2022 was plagued by labour shortages, industry strikes, and more job openings than ever before. In a panic, employers grasped at straws to try and fill their empty roles as quickly as possible, much to the dismay of jobseekers.
A report from The Greenhouse Candidate Experience found that over 60% of jobseekers are ‘unimpressed by time-consuming recruitment processes, and are demanding companies create a more modern recruiting experience’. Traditionally, job applications consist of a C.V. and cover letter, but more often than not, once an applicant progresses to the interview stage, they’re then asked to recount exactly the same information.
Do employers even read C.V.s in 2023? Are they still used as a filter by recruiters to determine the best person for the job? Given how many employers insist on the completion of their own application form, are C.V.s even relevant anymore?
It's believed that the first ever professional C.V. was created by Leonardo Da Vinci in 1482. By providing references to familiar institutions, it was used to convey the trustworthiness of a travelling worker. During the 1950s the C.V. was formalised and commonly included with a job application.
Industry research suggests that the average recruiter spends just 6-8 seconds looking at a candidate’s C.V., to decide if they’re an appropriate fit for the vacancy. It can be incredibly disheartening for jobseekers to invest so much time into crafting their C.V. just for it to be disregarded in the blink of an eye. Individual job application forms are even more time-consuming for a jobseeker to fill out—it seems unnecessary to input a person’s entire employment and education history into an employer’s form when it would have taken them seconds to upload their C.V.
Maybe this requirement is a filter in itself.
Often, a C.V. isn’t even read by human eyes before it’s rejected. Around 98% of ‘large organisations use software known as an applicant tracking system to scan C.V.s and eliminate the least-qualified candidates for a role. On average, these ‘bots’ reject 75% of C.V.s before the recruiter sees them’.
These applicant tracking systems determine whether a candidate’s C.V. is a match for the role by searching for specific keywords. For example, if the job is for a Social Media Manager, the recruitment bot will search for that term in an applicant’s C.V., and possibly reject it if those particular words are absent. This doesn’t seem a fool proof system, however. For example, a Digital Content Creator or Marketing Specialist might have the same skillset and be worthy of the role but find themselves rejected for not matching the key phrase.
AI recruitment reflects its programming; if unconscious bias is written into its DNA, there could be harmful consequences. In a recruitment report, ‘85% of respondents felt the C.V. was still a useful tool, whilst 40% don’t feel a C.V. provides a real picture of a candidate’s personality. 36% of respondents felt C.V.s leave too much room for unconscious bias’.
Many CEOs believe that the C.V. is no longer as relevant in recruitment website design nowadays as it was thirty years ago, due to how easy it is to exaggerate the information it includes. They claim that a candidate’s transferable skills and personality demonstrate whether the individual would be a good fit for the role and the company’s culture.
In fairness, it is difficult to portray anyone’s personality in a C.V. of no more than two pages of A4. Psychometric tests are often used as an alternative; these assess a candidate’s behaviours and abilities based on their responses to different questions and situations. This might be especially worthwhile for graduates applying for entry-level positions, as they won’t have much work experience to set them apart from other applicants.
If all the necessary information is inputted into an individual application form it makes the recruiter’s life easier; however, ‘more than 70% of job seekers said they would not submit a job application if it takes longer than 15 minutes to complete’.
Time seems to be a real issue in the hiring process. For example, most employers might not have time to offer personalised feedback after a job rejection, yet ‘over 70% of job seekers want feedback on an interview. More than 60% said that receiving feedback during the interview process, even if they do not receive a job offer, would make them more inclined to apply for future jobs at that company’.
Recruiters can take advantage of being in the middle of the two parties; they’re the perfect mediator between employer and applicant. Human recruitment agents can take time to carefully read through a candidate’s C.V. and assess their experience and transferable skills. They will also understand the needs of the company and can interview suitable applicants to determine whether their personality would be a match for the company.
