To think it’s a bit unfair for employers to list 20 + criteria on a job specification?

[VioletsandRoses]

Aibu to think it is unfair of employers to list 20 different criteria on a job specification and ask you to give examples of how you meet each one but only give you a word count of 1000 words to do so? I see this and similar a lot on job applications and recognise the importance of being concise but I don’t see how so many points can be covered in such a short space.

I’ve had 30 or more bullet points to do with only 500 words! It’s idiotic. Don’t forget if you’re submitting a cv as part of the application they’ll be able to see eg retail experience on there. And then group the requirements together into a few key headings (eg “being innovative”) and outline one project where you did all that.

In Australia (for mainly government jobs) there is a long criteria list HOWEVER the advert will state how many of the criteria to respond to and usually you don't have to cover the desirable criteria, just essential.

Can you post a photo or link to the job you're referring to?

I'm involved in a bulk recruitment at the moment - we have received over 1500 applications for 200 jobs and have to go through each one manually to sift it. We have 800 word limit and 10 criteria, it is surprising how time consuming it is to read through every application and assess fairly against the criteria even with 20 of us sifting. An increased word limit would make it even harder - you can get a sense of a person and their credibility in 800 words, it's just a taster designed to see if you want to take their interest further.

I agree, OP. Up to 12 is plenty. It's an example of an employer understanding the value of a competency based job description but not understanding how to create an effective one.

Are you sure you need to demonstrate each one individually? Our applications use headers like communication skills, leadership etc and then have a list of about five things under each one. They're not looking for specific examples of each one. They're looking for an example of when you did one thing that met the general header and also hit more than one of the other criteria.

There is a word they use for this type of application and can I hell remember what it is. Competency based or something.

@newnortherner111

I agree. This suggests to me a recruitment process where there is a favoured candidate, who they want to choose but must have an open process to avoid any allegations of unfair selection.

Not at all. This is completely common and standard in recruitment. It doesn't indicate a preference to a certain candidate at all. It is trying to have a very clear objective evaluation criteria that can be stood over. Bullet points and interlinked skill sets is the way to go.

Don’t forget you’ll have to jump through rings of fire whilst writing a 5,000 word essay on the social aspects of wearing odd socks and have 30 years experience whilst being aged 21 or younger with one blue eye and one pink eye.

I always find it strange the need to make recruitment as undemanding on HR as possible. Complaining it is time consuming for HR etc is bizarre. Recruiting suitable employees is the most important function in any organisation and getting it wrong can have significant impacts. We all know people who really shouldn't be doing their roles in organisations and the effect it has.

The pressure in recruitment isn't just on the person looking for employment.

Are HR ever held accountable when the process gets it wrong?

I think 1000 words sorts out the people who have that experience/ training and can succinctly list it from those who haven't so will waffle around the issue.
If you don't have experience of something don't give up as we have chosen less experienced people at interview because they seemed to have more potential to learn.

I always find it strange the need to make recruitment as undemanding on HR as possible It's called efficiency - I know who knew? - HR spending time reading waffle is a waste of their time (someone has to pay them!)- moving forward it will be a waste of everyone else's time if the applicant can't write in a concise manner.

Is it possible to cluster them ?
Ie - communication/organisation/professionalism/reliability etc. You might get down to 6 or 7 keys areas.

‘The listed criteria fall within 6 main areas which I’ll address in turn - 1. Communication skills ‘ type content ?

@TheReluctantPhoenix

Employers love their forms but, realistically, they will look first at what your current job is, and then your education.

If you are qualified and don’t shoot your self in the foot by writing nonsense or ungrammaticallly, the 1,000 words will be skim read (at best). I am fairly certain few HR departments have time to use some sort of marking scheme where they tick off the points one by one.

Nope that's not true. In my place your answers are scored and is where you will pick up most points.

@ClareBlue where I work, HR don't do the recruitment. There is a recruitment gateway and its the hiring managers that do it alongside their day job. The thinking is that they know best what they are looking for, in terms of experience and fit. It is very important to get the right person, so the application process whittles down the applicant list to only those who you want to meet in person. So the interview stage is as in depth as you make it, but getting to that stage, nobody has the will or time to read through 3000 words of drivel that could boil down to 500 relevant words, when the time available is best spent on talking to people face to face. That's why the blunt instrument of sifting needs to be efficient and consistent, hence the shorter application word limit. We do blind recruitment too, so we don't know if the person we are sifting is a man or a woman, their age or ethnicity - we get a candidate number and their personal statement with a CV that can be brief or lengthy depending on how the applicant chooses to complete it- it's often not possible to work out age and background as they may only last the last 3 years or so of employment.

I am fairly certain few HR departments have time to use some sort of marking scheme where they tick off the points one by one. That is pretty much what we do - tick off your points one by one - I always get the feeling that people somehow think we'll not notice what you write if you do your CV in blue paper - we'll be blown away with your originality! Mind you some idiot might but just in case - write something that's relevant and makes sense!

Thanks everyone again for all the advice, I will definitely bullet point going forward. For a couple of the criteria I’ve given a couple of examples of how I meet the criteria so I’ll take out the second examples and leave it at one