-apply options on the volume of applications, it’s simply not feasible for many hiring teams to use them or, if quick-apply is an option, to give considerable weight to all the quick-apply applicants.
“For recruiters who have a huge number of requisitions to fill and have thousands of applicants for each, it would be virtually impossible for them to manually sort through all of these,” says Trust.
Integration with ATS
One impact of third-party quick-apply options that is not obvious to most job applicants is the logistical challenge of tracking applications made through third-party databases within a company’s applicant tracking system (ATS).
“The applicants can’t be saved in the company’s database because they live on LinkedIn as applicants, which defeats the purpose of having a company ATS like Workday,” explains Steven Lowell of Find My Profession, a reverse recruiter, about his experience with LinkedIn’s Easy Apply feature.
Lowell also notes that quick-apply tools are often limiting, because the data fields supported by a particular quick-apply option might not include all the criteria an employer needs to evaluate. Even when the desired fields are present, there’s plenty of room for error since some inputs are based on existing records like LinkedIn profiles that aren’t always accurate or up to date.
“LinkedIn’s Easy Apply is limiting,” Lowell explains. “You have to use their ATS design, based on their algorithm matching to profiles that may not have been properly filled out.”
Common Use Cases for Quick Apply
Despite these drawbacks, many recruiters and employers do find a place for quick-apply tools. For example, smaller companies or teams with limited budgets hiring for junior or entry-level roles might leverage a quick-apply tool to expand their reach and attract a large pool of applicants.
The relatively generic nature of the work in this example means that even the basic screening abilities of quick-apply tools can be effective to quickly weed out a large volume of poor fits. For example, if the role requires a certain length of experience, degree, or certification.
Additionally, low-effort application options can be a great way for companies to attract more passive applicants—those who already have a job and aren’t interested in spending a lot of time on a tedious application process but may be a great fit and might be open to learning about new opportunities if it doesn’t require a significant time investment up front.
Using tools like LinkedIn’s Easy Apply feature can save applicants considerable time in their job search, especially when they’re applying to many jobs at once. But if employers take a negative view of those applications compared to applicants who spend extra time jumping through additional hoops, such disparate treatment may easily outweigh the time savings.
It may be wise for applicants to avoid quick-apply options when applying to positions they feel particularly strongly about. As for employers themselves, while quick-apply options may have a place in their recruitment efforts, they should consider the potential downfalls—and the chances that this feature could be negatively impacting their recruitment efforts.
Lin Grensing-Pophal is a Contributing Editor at HR Daily Advisor.
The post <strong>The Double-Edged Sword of Easy Apply: Boon for Applicants, Bane for Recruiters?</strong> appeared first on HR Daily Advisor.