Why is Finding a Job So Hard?

The challenge of entering the job market and searching online for the right fit can be somewhat daunting. The challenge of joining millions of suddenly unemployed professionals during a global pandemic? Terrifying.

This is where I found myself back in April. With Covid-19 related layoffs in full swing, I wondered how to even begin the process.

• What titles do I search for? A 'Manager' at one company is a 'VP' at another - should I just apply to each and hope for the best?
• Which experiences do I list on my resume? Do I really have to tailor a new one for each position?  
• Once I apply, how do I know where I stand in the process?  
• How do I get feedback from a human being? 

As I started looking through potential roles, I realized that many positions (even some very specialized ones) received hundreds of applicants within hours of posting. Either I was the only one lost in the process, or folks were taking a volume approach and applying to many roles in hopes of raising their odds.  

While the volume strategy makes sense on the surface, I couldn't help but wonder why it had to be this way. Job applications, at least thoughtful ones that you put your best effort into, are super time-consuming. Each role has some level of repetitive background information that you have to fill in, so it didn't seem very efficient to apply to multiple positions unless I knew that I could compete.  

Then there's the whole matter of actually qualifying for the role. Even if I did meet all of the requirements, was there any guarantee that I would at least get a screener interview? I knew that most systems would filter my application for fit before passing me to a recruiter, so how much effort did I need to put into finding the right set of keywords to get by?

Status Quo

As you can probably tell by this point, my focus shifted from finding new roles to reimagining the job application process that we've all become accustomed to. The current process isn't just critical for job seekers, but also every professional looking to manage their career progression. Before jumping into potential optimization opportunities, here is the flow that a job seeker usually experiences:

1. Search job titles or keywords
2. Read through postings to see if any are relevant
3. Create a custom resume for each position
4. Applicant Tracking System (ATS) reviews application
5. Answer questions from the company (screener or recruiter interview)
6. Interview with Hiring Manager

Unless you have someone refer you to a role, a custom resume with the requisite keywords is nearly mandatory to get past the ATS and to a human. Did you know that roughly 3 out of 4 applications are filtered out here? If your application makes it through, then a recruiter spends an average of 6 seconds scanning your resume to see if you're a good fit for a screener interview. This review filters out another 4 out of 5 applications. In other words, for every 100 applications, only 5 candidates get a shot to speak to the recruiter (step 5). With such low odds, it's no wonder that candidates are taking the volume approach of applying to as many jobs as possible.

The math above implies that 95% of applications aren't qualified enough for the role. But is that true? What if the automated filtering was blocking qualified candidates and letting others slip through because they had the right keywords? This scenario isn't just a concern for job seekers; Human Resources is getting inundated with applications that they need to process, but they end up wasting considerable time on candidates that never should have applied in the first place.  

Humanizing an Automated Process

So where can we improve a process that we've accepted for the last few decades? For me, there is one main principle that everything else funnels back into:

Qualified candidates should have a real opportunity to interview with companies that are searching for people like them.  

Notice I said 'people', not 'keywords'? When companies post a role, they are aiming to find someone that has a particular collection of experiences and use the resume to see if there is a match. At the same time, candidates write their resumes by essentially guessing which experiences a potential company might want to see.  

Doesn't this seem disjointed? Couldn't companies just ask the important questions in the beginning to save everyone a bit of time? I know I'd prefer to know if I had the 'must-haves' for the job before going through the lengthy process of applying and waiting for a response.

Enter hapnak: With a simple process shift (shown below), and some fun machine learning in the background, candidates will earn interviews from the merits of their experiences - not the keywords in their resume. We believe so strongly in the impact of these changes that we named our company after it- 'hapnak' stands for "Hire a Person, Not a Keyword".

How will hapnak be different?

I’ve attached two explainer videos at the bottom of this article, but here are a few main features:

• While job boards are great tools for employers to advertise roles, they aren’t built to evaluate candidates. Our platform asks the questions up front so that job seekers know where they stand earlier in the process.
• Job applications are currently single instance submissions. Each submission is intended to serve one role at one particular company. This means that you fill out an application, send in your resume, and then start over for each role that you apply for. We think it would be more efficient if the time that you spend on any application helps qualify you for every role that you might be interested in.
• Every question on hapnak continuously learns about your professional profile as you evolve. This means that you won’t have to re-answer common questions, and you won’t have to worry that your old resume isn’t up to date. 
• Single instance submissions are also an issue from an HR perspective. There currently isn’t a scalable way to track career progression in candidates that haven’t re-engaged with the company. We want to give HR organizations a view of the global talent pool as it continuously evolves so that they can find both active candidates that are applying directly, and also passive ones that might be a perfect fit.

These are just some of the high-level plans that we have for hapnak, and I'm sure that we'll learn about plenty of other pain points as we start working with the professional community and our HR partners. While the details may become intricate, and the journey will be lengthy, here's to hoping that we can do our little part to get the world back to work as soon as possible. For now, please join our waitlist (and share!) so we can keep you updated and provide early access as we build!

Cheers,

Jerin