Why Job Boards Should Charge You for Resumes
I often talk about the fundamental lack of good job search training at the college level. Let's face it, every college should require a 3-credit course teaching students about the job marketplace, developing a value proposition, creating a job search strategy and learning various job search tactics (organizing a job search "territory," proactive networking, interview prep and so on).
Let's face it, if you don't learn these skills in college, you'll probably never go out of your way to learn them later in life. We're all too busy playing golf and shopping to learn a skill you actually need.
I am bummed that this will never happen. It's just too big of a cruise ship to turn around. It's like asking IBM to change from Big Blue to Big Red.
So we're stuck with the current system. The antiquated system of applying via online postings and half-hearted networking ("Uncle Joe, can you please send my resume to your neighbor's HR Department?").
But I have an idea, inspired by Seth Godin. Job seekers should have to pay to apply to all online postings (big job boards like Monster, in-house corporate job boards, Craigslist, ALL OF THEM). $1, $5, $10... I don't know. The higher the stakes, the higher the cost, I guess.
I know what you're saying. "Brian is a recruiter, he just wants to make his life easier" or "There is 10% unemployment right now, is he crazy?"
Trust me. If job seekers had to pay to apply to job postings, it would really shift the job market. You're not going to spend money, even a dollar, on a job that isn't a good fit for you.
One PR firm recently got 370 resumes for one junior position. This is a problem. The company knows they're not likely to find the perfect candidate in this pile of nearly 400 resumes. There are a dozen candidates who might not have "round peg, round hole" experience, but surely hustle and have great transferable skills they could adapt for the role... but alas, they'll get lost in the shuffle. And for the truly five or six great candidates with spot-on experience, this reality means it may takes days or weeks for the HR team to contact them, resulting in missed opportunities, timing issues with other offers, etc.
Essentially, EVERYONE LOSES. WOMP WOMP.
However, if everyone had to pay to apply to job postings, here is what would likely happen:
You would really decrease the amount of resumes a company receives, resulting in quality. From say, 370 to 50 for that one junior posting. That would allow companies to give proper time to all 50 resumes and perhaps call some of the transferable skills folks that might get left out. The spot-on candidates would get called in a day or two. And the folks who applied to 20 jobs and never heard back from anyone, would realize there's something that needs to be changed/adapted. They could evolve. They could seek out new skills. They could ask for help.
This approach would also force people to HUSTLE. It's just too easy to "click apply." People who refused to pay to apply (couldn't afford it, refused to, etc.) would be forced to learn new skills, networking skills, how to leverage social media, etc.
Isn't that how it happens? We don't adapt and learn new skills until we have to, right?
I know this sounds wacky, but this would restore some order to an otherwise broken system.
Let's face it, if you don't learn these skills in college, you'll probably never go out of your way to learn them later in life. We're all too busy playing golf and shopping to learn a skill you actually need.
I am bummed that this will never happen. It's just too big of a cruise ship to turn around. It's like asking IBM to change from Big Blue to Big Red.
So we're stuck with the current system. The antiquated system of applying via online postings and half-hearted networking ("Uncle Joe, can you please send my resume to your neighbor's HR Department?").
But I have an idea, inspired by Seth Godin. Job seekers should have to pay to apply to all online postings (big job boards like Monster, in-house corporate job boards, Craigslist, ALL OF THEM). $1, $5, $10... I don't know. The higher the stakes, the higher the cost, I guess.
I know what you're saying. "Brian is a recruiter, he just wants to make his life easier" or "There is 10% unemployment right now, is he crazy?"
Trust me. If job seekers had to pay to apply to job postings, it would really shift the job market. You're not going to spend money, even a dollar, on a job that isn't a good fit for you.
One PR firm recently got 370 resumes for one junior position. This is a problem. The company knows they're not likely to find the perfect candidate in this pile of nearly 400 resumes. There are a dozen candidates who might not have "round peg, round hole" experience, but surely hustle and have great transferable skills they could adapt for the role... but alas, they'll get lost in the shuffle. And for the truly five or six great candidates with spot-on experience, this reality means it may takes days or weeks for the HR team to contact them, resulting in missed opportunities, timing issues with other offers, etc.
Essentially, EVERYONE LOSES. WOMP WOMP.
However, if everyone had to pay to apply to job postings, here is what would likely happen:
You would really decrease the amount of resumes a company receives, resulting in quality. From say, 370 to 50 for that one junior posting. That would allow companies to give proper time to all 50 resumes and perhaps call some of the transferable skills folks that might get left out. The spot-on candidates would get called in a day or two. And the folks who applied to 20 jobs and never heard back from anyone, would realize there's something that needs to be changed/adapted. They could evolve. They could seek out new skills. They could ask for help.
This approach would also force people to HUSTLE. It's just too easy to "click apply." People who refused to pay to apply (couldn't afford it, refused to, etc.) would be forced to learn new skills, networking skills, how to leverage social media, etc.
Isn't that how it happens? We don't adapt and learn new skills until we have to, right?
I know this sounds wacky, but this would restore some order to an otherwise broken system.
Thanks Caroline. Bold yes and it will never happen on a grand scale (but neither will training the entire country on how to conduct a job search, unfortunately). I did hear from one organization that charges for internship applications and they claim it really weeds out candidates.
I see the concept, however, as a person who was underemployed and is now unemployed, paying non-existent money for a job posting is ridiculous!
As a recent grad who hasn't made it into the career realm yet (or "limbo" as I like to call it) it's difficult to pin down what I think I would be great at or interested in as a second/back-up career option.
HOWEVER, in the online portion of my job hunt, I'll keep this idea in mind and be more strict in applying only for jobs that I mesh with my career goals and skill set.
Great idea, but the market seems to be heading the opposite way (witness the growth of 'free job posting' job boards). I'm hoping you're just ahead of your time, and that we're in a better system a few years from now!
I think the system you proposed would be very beneficial for the job search. This system is already utilized by colleges who require applications fees. To great effect, top schools would certainly receive an enormously greater volume of applications if anyone could apply free of cost.