Data Proves Online Applications Are A Buzzkill

Have you ever filled out an online application, only to never receive a response of any kind? Well, now there is data to support the alarmingly ineffective and frustrating nature of applying for work online.

Data Proves Online Applications are a Buzzkill

Today, Big Data is like 1990's Madonna, totally En Vogue.

At the same time, many who are fighting to get out of the unemployment line and back into the workforce are living the American Nightmare when it comes to data. They are being compelled by companies to do large amounts of time-consuming data entry on each application. When no responses are received in return, this can make applying online feel about as effective a use of time as one of 1980's Madonna's lace gloves is stylish in the present day.

Keeping the American Dream alive means facing many challenges and defying the odds brought on by unexpected unemployment. Balancing time between family and job hunting these days means being extremely organized while also taking a creative, yet analytical approach to tracking progress of your applications and results of your search.

Based on personal experience, I knew going into this process that with family responsibilities, my opportunities for after hours or other in-person networking events would be limited. Honestly, I also knew the same holds true today that did many years ago, it's not what you know, it's who you know. Even for those of us who are cool under pressure, unemployment can reek of desperation. So, for the most part, I prefer attending networking events when gainfully employed.

One of the few options left then, was man vs. machine.

Even the most popular systems for submitting online applications (also referred to as Applicant Tracking Systems, or ATS) are alarmingly ineffective and frustrating to navigate. Anyone who has attempted to find work using these tools probably knows the mind-boggling feeling of just wanting to advance to the next page…but getting blocked from doing so. That is, until you enter the telephone number of your 2004 employer.

(Employers, please check the "required" data fields in your forms, what does the phone number of a previous employer have to do with my present day Search Query Language skills?)

The system is broken, but like Winston Churchill once said, "If you're going through hell, keep going."

So, over a period of 5 months, I painstakingly compiled, tracked and analyzed data from nearly 300 applications to prove the alarmingly ineffective and frustrating nature of applying online, even in 2015.

Before anyone gets critical about the size of the data set, think for a moment about what is humanly possible on a daily basis, running daddy daycare in the summer months, scraping the web for job opportunities to which you are a reasonable match, optimizing keyword content, revising resumes, doing data entry, conducting research, keeping accurate records without an enterprise-level filing system, doing follow-ups, attending interviews and gathering feedback from the professional network across multiple time zones. Respectfully, I ask for leniency on the size of the data set.

Also, out of respect for the employers and their selected software systems, we'll keep the results to generic data, where you will see how poor the response rate is - even with today's advanced algorithms and killer keywords (reportedly) playing a major role in the process.

Believe it or not, at one point, I actually researched if there was a way to automate my resume submissions. The thinking at the time was a more shotgun approach might at least improve my chances for a successful outcome. Then, I thought about IBM's "Watson" laughing in my face before beating me into submission, which convinced me to quickly get back on my original course.

The review of outcomes is limited to applications that were tracked and entered as data which came from new contacts sourced through networking, major career websites, company websites or social media. Due to family considerations, most of the applications were limited to the Charlotte, NC area but I enthusiastically entertained some exciting opportunities outside of the local area (had I been made an offer, I would then have to get really creative about quality time with family).

61% of the time resumes were revised to best match the job description associated with each position.

46% of my applications are still in a holding pattern, there hasn't been any feedback from the employer, despite numerous follow-up attempts with the appropriate individuals.

42% of those rejections were in writing, the other 58% I had to log into the ATS, only to discover the status of my application had changed without my receiving a notification of any kind.

33% of my applications received a rejection email, and get this, one even sent a written form letter through snail mail!

29.3 days was the average time to receive a response to an application (automated form letter, personalized message or phone call).

28 different ATS platforms were encountered.

7% of my applications resulted in a phone screen of some kind, through human resources, a hiring manager or a recruiting service looking to fill a position as an independent 3rd party.

5% of the jobs changed to closed or the job requisition was cancelled.

3% of the applications actually resulted in an in-person interview.

0% resulted in offers for employment.

In conclusion, (at the risk of sounding extremely cliché) who you know and the perfect timing may ultimately prove to be your best chance of getting out of the unemployment line. As you can see, the data backs up the alarmingly ineffective and frustrating nature of applying for jobs online.