#QualifiedCandidates #JobApplications #LinkedIn
Hey everyone! 👋 Have you ever scrolled through job applications on sites like LinkedIn and wondered, “How many of these candidates are actually qualified for the position?” 🤔
As a CS student myself, I often ponder about the quality of applications flooding in. Here are a few points to consider:
– According to a recent survey, only about 20-30% of job applicants meet the qualifications listed in the job posting.
– Many applicants may lack the required skills or experience, leading to a high percentage of unqualified submissions.
– Some candidates may also resort to spamming applications in hopes of landing a job without actually meeting the requirements.
One possible solution to this issue could be implementing better screening processes, such as:
– Requiring specific skills tests or assessments during the application process.
– Utilizing AI technology to filter out unqualified candidates based on keywords and qualifications.
– Conducting thorough background checks and verifying credentials before moving forward with interviews.
What are your thoughts on this topic? How do you think we can improve the quality of job applications and ensure that more qualified candidates are considered? Let’s discuss! 💬 #JobSearch #CareerDevelopment
We are currently in the process of hiring a 2-3 yoe front-end dev where I work.
We’ve received a little bit less than 200 applications.
I’d say that maybe 5-10% of them are good quality candidates. Like, good enough quality that I don’t feel like I’m wasting my time interviewing you.
And that’s for a front-end position. Supposedly the most saturated field in CS.
Depending on how you define “qualified”, it can be as low as 0%
I work at an auto supplier. We only hire every 3 years or so. I’ve never seen an unqualified resume…
But I have definitely seen people fired for incompetence after struggling for over a year and failing to be able to do even the bare minimum, in spite of constant support. I’ve also seen people fired for “bad attitude” when the manager wants to launch but the product is nowhere near deliverable and there is no way to back out. I’ve also seen people fired for “we have you 30 million and five years and you say you’re at square one because only now has the vendor said they can’t do it??”
So yeah incompetence can come at any level.
Having recently recruited for a junior developer role, for every 200 candidates I’d say 185 had shock horror applications, 15 were worth investigating and after interviews I’d find 3-5 with the required coding skills. Amazing how many ppl lie and can’t code for their life which becomes quickly apparent in the coding challenges
“What is qualified” is a moving target. If too many people are passing, they make the interview harder. If too few people are passing, they make the interview easier.
That’s why the standard interview in Big Tech now is “must be able to do several leetcode hards”. Once everyone knew they were doing leetcode interviews and everyone was practicing, now they need to make the questions really hard so the desired percentage pass.
Real answer? Read into IQ a bit
My best guess is 20-50% for junior to mid level roles and 10-20% for senior roles. Amongst these people only about half of them or even less can actually prove beyond their resume that they have what it takes through their raw talent.
Gusto Recruiter told me he received 1000 applicants (for a Senior Infra Engineer position),
He said it is easy to filter out applications from outside of the US (Indians?)
He narrowed down to less than 10 candidates to call
The thing with LinkedIn is that 90% of the jobs are fake or outdated while 70% of the applicants are unqualified for the position to begin with. I do not rely on LinkedIn for any job searching tbh and have met only a handful of people who’ve gotten positions via LinkedIn. Also, check your DM I might be able to help you with a resource.
The bar for being qualified also tend to go up with higher unemployment/more qualified candidates in the pool. Need easy filters for HR.
I’m a hiring manager and I would say it’s around 2-3%
I worked at shitty non-tech companies in non-tech cities for 15 years and most candidates do not pass the really low hiring bar. We were hiring embedded SWEs with C and C++ experience. This was not a company that wanted hire smart people and let you learn C and C++.
So interviews are geared to do you know the languages we use. I found the vast majority of resumes we got didn’t even mention C or C++ and got trashed right away. So finding people to interview was a tough, never mind success rate.
The coding question is basically FizzBuzz level. Then we put code up on the screen and we expect you to walk through it and talk about each line in terms of what it does and how it interacts with memory.
Frankly I thought the interview was as simple as it could be, but lots of people were not passing. I guess it’s just one of those things where when you do it often you just internalize the information better. Sadly there was no leeway to candidate was unable to explain X/Y/Z in interview feedback to the company.
I randomly interviewed at another company that asked very similar questions in terms what code does and how it interacts with memory. The interviewer mentioned how that was the fastest he every got through that portion of the interview. Unfortunately I failed later rounds when the threw Leetcode mediums and hard at me.
Lowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww.
Years ago, the first time I hired for a role was a writing job. Probably north of half my candidates could not write a grammatically-correct English sentence.
I believe our interview has about a 20% pass rate so far, and that’s meant to be a somewhat high-pass filter at early stages (we’re trying to find people companies would feel would be worth their time to interview, not people they’ll necessarily always hire, that’d be too restrictive). But that’s after filtering on area of interest, for most roles YOE, location, visa status, and other criteria that typically eliminate 90+%.
If there is one thing the average job seeker does not understand about recruiting, it is the absolutely horrific quality of the average applicant.
I’m big tech, and I’d say maybe around 1/20 candidates pass the phone screen. Once they are at the onsite stage, it seems like around 1/10 pass rate. That just means they pass the technical rounds, not that they will get an offer.
I know on the resume screening side, something like 20/1000 resumes actually meet the minimum qualifications for the role at the entry level. Most resumes will get filtered by the ATS and then by the recruiter.
Most are spam. There’s some math to it. Even if the vast majority of people in general are well qualified, the unqualified will still dominate the application pool. By their nature they are on the market more often and longer. Good engineer are generally on and off the market relatively quickly.
The same is true the other way: most open positions are at poorly run companies. Good companies open up a role, get a few candidates, make an offer, it’s accepted, and that’s it. That employee stays in the role for several years. A poorly run company can be filling the same role multiple times a year. And when they do have an opening they have many people turn down the role, so the opening is up for longer and they do a lot more interviewing.
On both ends the poor options dominate the job searching landscape, even if they represent a minority of the overall population.
I’ve done technical interviews for some 200 candidates. Anecdotally, less than 1 in 10 that make it to my stage end up getting an offer. Mind you, this is not counting top-of-funnel filtering (ATS), so the overall rate is lower.
A lot. A staggering amount.
It depends on what company, at what level, and how publicized the listing is. A low level front end developer job at a well known company posted on several boards will be spammed with thousands of unqualified applications.
A very technical, high level job position posted only to the companies site, with only a select amount of third party recruiters directly being used? Not nearly as a much spam. But at the top level, the actual requirements can get a little fuzzier since many companies have very specialized needs and are willing to adapt to fill
Anecdotally at my big tech company we’re receiving many more applicants but the quality of candidates have significantly dropped from a couple years ago (for L4/L5 specifically). Some coworkers agreed their pass rates for the phone screen have dropped significantly even though the questions are the same