5 Reasons Why Job Postings Kill Productivity


With the time-to-fill-a-job average at a 15-year high, job postings may be part of the problem, not part of the solution. The problem is that in January of this year the national average workdays to fill a job was 25.7. The same study done by the Dice-DFH Vacancy Duration Measure revealed that U.S. employers spent an average of 26.8 working days to fill a job in February. Some industries are worse than others. Health services, for example, experienced an average vacancy duration of 42.6 working days. That’s over a month waiting to fill positions, a month without properly staffed hospitals, a month of problems.

Job postings are making the problem worse.

Hours are wasted weeding through seemingly endless resumes. People think, If I post on a job board, I'm going to get results out of it. But good results are not guaranteed, and employers have lost valuable time due to inconsistent results. Finding job candidates is now easier because of services like Relode’s marketplace. That’s the good news, but we must face the problem—a necessary issue to address in order to increase efficient hiring.

Here's five reasons why job postings destroy productivity.

1. Unqualified candidates.

In my (Jon’s) experience, the majority of the candidates that apply to a job posting are not qualified. Even if qualified, they are completely outside of the skill sets desired by employers. For example, the person is an oil-change technician applying for a computer support tech job. They don't even fit the job description—not at all. A lot of times they don't even live in the area of the position. They live in Alabama, but the position is in Nashville, for example. Even Applicant Tracking Systems (ATS) do not weed out the unqualified candidates. Business strategist Doug Mendoza says, “After working with several ATS systems over the years, I still find that upwards of 40 percent of the resumes are a poor match.” Those poor matches are unqualified for the job, and it decreases productivity for employers.

2. Incessant calls.

If you post a job online, you're almost guaranteed to have a bunch of unqualified people contact you, especially if no one on your team contacts them. Ignoring irrelevant candidates can produce unnecessary emails, calls, and voicemails, and responding to them kills productivity.

3. Wasted money.

As technology is changing, job-board alternatives are increasing. Companies think they will save money by posting a job online, but it's like throwing out a net to find interested candidates. Top-notch, qualified candidates typically do not apply to job postings, because they're not even looking at them. The average price of a 30-day job posting across top sites (like Monster, Careerbuilder, and LinkedIn) is $387, so it's a waste of money when the candidates do not fit the job description.

4. Wasted time.

In my experience, even when a candidate fits the job description—a company might not find them. You post a position for a registered nurse, for example. A thousand people might apply to it. There's a chance the recruiter doesn't get to the best candidate, because they find three or four they like and end up hiring someone without even going through the whole list. Peggy McKee, CEO of Career Confidential, notes, "Only about 5 out of every 1,000 online applications ever make it to the hiring manager's desk." Before they get there, someone on staff has to filter through the 1,000 resumes. The last thing employers want to do is waste time going through too many resumes.

5.  Low results.

Although some companies facilitate good hires through job boards, the chances of a great hire are so low that the results are statistically not worth it from what I (Jon) have observed. The results just don't match up. The best candidates come from trusted referrals and calculated searches, not job board postings.

These five reasons show that hiring through job boards is painful, but it doesn't have to be that painful.

Granted, work is always hard, but a more efficient way is here. Relode offers an alternative way to locate and organize job candidates, one that makes hiring more efficient than job postings. Through our marketplace, employers hire professional recruiters on demand.

Photo credit: Unsplash.

Photo credit: Unsplash.

If I (Jon) were sitting down with someone who sourced candidates only through job postings, I would ask them, "If you're posting online, who's sifting through all the resumes?" If that person was the one sifting through all the resumes, I would ask, "Do you really have that kind of time?"

Bottom line, it's about saving time and money. Job seekers upload 427 thousand resumes to Monster every week, for example—that is the approximate size of the country of Luxembourg. No one has time for that.

The problem is worse with more Millennials in the job market, according to Katharine Hansen. She writes, “Today's Millennial job-seekers neither know nor can image any other way than applying for jobs online. So we submit resumes online. And submit them and submit them in astronomical and unmanageable numbers. Worse, in our desperation for jobs, we recklessly submit resumes for jobs we're not qualified for.”

Hansen concludes, “We've thrown spaghetti at the wall, hoping it will stick.”

With the time-to-fill jobs at a record high, don't spend your time on job posting. You don’t have time to waste. Hire a Relode recruiter, and you'll be happy with the results. We literally guarantee it.