Soooo disappointed in job applications!

[SnowfallSnowball]

Hi
I am currently shortlisting for a role and the level of applications are so disappointing. I totally understand that nowadays applications are a task in themselves but if you’re not going to take the time to read the application guidance, JD and PS why bother applying at all?

I have already seen a high number of people who have just wrote a cover letter and attached their CV when we specify no CV’s and to write a supporting statement abiding by items on the PS. Many of these applicants are already in a job so they must have applied properly to posts in the past, I don’t get it!

Any other recruiters have these issues?

just because you've done a job for a number of years doesn't mean you're very good at it! Within reason surely? That's why you ask for a minimum because the most talented person would still need a minimum amount of knowledge and experience gained from doing the job.

I do know what I'm doing when it come to recruiting my staff believe it or not! It might not be an approach others would use but it works well for us! It's really useful hearing about how other people do it - please don't take it as a criticism - I am interested in others point of view even if I don't believe it might not work for us - I like to remain open and curious to different ways of doing things.

@RemoteControlledSheep

just because you've done a job for a number of years doesn't mean you're very good at it! Within reason surely? That's why you ask for a minimum because the most talented person would still need a minimum amount of knowledge and experience gained from doing the job.

But that's difficult to quantify as it can very much depend on the individual which is why it's best not to specify a certain number of years. It's fine to ask for experience but it's not good recruitment practice to put a number on it.

@RemoteControlledSheep

I do know what I'm doing when it come to recruiting my staff believe it or not! It might not be an approach others would use but it works well for us! It's really useful hearing about how other people do it - please don't take it as a criticism - I am interested in others point of view even if I don't believe it might not work for us - I like to remain open and curious to different ways of doing things.

Thank you. I worked as a careers adviser in HE for a number of years so I've seen all manners of good, bad and downright ugly recruitment practices!!

I'm sure it works for you because in academia the employers hold all the power and people will jump through any hoops you hold. You're proving exactly why people with caring responsibilities etc get driven out of the industry though.

A good CV should already have the relevant industry experience. The information you requested should be in a standard teaching plan. A tailored CV, teaching and research plan can already take a week to write, even when you have one ready from a previous application. If someone hasn't bothered to include it there, they're clearly not right for the job anyway.

All the prep work for applications is done after hours. By demanding someone take an extra hour or two to fill in your form you're adding to their already enormous unpaid workload. But it's ok, because academia runs on unpaid work and everyone is so thankful to get a job the universities can exploit them as much as they like. Even before they've applied.

I hate how much employers expect from candidates vs how little they give in return. Lengthy application forms, multiple interviews, etc, just puts me off entirely. Especially when you don’t even hear back in return.

Gosh yes yes yes. If i get to a first interview i expect a reply. When i was looking last year, i had a few interviews, mostly i got a reply but for 2 i didn't. One i emailed and got a pathetic excuse of a reply. One i called, and they actually thought that was great and invited me for a 2nd interview (which i told them to shove)

But in the end i was head hunted into a job, half an hour talking to the boss, half an hour talking to the rest of the team. That was it.

I'm sure it works for you because in academia the employers hold all the power and people will jump through any hoops you hold. You're proving exactly why people with caring responsibilities etc get driven out of the industry though.

Sorry but you're wrong. Due to the nature of my course and additional roles I undertake, I am VERY conscious of not making it difficult for people with caring responsibilities. You're making an awful lot of assumptions considering you've not actually seen my application firm.

A good CV should already have the relevant industry experience. The information you requested should be in a standard teaching plan. A tailored CV, teaching and research plan can already take a week to write, even when you have one ready from a previous application. If someone hasn't bothered to include it there, they're clearly not right for the job anyway.

That might work for some academics positions but not mine. I don't want a any of those things. I have a very specific person specification and I want to see evidence of how the applicants meet those criteria.

All the prep work for applications is done after hours. By demanding someone take an extra hour or two to fill in your form you're adding to their already enormous unpaid workload. But it's ok, because academia runs on unpaid work and everyone is so thankful to get a job the universities can exploit them as much as they like. Even before they've applied.

The vast, vast majority of my applicants ( if not all) will not becoming from inside academia. I'm not exploiting anyone.

I have no experience of working in academia so accept it’s different but in most other jobs experience is absolutely relevant.

20 years into my career I’m rarely experiencing “firsts”. Just about every issue that arises from a cyber attack to a takeover bid to a death on site is something I have experienced at least once in my career. That is what makes me a better lawyer and leader.

People in private companies who are not good at their jobs despite twenty years experience are easy to identify because of their lack of progression.

@thedevils are you asking for things that don't go together?

I am an accountant. If you needed accountancy and a sales person in the same job you would struggle as people don't tend to do both?

@topcat2014 welcome to the madness 😂 I love it but I am also painfully aware of the oddness of education life when compared with the 'real' world! You might find things move a bit slow as everything has to follow a procedure but in timw you get institutionalised to that and date I say find it quite comforting. Going back to recruitment, i know if I apply for five teacher/middle leader jobs in five different counties each application and interview process will still be pretty much the same, you do get used to what you know. I had to write my CV purely to go into a vocational subject evidence folder a few years ago so if I went out into the private sector I'd have to start it from scratch.

I am very familiar with this process from both sides and think it's pure evil (like @Flowers500 and some others suggest). There is sometimes an opportunity to challenge this bullshit which is what I have done as a recruiting manager so thankfully I can avoid the nightmare of reading half-arsed responses from now on. Even more importantly it means a wider pool of suitable candidates.

[quote topcat2014]@thedevils are you asking for things that don't go together?

I am an accountant. If you needed accountancy and a sales person in the same job you would struggle as people don't tend to do both?[/quote]
I'm looking for a practitioner who has the ability teach and eventually get involved in research.

It's not your typical route into academia but we are training people to do a specific job so that industry knowledge and experience is key. This is a typical route into this role, in my subject.
For most academic jobs a proven track record in research will be key whereas I just want to know they have the ability to do research.

This is why it's important to consider these things on an individual level.

@PegasusReturns

I have no experience of working in academia so accept it’s different but in most other jobs experience is absolutely relevant.

20 years into my career I’m rarely experiencing “firsts”. Just about every issue that arises from a cyber attack to a takeover bid to a death on site is something I have experienced at least once in my career. That is what makes me a better lawyer and leader.

People in private companies who are not good at their jobs despite twenty years experience are easy to identify because of their lack of progression.

Or they've taken family friendly or part time roles in many cases and prioritised that over career whilst children are young...

@TheDevils I meant more the bit about not being able to ask for a degree as that would exclude a 21 year old, I see the point about X amount of years potentially being discriminatory, it's not something that tends to come up even indirectly in teaching. We tend to say 'experience teaching physics to higher tier GCSE' or what have you, which you can technically tick off during your training year. Although we do also suffer in education that younger staff are generally cheaper so there is a lot of unscrupulous stuff that goes against more experienced (aka older, generally) teachers who are at the top of the payscale as they did their climbing when it was more or less automatic progression, it's much harder to go up the scales now so you can have quite experienced classroom staff stuck on a fairly low scale point if their performance management system is excessively tight, so they are more attractive to recruit. Just shows the nuance of each specific sector I guess.

I wonder if it's an education thing. We've tried 3 rounds of recruitment for a TA position which is specific and we've had applicants who have no idea, no mention of children and no comment on the job profile. It's just shocking really the level of applicants. When you ask for someone with BSL telling me you can interpret Spanish isn't going to cut it 🙄

I actually think that one lot were just told you apply as you have to complete so many applications a week. They were so poor and some never mentioned children at all!

Or they've taken family friendly or part time roles in many cases and prioritised that over career whilst children are young...

I disagree.

When you see talented people who have had time off for children or ill health there is an ebb and flow. Over a twenty year career it is barely noticeable. People who are shit have frequent job changes, plateaus and step backs. It’s easy to distinguish the two

Personally I don't understand why companies expect you to decant the contents of your CV into their online format.

One reason is so they cannot see personal details of the candidate. When I was recruiting you had a login to the application system that allowed you to view applications but no personal details about the candidate. The company felt it was the best way to rule out conscious or unconscious bias when shortlisting. Also, some companies use software to filter initial applications. The software picks up on key words in the application and either shortlists or rejects the application.

@topcat2014

The whole point of recruitment is discriminating against the crap candidates in favour of the good ones, bearing in mind a few specific legal requirements.

All these people guilding the lily.

I have a degree and professional quals. I expect people without those to be ruled out of applying for the jobs I do.

On the flip side of that, far too many companies request degrees etc when they're absolutely not necessary for the job.

When you see talented people who have had time off for children or ill health there is an ebb and flow. Over a twenty year career it is barely noticeable. People who are shit have frequent job changes, plateaus and step backs. It’s easy to distinguish the two

Oooh there's a lot to unpick here .....

You really shouldn't underestimate the impact of having children on women's careers. Yes, there are some women where this doesn't have a significant impact but the research shows that women (and particularly women who've had children) are disadvantaged in the labour market. This might manifest itself as a plateau or a step back from responsibility.

This is why I'm reluctant to recruit using just a cv as that can't tell you the full story. It's also why, when I'm recruiting for an academic post I want to look at more than their research profile because we know there are inequalities here between men and women. For example, during the pandemic women's research outputs pretty much halted where as men's increased. This has been attributed to women taking on additional caring responsibilities and homeschooling.

I applied for a job in a nursery. The online application required me to complete a behaviour management quiz.
Except all the questions were about children in junior school. I had no clue which of the multiple choice options would be best for a year 6 child doodling and disrupting a SAT lesson. All options seemed possible to me, but I wouldn't have known which to chose as I have no experience of this.

I'm sure the nursery manager really didn't care how I would deal with an 11 year old when the job was to care for babies under 2, the strategies used are understandably very different.

However, the online application would not progress without me completing this.

A total waste of everyone's time.

@girlmom2021 I agree. Post uni I ended up managing a shop that thought it was the next Waterstones and persuaded graduates to work there on low salaries and a 5 1/2 day week

Sone employers have ridiculously convoluted application processes. Why not just ask for a CV and cover letter, stating exactly what you want the cover letter to address. Application forms ask for way more information that is needed at shortlist stage, you can ask for more if you want to actually offer the job.

People lose the will to live with application forms, and many just won't bother.

Employers still think they have the upper hand in the job market - it depends on the sector, but it simply isn't true.

One reason is so they cannot see personal details of the candidate. When I was recruiting you had a login to the application system that allowed you to view applications but no personal details about the candidate

Can't you just remove the personal details from the version of the CV that is sent to those doing the shortlist?

I also suspect academia is a small enough field to know exactly who you are looking at, anyway. And LinkedIn searches are easy to do and you can find people easily if you know their current and previous employer.

As for using AI to screen applications, I hope very much that that will be outlawed soon. Machines should not be making those kind of decisions about people because HR people are too lazy to read a CV properly.

I went on an online course recently (offered by my work coach) and the main impetus was SEO and gaming the algorithm.

One piece of advice was to copy the job advert on to the end of your CV in white (so as to appear transparent) so you include the relevant keywords/phrases.