This article builds on a recent LinkedIn post with additional thoughts and advice.

I should point out the analysis below is necessarily generic, and every industry, location and job function has its own variables.

Original post:

When you see 400 people have already applied to a vacancy, you might think not to even bother applying.

But these numbers aren't always accurate, and never the full story - let me explain why, and how this might inform your decisions.

- There is a common reporting error, it seems when linked to an ATS, when a click that leads to an incomplete application is still counted as an application. The true number here is often lower.

- In this tough market, it's understandable that many people will apply at volume, often without reading the adverts. Tools like EasyApply allow a straightforward application, while automation like LazyApply can literally allow you to apply to 2,000 vacancies while you are sleeping.

- This leads to a high number of 'wholly unsuitable' applications. Common reasons can be no work permit or experience that has no relation to the vacancy.

- As well as a high number of applications that appear suitable yet are non-viable. This might be down to a too high salary requirement; one reason to list salary and help people make informed decisions. Even then many will still apply. Or they may have missed simple points like a location too far to commute to. These applications are fairly straightforward to rule out, yet at scale are time consuming.

These three points together mean that anything from 80% to 99% of applications aren't suitable, if they even exist.

So when you read 400, there may be only 4 suitable candidates - if you are a strongly suitable candidate, it's well worth considering. And maybe follow up directly with the hiring manager, where it's possible.

If you want a real-life example of what might go on behind the scenes with an advert, check out the screenshot below. I'll link to the original post in comments.

It doesn't help that many adverts don't list salary, misrepresent working conditions, or are so vague you can't assess if you even are suitable. By all means apply, but treat these as low stakes.

It also doesn't help that employers make arbitrary decisions. Such as a post I read recently which took down an advert after 24 hours, having received a huge response - then expressed surprise none were suitable. 🤷‍♂️

While at the same time these high numbers of non-viable applications take oxygen away from people who apply with care and specificity.

There aren't any easy answers to this situation, which is driven by poor market conditions, application processes that work against the applicant and, let's face it, a bunch of cynical behaviour from many hiring organisations.

Some added thoughts:

We are where we are with the jobs market = a high volume of jobseekers, a difficult market to navigate, few vacancies and many poor experiences.

Much of this is defined by the state of the market and wider economy. In the UK this does look to be getting better, and will lead to a shift for job seekers = more vacancies, less competition from qualified candidates, more urgency from employers to deal well with people in a competitive landscape.

It may be that if you’ve struggled through this market for the past few months, things improve - it’s what I’ve been hearing from job seekers and candidates I’m in touch with.

For candidates who take care in their applications, it’s been the single thing holding them back.

But market conditions are out of our control, whereas how you respond to individual situations is in your control.

When you see an advert such as we’ve just picked through, it’s certainly worth considering applying to, if you can show you are a suitable candidate.

If you can’t, and it’s a common skills role, I’d make the choice to step away. Concentrate, instead, on roles you are a 60-80% fit for (lower if it’s a niche role).

If you do decide to apply, don’t just rely on the transactional process:

If you see an interesting role that has closed, get in touch directly, it might be that scenario at the top where they have many applicants, but no one suitable.

It’s a careful balance. You want to find ways to cut through the transactional process, without being a pain (which may be behaviour that a hiring process uses to decline you) or being seen to cheat.

Listen to anything you get back from a process, and use that to inform your approach. This might be anything from specific instructions to follow in an application (in which case do so but think about what you can additionally do to stand out), through to individual feedback on your application.

Get ahead of the game, if a company advertises widely on LinkedIn, create a job alert on their company page (click on their company name, go to jobs and you’ll see the option).

The flip side of this advert scenario is that numbers can and will work against a careful application, such as if an advert is removed before you can tailor your CV.

Or worse, if an advert remains live, but no applications are reviewed after the first 100.

It’s an argument for having a single ‘good enough’ CV so you can move quickly, rather than spending hours on a single application.

Above all, think what you can do differently from what may be a high volume of people only applying through a transactional process. You can see how to do that by reading through other posts on the archive.

I hope this article has given you a little more insight into what goes on behind the scenes.

It won’t solve the problems inherent in our advertising industry, yet at least it may explain some of your experiences.

As well as what changes to your approach you might make to improve your return in what is a numbers game for many.

Thanks for reading.

Greg