It's About Time We Had THE Talk - The Truth About Applicant Tracking Systems

"If I see one more person or "LinkedIn Influencer" using "beat the ATS" in a post I am going to legit go out of my way to step on Lego barefoot"

Earlier in the year I asked my network what topic they wanted me to write about next, and while I thought the three options I provided were equally interesting, my network exponentially voted to hear more about Applicant Tracking Systems (ATS). I've put off writing this article, because while I know my network wants to hear more about the ATS, I have felt stuck putting thoughts on paper, maybe because I knew I'd open Pandora's Box. Today while trying to get everything complete before the holidays (this is historically my busiest week of the year), I received a cold call from a candidate asking about a position posted. I was about to enter a meeting and didn't have time to chat with him, but he asked if I had time for one question, and I replied that I did. He responded with his question. "Does your company use an ATS, or do you manually go through resumes?" I struggled for words. It caught me off guard because the idea that candidates think that they are mutually exclusive has perplexed me for years. Where did this rumor come from, and how had job seekers been sent so astray? And why are ATS seen as the death of HR and recruitment? Are they?

There is this absolutely bizarre trend where ATS have a relentlessly growing target on their backs as something to be "beat" rather than a tool to work with (if I see one more person or "LinkedIn Influencer" using "beat the ATS" in a post I am going to legit go out of my way to step on Lego barefoot). These attitudes (or misunderstandings) have made talking about ATS almost taboo, and even posting this I expect people without any HR or recruiting experience to come out of the woods with their flaming pitchforks about how wrong I am, but as a recruiter who literally reviewed over 10,000 resumes this year alone (yes, I checked), I'm pretty sure I have a handle on ATS systems and what they do (and most importantly, what they don't do). It's constantly a question I receive in my inbox and something candidates now think they have to personally call or email me about to get clarification on - Does your firm use at ATS? As such, here I am to finally sit you down and have THE talk with you. You know the talk. The one I have been perpetually avoiding - buckle up folks - let's finally talk about the truth about ATS.

What is an Applicant Tracking System?

Before we get into why ATS have gotten such a bad rap, let's start with the super-duper basics. Often referred to as a job seekers nemesis (next superhero blockbuster, anyone?), at it's core an ATS can be defined as a "software application that enables the electronic handling of recruitment and hiring needs." Seriously, that's it! It's basically a Customer Relationship Management System (CRMS) or database, but with the sole intent and purpose to meet the requirements of recruiters and talent seekers to move candidates through some sort of workflow. Beyond the basic database like functionality of a ATS, most often act as a workflow manager that moves candidates and talent throughout the lifecycle of hiring, and into their employment or onboarding. For example, I can move a candidate from the recruiter screen, to the hiring manager review, through to interviews, references, offers, pre-employment checks, into hired, and all phases in between of the hiring workflow with just a click.

"Gone are the days when you'd have to send your resume to a company inbox monitored by the Intern with the hopes of someone actually looking at your carefully constructed resume"

ATS have automated a lot of the recruiting process to ensure recruiters and HR are more focused on the strategic component of their jobs, rather than the day to day admin tasks that go into hiring. Beyond this, it makes candidate management and sourcing easier. When you apply via an ATS you are often consenting to allowing the company to keep your resume on file. When a recruiter searches their internal database, an ATS allows your data to be stored and considered for future opportunities. Gone are the days when you'd have to send your resume to a company inbox monitored by the Intern with the hopes of someone actually looking at your carefully constructed resume, all while killing 378 trees just for a hiring manager to print off EVERY SINGLE DAMN APPLICATION ONE AT A TIME (Oh, the humanity!). Also, do you really trust Resume Hoarding Cathy the Recruiter at a firm without an ATS or database to actually pull your resume you handed her in person 6 months ago that's been collecting dust at the bottom of her drawer, with another 50 resumes? No, I don't either.

Now, not all companies need or can afford expensive fancy ATS. I've seen really fancy, slick ATS, all the way down to janky band aid solutions. Regardless, ATS enable companies to manage, store, and track candidates through data base like functions while storing your most up to date information and resumes (sorry Cathy, that resume can change a lot in 6 months), not to mention that they make complying with local compliance laws easier to do (for example, federal contractors in the US have to provide disposition code to candidates for compliance reasons, something ATS make easier to do and ensure accuracy for auditing purposes).

So, what ACTUALLY happens when I apply via an ATS?

You ready for the big secret here? Sorry, there isn't one. When you apply, you're basically entering your data into the database. You'll likely be asked to load up a resume attachment, then after the system parses your resume it will ask you to fill in the blanks as well. Next big question we get is why do I have to do both. Well, I like a PDF/Word version of a resume to actually look at - I want to see your formatting, how you present your resume and cover letter, and when I look at resumes, I am looking for the actual resume not the data you entered into the system. If you get asked to enter both, do it! It ensures there are two ways for your application to be reviewed. The data you entered helps for searching and filtering basics and filling out a profile in the database, again for searchability. For example, if I am hiring a Civil Engineer and the leader confirms to me that the candidate NEEDS a civil engineering degree, no exceptions, I can filter by relevant education from your answers in the database and remove the people that don't meet my absolute bare minimum with that basic civil engineering degree. This data also makes you findable. If I am looking later for the same type of Civil Engineer role that we're now hiring 6 months later, I can search out what we already have in our database to make my sourcing quicker, and build relationships with those top candidates who may still be a viable candidate, but maybe for another job.

I can also see how far you made it with other positions, so if we ran references, but ultimately ended up hiring someone else, I can see you made it to that final selection process and see why you weren't selected and any comments or communications the prior recruiter may have made. This functionality has saved my butt from a few almost embarrassing run-ins. I've had a candidate apply for multiple roles at the same time, and suddenly, myself and another recruiter hiring for different roles in different teams are fighting for the same candidate... At the same company! By seeing what other roles you have active means I can check if you're currently interviewing for another role with the same company, I can better collaborate with my co-worker to ensure we're in the same boat regarding your candidacy with both roles. If I wasn't able to know that you were already interviewing and I blindly called you to setup another interview without mentioning the other position you're also active on or asking you about your preference, it would look like we had no clue what we were doing.

How about ATS doing the candidate review and shortlisting for a recruiter? This brings us to the biggest misconception about ATS; that they completely do the shortlisting for recruiters all through artificial intelligence (AI), and you are trying to "beat the system". No, I have never met a single recruiter at any company that allows an ATS to do their shortlisting completely, nor do I think I ever will. I wish. Anyone who knows me well knows that I think of shortlisting as the bane of my existence. I wish ATS shortlisted for recruiters because it's one of my least favorite things ever. Yes, I can set knockout questions (back to my Civil Engineer basic requirement, or a location requirement, maybe a specific qualification/certificate requirement, or a specific knockout requirement to do the job). Yes, some companies use automatic system rankings or keyword/match percentages. However minus the absolute bare minimum requirements, that I discuss with the leader as job requirements before even posting a role, recruiters are looking at every resume that meets their bare minimum requirements manually, but using the ATS to help them view candidates with increased organization and efficiency.

We live in the system, so we see changes and applications come in in real time! ATS act as a source of truth with its data and reflects real time updates, which is why ATS are so valuable regarding HR metrics.

So why did you get rejected so fast? Yeah, I was actually in the system shortlisting right as you applied - yes, it truly is sad that shortlisting is often what I do during my evenings and weekends. Most recruiters do the same. We live in the system, so we see changes and applications come in in real time! ATS act as a source of truth with its data and reflects real time updates, which is why ATS are so valuable regarding HR metrics. They paint a full picture with actual data in real time, rather than Cathy with her paper resumes in the drawer not showing any trackable information that the company can use to improve their operations or sourcing strategies.

I am not just looking at resumes blindly, I am being a strategic talent partner with my business and trying to do so as cost effectively, within budget, and within a set time frame. All these elements have to come together for recruitment to work.

I will one day write a full article on how I shortlist and what I am doing, but even with fancier (read more expensive) ATS where they may rank the candidates or show you percentages of job fit, recruiters are still looking at your resume. I take a lot of time learning about my clients (the leaders I support), their business, what they're looking for, the differences in the same role but for different teams, and what their "must haves" versus "nice to haves" are. I can properly identify top candidates, and if top candidates don't exist, I can identify what a secondary or tertiary candidate looks like. I can create and determine hiring strategies based on a unique client's needs - ATS are not at that caliber yet. They can do the basics, but when it comes down to the nitty-gritty and human element and deducing company culture, specific skill sets for hiring needs, and being able to use sound judgement regarding a candidates unique background, sorry AI - I win. This is the value recruiters add, and why it's so hard to find and hire a good recruiter. I am not just looking at resumes blindly, I am being a strategic talent partner with my business and trying to do so as cost effectively within budget, finding the best possible person, all within a set time frame. All these elements have to come together for recruitment to work. How about keyword searches? Let's chat about this along with who started the "beat the ATS" (and yes, I would like to have a stern talking to with this person).

So why am I told to "beat the ATS"? Is it true that 75% of resumes are never viewed by a human?

Time and time again I've seen post after post state that "75% of resumes are never viewed by a human." I'm here to tell you that this is not true. This stat was shared out by large business news sources a few years back quoting a "study" completed by Preptel. Who is Preptel? Preptel is a resume writing and consulting firm. It's almost like they have a vested financial interest in you believing that you need a customized resume using their services to get past the ATS... Hmm. Sounds fishy, huh? Actually, most of the people shouting this stat from the roof tops are firms and consultants who have a vested interest in you using their resume writing or job searching services, or, to be blunt, from a source that negligently didn't do their research or source vetting. In university if I wrote a paper without quoting a legitimate, scholarly, and peer-reviewed source I would fail the assignment. We are taught to look into scientific journals and vetting studies for potential biases, yet here we are, as job seekers throwing logic and reason out of the window, often out of desperation and seeking to understand why we didn't make the cut. I am not saying that you shouldn't use a resume writing service (the right resume can get you the job!), but I am saying be mindful if a resume or job search consultant is trying to prey on you by throwing around inaccurate stats to secure your business. They may be hoping you'll fall for the hysteria surrounding ATS.

So how about those keywords? Those must cut you out automatically in an ATS, right? Well, I will sometimes use a specific key word to search out, again, if it's an absolute requirement of the job. Here's an example. I had a role that required finite element analysis using a specific program called ABAQUS. If the candidate did not have this software skill, they legitimately would not have been able to do this job - it was a requirement for the candidate to even be considered for the role. This is a case where I would in fact search for a keyword, but if a candidate read the job description, they would clearly see references to ABAQUS as a requirement of the job, not once, not twice, but literally seven times in the job posting. We're not keyword searching off of any top secret spy criteria. We're looking for words literally there in the open and easy to find in the job posting! In this example if I keyword search and you do not say ABAQUS, or at the very minimum Finite Element Analysis, I would likely cut you out of the recruiting process pretty quickly using a keyword search because you clearly did not read the job description, and clearly did not tailor your resume for the job, or you do not meet the requirements to complete said job. I'm also not just looking for you to list a software or skill, I'm looking for you to explain how you've used it. Putting a word 30 times in your resume may catch an ATS looking at keyword searches, but when I do my review, if I see you're just using fillers and fluff without meeting the requirements of the role, I'll reject you regardless of how many times you, for example, list ABAQUS in your resume.

How the company approaches their HR strategies, their size, and their budget will also impact how much a firm relies on an ATS and it's function.

How about ranking and percentages? Some companies do use ATS to rank candidates or give them a job match percentage, but as long as someone met the basic requirements of the job, most would still give other candidates with a lower score a quick look, and if they meet the needs, give further time and attention in their review. If your score is low, it's likely because you didn't take the time to actually read the job description, tailor your resume to the job posting, and think about what the role is looking for. You'd have a higher score if you did. I'd also like to note that a companies reliance on an ATS may also depend on their strategic HR approach - are they more classical in their people management approach (think Walmart)? Are they more consultative and high touch (think boutique niche consulting firm)? Are they a large firm that will need to rely on an ATS, or a small local company that maybe hires 3 people a year and doesn't need on? How the company approaches their HR strategies, their size, and their budget will also impact how much a firm relies on an ATS and it's function. Working in Consulting, I personally look at almost all resumes, minus again, those candidates who don't meet the basics that I discuss with a leader in an intake call before I even look at a single resume.

Okay, but now what? I still have a beef with the ATS.

There are no deep dark secret to ATS or how they work - every recruiter I have ever met has always said time and time again to customize your resume for the jobs you're applying for. Know that recruiters want you to "beat the ATS". I want you to get the interview! I want us to find the best candidate for the job! If we're being honest, it's not about "beating" anything It's about meeting the needs of the job and showcasing that in a way that shows you can meet those needs better than other candidates with similar skillsets. In a competitive job climate, we may receive literally hundreds, or maybe even thousands of applicants, only for one opening. I wish I could have a job for every outstanding candidate I see on paper, but I just don't. I know it get's discouraging, trust me, however I'd rather you take the time and effort to apply to 10 roles with a tailored, high quality application over firing off over 100 applications with the hope that one may land. Maybe your "beef" isn't with the ATS, but with HR and the recruiting function as a whole. Maybe somewhere along the way Recruiters and the recruiting process have lost the faith of candidates, and in turn, candidates have turned their blame and dissatisfaction to the ATS as a scapegoat of sorts. I've been a job searcher before. I understand first hand how demoralizing job seeking can be sometimes, and how painful getting those "you have not been selected" emails can be.

Maybe somewhere along the way Recruiters and the recruiting process have lost the faith of candidates, and in turn, candidates have turned their blame and dissatisfaction to the ATS as a scapegoat of sorts.

Here's the thing though, systems and tools like the ATS actually ensure I am able to save my time by not doing as many admin heavy tasks, and in turn give me more of an opportunity to be a better and more strategic partner to my business leaders and allows me to focus on more human interactions with candidates. These tools and technology as a whole are essential to adapting and meeting the demands of the changing job market. At the same time, we in HR have to do a better job of explaining, humanizing, and providing dignity to the job search process. We have to find a balance between systems and software and the human element of recruiting and job searching as a whole.

So, back to that caller who asked me "Does your company use an ATS?" The answer is yes, I use the ATS as a tool and system, but I am a human and there are humans using these tools - the ATS doesn't do the work for me, it helps me, almost like an assistant. I am looking through your resumes, I am doing the best I possibly can to get through resumes and candidate requests, I am trying my best to be a consultant with my leaders and meet the needs of the company I represent, and I need these systems to do my job efficiently. I also need to make sure you know I am human and I get no joy from rejecting a candidate, literally none... maybe that's why I hate shortlisting so much to begin with. Regardless, recruiting, hiring, and HR functions will always need a human element. Maybe we're still trying to find that harmonious and serendipitous balance where technology meets human and we create something amazing. Maybe it will always be a swinging pendulum. But for now, as we continue to seek out that perfect balance, I need you to know that you're not trying to beat an ATS, you are trying to work with it. This is why it's about time we had the talk regarding the truth about the applicant tracking system.

-Laurie Gaal