Slashdot Mirror


Ask Slashdot: Why Are Online Job Applications So Badly Designed?

First time accepted submitter GreyViking (3606993) writes Over the past few years, I've witnessed a variety of my intelligent but largely non-technical nearest-and-dearest struggling to complete online job applications. The majority of these online forms are multiple screens long, and because they're invariably HTTPS, they'll time out after a finite time which isn't always made known to the user. Some sites actively disable back/forward buttons but many don't, and text that's sometime taken a lot of effort to compile, cut and paste can be lost. And did I mention text input boxes that are too small? Sometimes it seems that the biggest obstacle to getting a job can be being able to conquer the online application, and really, there has to be a better way: but what is it?

188 of 278 comments (clear)

  1. Instructions by psybre · · Score: 2

    Did you RTFM?

    --
    Authority questions you. Return the favor. -- d474
    1. Re:Instructions by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      They have no manual. They often don't have help of any kind. It's a type of job screening. They only want people who put up with arbitrary broken bullshit.

  2. The larger problem.. by Scottingham · · Score: 2

    ..seems to be online forms in general. Considering how disparate various forms and their submission mechanisms are I think the only course of action would have to be at the browser level. Perhaps some automatic usage of the LocalStorage api to store text typed into these fields. Though that might lead to some security concerns. Perhaps recalling that cached data requires some form of user authentication for the browser itself (which isn't a bad idea in general).

    I dunno, just spitballin' here...

    1. Re:The larger problem.. by buchner.johannes · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This addon is a life-safer, for lost text input: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-...

      --
      NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
    2. Re:The larger problem.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This addon is a life-safer, for lost text input: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-...

      Actually it seems that add-on is getting out of date.

      This one appears to be better maintained and thus more up to date, properly supporting the newest versions of Firefox.

      https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/form-history-control/?src=search

    3. Re:The larger problem.. by vux984 · · Score: 1

      This addon is a life-safer, for lost text input: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-...

      Life-saver ... giant security hole... bit of both.

    4. Re:The larger problem.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You're right that it is a general problem.

      My solution: I don't even type stuff into the online forms if it is of any decent length (more than a short paragraph). I type it all in outside programs and then cut-and-paste it in. I save the file if I'm working on it over significant time. Stupid way to do it? You bet. But having lost stuff in poorly-designed forms due to timeout, clearing after some kind of entry error, back-arrow not restoring already-entered data, etc., it's not worth the risk unless I've used the site before and know its quirks or its reliability.

      Bad design that should be fixed? Hell yes. But if it's a site you have no control over, what's to be done? I suppose you could complain, but for sites such as job applications that might not send the right message.

      Sometimes I've wondered if overcoming the quirks of a badly-designed website is some kind of screening test for applicants.

    5. Re:The larger problem.. by Tazmaster75 · · Score: 1

      The fact that this addon exists is a symptom of the overlying problem, which is that these companies feel they need such a restrictive level of security on their application forms.

      My two favorite online form issues are:
      1)Not being able to save the form in an editable state to work on at my leisure.
      2)Signature fields that either do not allow using PDF's built in signature file import, or require some unusual signature format instead of the simple picture file that any PDF reader can place in the field.

      It's 2014 and it irks me quite a bit when I am forced to print, sign, then scan a document. It can, and should be much more straight forward and easy.

      --
      The glass is neither half full nor half empty. It is dirty and I don't do dishes!
    6. Re:The larger problem.. by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 2

      My leading unfavorite is the field validity check that starts out by preventing you from submitting a page because you're missing the "I have read the terms and conditions..." When you check the box and click Submit again, you find it has cleared several fill-in fields of vital info that you're now going to have to retype, including that credit card security code field that you have to dig into your wallet all over again for.

    7. Re:The larger problem.. by pepty · · Score: 1

      They're ALL designed and built by interns, or idiots. (or both).

      Taleo's portals for job applicants were quite borked back when they were an independent company and their one job was "talent acquisition" and other HR related database stuff. God knows what it's like for job applicants using their stuff now that they are part of Oracle. Personally, I'm going with this sentiment from upthread:

      Sometimes I've wondered if overcoming the quirks of a badly-designed website is some kind of screening test for applicants.

      Yep. If you are easily frustrated by software SNAFUs and don't have the patience or cleverness to get past the difficulties in a high stakes situation like a job opportunity then what is the likelyhood of you showing those qualities day to day at work?

    8. Re: The larger problem.. by GrantRobertson · · Score: 1

      Not true. Bill Clinton signed a law making digital signatures as binding as "real" ones. I don't recall the rewuired formats or technologies, but I have "signed" many forms by just typing my name and typing "I agree."

    9. Re: The larger problem.. by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      But how long will it be before we can make a real estate transaction without having to fax a hundred pages of signed paper forms?

    10. Re: The larger problem.. by GrantRobertson · · Score: 1

      It's legal now. Unfortunately, almost none of the real-estate agencies have modernized and there is no real incentive to do so. I used to do some IT consulting work for a real-estate agency so I looked up all the legal stuff and offered to get them all set up. They weren't interested in anything other than nursing along their decrepit old PCs.

    11. Re: The larger problem.. by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      I want to look at the forms anyway. It struck me as really odd that, when gas stations were examining my methods of payment carefully, I was expected to sit down and sign numerous forms about the biggest financial deal I'd ever made without reading them first.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  3. Contact Us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Look for the contact us, use it, ask for an application to be mailed (or e-mailed), fill it out, send it back.

    Online forms are generally designed and built by the lowest-bidder who promptly closes up shop after a project is completed, I wouldn't expect much from them.

    1. Re:Contact Us by killkillkill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If they won't mail it, assume the company tries to force every employee into a rigid structure where you will not be free to operate in the manner that best suites you. Your day-to-day work life will be subject to procedures as frustrating as the online form and endless TPS reports.

    2. Re:Contact Us by pkinetics · · Score: 1

      Or worse, designed by the HR department using FrontPage or Word. Or asking the intern or PFY to do it using WordPress or some other painful environment

    3. Re:Contact Us by Chelloveck · · Score: 1

      Or, it's a test. My wife sometimes needs to hire clerical workers. The help-wanted ad she posts end with "Fax a resume to...". I looked at the ad and said, "Fax? Who has a fax machine any more? You should give them an email address!" She says no, the instruction to fax is intentional. She wants someone who can A) follow directions; and B) is resourceful enough to find a fax machine. This is not a high barrier to entry; think of it as the FizzBuzz of office help. In fact, that's exactly what it is, a way to weed out the absolute dregs before you start.

      I'm not saying that filling out an awkward online form is necessarily a test for a tech job, but it may be... Can you follow directions? Can you restate your prior job responsibilities in a format other than your prepared resume? And, let's face it, they're asking you to do the data entry of basic information such as name, address, phone, etc. Key-punch operators are a thing of the past. Nobody's paying people to copy hand-written information off of paper and into the database anymore. If you're such a prima donna that you won't fill out the form, why should I even consider hiring you? Asking for a mailed application simply on the grounds that "your web site sucks" (even if it's true) only makes you look conceited and arrogant.

      (Full disclaimer: My company's online job application sucks. It's not a test, it's just a poor purchasing decision that was made by a different department. I've argued to make it better. Still, it's not impossible to get through as evidenced by the fact that we have people successfully applying every day. If you can't or won't make the effort you're probably not someone I'm going to want to work with anyway.)

      --
      Chelloveck
      I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
    4. Re:Contact Us by russotto · · Score: 1

      I'm not saying that filling out an awkward online form is necessarily a test for a tech job, but it may be... Can you follow directions? Can you restate your prior job responsibilities in a format other than your prepared resume?

      I think you're misunderestimating just how bad many of these things are. They aren't just badly designed. They hang, they freeze, they throw ASP errors just before the final submit (or just after, leaving you wondering if it sent or not).

      The reason seems obvious: In most cases, the output either goes straight to File 13, or goes to some CYA file and is never actually looked at. They're applications for non-jobs.

    5. Re:Contact Us by w_dragon · · Score: 1

      Google 'free fax'. There are plenty of companies that will fax a PDF of a couple of pages for free.

    6. Re:Contact Us by someoneOtherThanMe · · Score: 1

      And once employed, this person may use similar services on company's behalf, instead of asking his boss for the needed resources. Breaking the service's TOS, his company's security policies, and possibly some laws.

    7. Re:Contact Us by david672orford · · Score: 1

      I think you're misunderestimating just how bad many of these things are. They aren't just badly designed. They hang, they freeze, they throw ASP errors just before the final submit (or just after, leaving you wondering if it sent or not).

      I'll second that. I once helped someone who was struggling to fill out a large retailer's online job application forms. With all of the hangs, weird errors, incompatibilty with modern web browsers, tedious prodedure for resuming after a disconnect, and the dozens of pages of redundant questions interspersed with nag screens demanding that the application afirmatively acknowledge assurances as to the fairness of the hiring process, it took about four hours. Then they tell you they will keep it for six months at which time if you are still interested you have to do it all again from scratch.

      I wondered at times if it might not be some kind of test, but the signs of simple programmer incompetence aggrevated by managers who kept pouring more stuff into the application were too obvious to miss.

    8. Re:Contact Us by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Meanwhile I can find and use the email address of your head of HR and include within my application a suggestion that I can help them move off archaic technology and attract candidates that want to work with forward looking companies.

      Or I can just apply for a job with a forward looking company.

      His wife is an idiot, she's driving away potentially great candidates with her artificial barrier to entry.

    9. Re:Contact Us by s0nicfreak · · Score: 1

      Or people who want a job bad enough to leave the comfort of their home and go to the local library.

      Many companies still use fax machines, btw.

  4. Pete and Repeat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What annoys me the most is they ask you to upload your resume... and then ask you to fill out a million fields with the exact same information that's already on your resume.

    1. Re:Pete and Repeat by bobbied · · Score: 3, Funny

      I further hate it when they insist on "plain text" for the resume too. For crying out loud, I spent hours trying to cram my 20+ years onto two pages and when I dump it to plain text it turns into like 5 pages of disjointed text. I get the problem with MS Office macros being dangerous, but plain text?

      My advice to these sites is.... At least accept PDF or XPS versions of any document that's formatted like a Resume.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    2. Re:Pete and Repeat by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I further hate it when they insist on "plain text" for the resume too..... At least accept PDF or XPS versions of any document that's formatted like a Resume.

      You seem to be confused. Your resume is being read by a Perl script, not a human. If your resume does not include certain keywords, a human will never see it.

    3. Re:Pete and Repeat by powerlord · · Score: 1

      Really depends how much experience you have. If you've been one place for 20 years, yeah, sure. If you've been 5, with different responsibilities and in different areas, no.

      --
      This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
    4. Re:Pete and Repeat by bobbied · · Score: 1

      There is that.... I guess I need a plain text resume that has every keyword I can conceivably claim, which is a lot of them...

      Problem with that is, I've been on more than one interview where the interviewer had the plain text resume and nothing else.... What to do..

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    5. Re:Pete and Repeat by div_2n · · Score: 1

      Most employers only care what you've done in the last 7 years. Outside of that window, it's generally assumed that either A. The skills/tech are no longer relevant or B. If you haven't used it in the last 7 years, you probably don't remember it well enough to be relevant anyway.

      Tweak your resume to highlight your skills and experience that are relevant to the job posting. Don't include anything that isn't directly related or completely awesome. I mean REALLY awesome. Like you won a prestigious award kind of awesome.

      Most resumes I've seen that are excessively long would be less than 2 pages following this design regardless of the formatting unless you used gigantic fonts.

    6. Re:Pete and Repeat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      your resume goes through (at least) 3 layers before someone technical sees it.

      #1. automated scraping script. if it can't parse the resume, you get rejected.
      #2. keyword search performed by HR. if you don't have _ALL_ the keywords for that position, you get rejected. even if they are looking for a microcontroller developer and the lead developer said "basic html/css familiarity would be nice".
      #3. HR review. they will be looking for employment length & gaps. If you worked at one place for 20 years, you are probably "less agile" (too old), haven't been keeping up with new tech, and will lose points. If you worked at a place for less than 2 years, you're a job hopper and lose points. what's that gap between job #3 & job #4? more than 3 months? minus points. worked overseas? unless that language/culture is in the keywords, minus points because they can't verify it.

      and don't forget, there's a big point loss if you are currently unemployed, that means nobody else wants you.

      don't try to argue the rationality of the above, i'm not the god of HR. I just worked for IT at a recruiting company.

    7. Re:Pete and Repeat by nblender · · Score: 2

      I was recently given a resume to review prior to interviewing the candidate... The resume was chock full of keywords... ie: on one job, it was clear they'd used ssh as part of some administrative interface they'd built... He included keywords: "Openssh", "Blowfish", "RSA", "DSA", "Public Key", etc ... The resume was 9 pages long and most of it was useless keywords... Clearly intended to bypass automated resume filters... When it came to the interview, I found myself less than impressed with the candidate so I started asking technical questions about Blowfish, RSA, DSA, and he clearly didn't know anything about them. If you're going to put something on your resume, you had better damn well know about it.

      He was not hired.

      Frankly, I'm not sure I know how to get a job these days... I'm fortunate to have work come looking for me these days.

    8. Re:Pete and Repeat by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Good advice. I've been whittling it down to the point where much of my employment history before 2000 is limited to position, company, and dates while moving all relevant "what I have experience with" to a master list of keywords. It's proven effective this way. Still, it's hard to fit everything on two pages after 20+ years. Where I'm pretty sure knowing "VULCAN" and "ATLAS" isn't going to help me today, being able to do C and shell programming might.... What to do.

      When I have the time, I generally like to tailor my resume for the position I'm applying for. For that reason I have about 3 basic resumes, one slanted more towards firmware/hardware, one for system integration and one that's pure software engineering and start from there.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    9. Re:Pete and Repeat by nephilimsd · · Score: 1

      Posting every keyword you can think of is also most likely a bad idea. If the automated software detects too many keywords, the application is thrown out as likely spam. The ideal thing to do is to have one master resume that contains everything you think might ever be relevant, and then tailor a specific copy for each job you are posting for, using only the keywords they ask for in the job posting plus maybe one or two related skills. Then a human might actually see it. Also, you can still format a plain-text resume to be short, and provide a PDF of a pretty version with expanded explanations of duties or situations. And learn to bring additional copies of your resume to interviews, so you can give the interviewer something much nicer to look at.

    10. Re:Pete and Repeat by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Challenge the interviewer to a truing test!
      Or present yourself as an Eliza!
      'Why are you insisting on my C# skills, what does it bother you? Why lets not talk about my other skills? Hm? Hmmmmm?"

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    11. Re:Pete and Repeat by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      That is exactly how I approach Y2K and Euro currency conversion problems, the odd and random PL/1 and Assembler question also fits into it.

      Oh ... you mean I should not apply to those jobs as I did not do anything related the last 7 years? WTF, now I'm unemployed forever !!!

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    12. Re:Pete and Repeat by ProzacPatient · · Score: 1

      I got contacted by a Wells Fargo recruiter once and they asked me to fill out an application, so I filled out an application and eagerly awaited a potential interview but when I heard back they told me the hiring manager was very interested in me and wanted me to go back to their HR portal, or whatever it was, and upload a resumé in Word format on top of all the tons of information I already filled out so I did as instructed but their upload form would always fail and give me an internal server error 500. I tried contacting the recruiter to tell him I couldn't upload a resumé because a server error on their end only to hear from them two months later to tell me they decided to hire someone else instead.

      Long story short I hate online applications.

    13. Re:Pete and Repeat by nine-times · · Score: 2

      If you're going to put something on your resume, you had better damn well know about it.

      There's a bit of a problem there, given the automated scans and everything.

      For example, HR people will do things like filtering out resumes that don't include "Cisco". They might not actually have Cisco equipment, or even if they do, it might not be a vital part of the job. Regardless, Their system is just set up to filter out anything that doesn't include "Cisco". Now, you're a network tech that isn't very experienced with Cisco, but you've done a little work on Cisco equipment here and there, and you understand routers in general. Do you slip "Cisco" into your resume just to get past the scans?

      I don't on my resume, but it's a tough issue, and I understand why someone would do that kind of thing. The problem is, by having the automated filtering process, employers/recruiters are providing an incentive for people to throw in buzzwords just to get their resume to be seen by human eyes. I've actually heard recruiters suggest that people put a bunch of small-type white-on-white invisible text at the bottom of their resumes, filled with buzzwords without context, just to get past automated filters.

      What I find sad and disturbing is not that people will throw buzzwords in their resume, but that employers have created a system where that's a smart strategy. You'd think someone would come up with a better method.

    14. Re:Pete and Repeat by spatley · · Score: 2

      There is absolutely a way to get all the keywords you want onto a resume for the Perl engine and also be honest to a human reader

      You could have a section at the end of the resume labeled "keywords" and then put categories in for you proficiency level: guru keywords, master keywords, apprentice keywords and newbie keywords. or any other such arrangement.

      I have spent years as a hiring manager and I would be quite impressed if such completeness and honesty showed on a resume.

    15. Re:Pete and Repeat by Khashishi · · Score: 1

      Seems like the resume did its job, got him the interview.

    16. Re:Pete and Repeat by Mr.+Freeman · · Score: 1

      >He was not hired.

      Oh yes he was, he just wasn't hired at *your* company. I'll bet you dollars to donuts that his "resume" got him a job at another company because their software ranked him at the top for having "more qualifications" than any other applicant.

      --
      -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
    17. Re:Pete and Repeat by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

      and get kicked for going over 2 pages.

    18. Re:Pete and Repeat by pepty · · Score: 1

      If you've been at 5 different companies with different responsibilities at each then most of those responsibilities will only be tangential to the job you are writing a resume for right now. Write the resume accordingly.

    19. Re:Pete and Repeat by nine-times · · Score: 1

      I have spent years as a hiring manager and I would be quite impressed if such completeness and honesty showed on a resume.

      And then other hiring managers would get annoyed and toss your resume because you did something you weren't supposed to. Maybe I'm just cynical, but that seems to be the way it goes with job applications: for anything that one person says, "I would be impressed and that resume would go to the top of my list!" there's at least a few others that say, "I find that unappealing and I would ignore a resume that came in with that."

  5. Because they don't use them to get employees. by gurps_npc · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Instead, they use them to show that they are willing to accept anyone - black, white, male, female, etc.

    Real jobs don't come from HR. They come from business contacts.

    --
    excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
    1. Re:Because they don't use them to get employees. by bobbied · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Real jobs don't come from HR. They come from business contacts.

      Actually, this is NOT true all the time. In fact, a any job you get from a corporation of any kind of size, you are going though HR and the only thing your contact can buy you is priority treatment (getting put top on the stack) and possibly having an advocate with the hiring manager. My last 3 jobs which cover the last 15 years of my life all came via HR and not direct contacts. In fact, most of my jobs came though the HR process and didn't involve an insider at all.

      That"s not to say that jobs don"t come from referrals and business contacts, for small companies, they often do. It's just a function of what kind of company we are talking about. The bigger they are, the more likely HR is going to be in firm control of the initial vetting of possible candidates and having an inside contact is much less valuable. But in the small company, where they don't have an HR department., contacts are the only route to get in. So it just depends on what kind of company you are looking for.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    2. Re:Because they don't use them to get employees. by pla · · Score: 1

      the only thing your contact can buy you is priority treatment (getting put top on the stack) and possibly having an advocate with the hiring manager.

      While technically true, that alone means the difference between at least having a shot at getting the job, or getting lost in the stack of 400 applicants.

      Yes, HR always has and always will count as the single biggest obstacle to getting the right people in the right seats; but having an inside "champion" always has and always will count as the single best shot at getting the right people despite HR's best efforts.

    3. Re:Because they don't use them to get employees. by bobbied · · Score: 1

      I won't argue that having an insider isn't invaluable, I'm just saying that having an insider is not the only way to get a job. Some of us can get though the HR wickets, though the interviews and actually get a job without needing inside help, and I'm living proof. Out of the 9 jobs I've had since college, only 2 ever involved an insider. Maybe that says something about me, but that's another topic...

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    4. Re:Because they don't use them to get employees. by nblender · · Score: 1

      In my experience, this is not true. For 3 of the large corporations (1000+ employees) I've worked for, a senior director wanted to hire me and we negotiated my rate/salary/etc. He told someone in HR to hire me and I dictated my terms. When HR balked, I received a call from the senior director, re-iterated my terms, and then promptly received a followup call from HR agreeing to my terms.

    5. Re:Because they don't use them to get employees. by bobbied · · Score: 1

      I guess it deepens on who you know. I've only been hired by an insider at small companies where HR didn't exist myself. With my personality, I don't tend to stand out in the crowd, nor do I tend to network all that well, being a scary tall guy who doesn't smile much. It's a skill I should have worked on a lot more when I was younger, could have paid off, but I'm trying to teach myself some new tricks in the closing years here....

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    6. Re:Because they don't use them to get employees. by Karl+Cocknozzle · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Real jobs don't come from HR. They come from business contacts.

      Actually, this is NOT true all the time.

      By any chance, do you work in HR? Exactly ZERO jobs "come from HR." Without a business need for a hire, there is no job. HR is the cadre of paper-pushers who stand in the way of getting a job, and make it impossible for teams to hire the people they actually need by enforcing meaningless, arcane, and bureaucratic "best practices" which also happen to enshrine the HR people themselves into unfirable, key-man positions. Their function is (literally) to prevent applicants from connecting with hiring managers--this is the exact opposite of what you should be trying to achieve. Until you're talking to the hiring manager, directly, and have permission to contact her directly after the fact with any followups, you're not a real candidate for a job. If HR can arbitrarily cut off your contact with the hiring manager (because you can only go "through HR") you're not a candidate--you're a person whose application is being used to justify the payment of salaries to HR people because otherwise "Who will deal with all these applicants?"

      In fact, a any job you get from a corporation of any kind of size, you are going though HR and the only thing your contact can buy you is priority treatment (getting put top on the stack) and possibly having an advocate with the hiring manager.

      It really depends on the company. Most organizations I know/have interviewed at intentionally recruit via third parties and "fix it on the back end" with HR because before they started doing so the HR "screener" disqualified all the good candidates and sent up clunkers with no employment "gaps," but no real achievements, either.

      My last 3 jobs which cover the last 15 years of my life all came via HR and not direct contacts. In fact, most of my jobs came though the HR process and didn't involve an insider at all.

      How many applications did you fill out to get those three jobs? 10? 50? 100? 1,000? 10,000? In the same 15 years, I've gotten six jobs. Five of them were recruiters, referrals, or placements. Only one involved "going in the front door" and that job paid the least of all the jobs, had the worst benefits, the longest hours, zero advancement opportunities, and generally sucked donkey-ass. And as for applications: I haven't filled one out since I started working with recruiters exclusively. "Fill out an application" is the same as being told "We'll call you"--it's a euphemism for "you aren't going to be hired."

      Since I stopped doing the "front door" my salary has quadrupled (granted, I've also added a great skillset in the intervening 14.5 years,) my working hours are sane, and permit working remotely when going to the office is inconvenient. That "front-door" gig? If there was enough snow to make going to work dangerous, but the roads were open, you have to go or use a vacation day. Literally every job I've ever had has been better than the "front door" place. But I also spend less time interviewing and filling out pointless paperwork (that you'll have to fill out again when hired, because they can't just "type in what you put on your application" in your new hire paperwork, of course.

      The bigger they are, the more likely HR is going to be in firm control of the initial vetting of possible candidates and having an inside contact is much less valuable. But in the small company, where they don't have an HR department., contacts are the only route to get in. So it just depends on what kind of company you are looking for.

      Here's my advice, do with it what you will: If you're trying to get a job and the HR department is so "firmly in control" of hiring that they have total trump over every hiring decision run away as fast as you can. Don't walk--RUN AWAY AS FAST AS YOU CAN. Why? Besides the nightmare of getting yourself hired, every time your team has an opening

      --
      Who did what now?
    7. Re:Because they don't use them to get employees. by nblender · · Score: 1

      I don't interview well but I never really have to interview... Open Source cred goes a long way...

    8. Re:Because they don't use them to get employees. by Ryanrule · · Score: 1

      No, untrue.

      If you are worth it, they will pass you to hr for a minute for a rubber stamp.

    9. Re:Because they don't use them to get employees. by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Real jobs don't come from HR. They come from business contacts.

      Actually, this is NOT true all the time.

      But I'll go back to the old saw (because it is true): "The best job openings are never advertised." Which means the best job openings don't "go through" HR. The best companies use HR as a convenient way to get paperwork done, not as a gatekeeper for hiring.

      I'm not debating with most of what you said. I'm saying that there are some of us who managed to get though the HR process without the benefit of having inside help. It *sometimes* happens. Now, the question about if folks could do better than the HR managed door is another matter. In my experience, what you describe has not been that common. I've certainly not ventured far from the corporate monoliths with strong HR departments, save once when I worked for a small start up that turned out totally dysfunctional and got me sued in the end. (Something I don't wish to repeat). However, what you describe does happen for some, I'm just not ready to say it's the only way. Other ways work too.

      I suppose that I could have done better with a bit more aggressive approach to job hunting that used more networking and less luck, it just doesn't serve my personality very well. I'm glad it works for you.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    10. Re:Because they don't use them to get employees. by sootman · · Score: 1

      > Their function is (literally) to prevent applicants
      > from connecting with hiring managers

      Now now, you're selling HR short.

      It's also their responsibility to be able to supply a valid reason to fire any person at any time.

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    11. Re:Because they don't use them to get employees. by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I currently work for a 20+ person corporation. They have no HR at all, and marginally illegal hiring practices (the same thing everyone else does, but without the legal polish of an HR department. And when I started work at a 10,000+ person company years ago, I spent 2 hours of my first day listening to HR lecture the IT manager for not hiring me through the proper HR process.

  6. Step 1: Ask and listen! by stderr_dk · · Score: 2

    ... there has to be a better way: but what is it?

    The first step would be for the job application site to ask their users and listen to the comments about the site.

    You know, just like Dice listens to all our comments about beta...

    --
    alias sudo="echo make it yourself #" ; # https://pipedot.org/~stderr & http://soylentnews.org/~stderr
  7. Just a friendly reminder by hillbluffer · · Score: 1

    Of the corporate owner, Dice.com; their online applications are surely WELL designed...

  8. Dedicated candidates by penguinoid · · Score: 1

    Maybe they're just weeding out the people who don't want the job bad enough to complete their terrible application system.

    --
    Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
    1. Re:Dedicated candidates by psyhofreak · · Score: 1
      I like this answer, for it's cheerful optimism, but I've worked in too many corporate settings to believe that anyone in the typical HR department is clever enough to be that devious.

      Probably they are that bad because the systems only have to be good enough that people can occasionally successfully submit an application. HR is a cost center in most companies, and spending money to get a less sucky website will not immediately pay off. After all, the people wasting all their time fighting with that website by definition are not being paid for their time.

    2. Re:Dedicated candidates by freeze128 · · Score: 1

      Conversely, why are the text fields too small? Would you want to hire anyone whose browser size is 640x480 for a technical job? What is this, 1994?

  9. Standardize by AaronLS · · Score: 1

    The reentering of resume information is ridiculous.

    What if there was a common XML format that represented your resume? You created this using a desktop GUI and just upload the resume.xml to potential employees.

    1. Re:Standardize by OverlordQ · · Score: 1

      There is, pretty useless though. Older versions of the spec were so vague it was implemented differently by different companies which completely broke any concept of a 'standard'.

      --
      Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
    2. Re:Standardize by SpzToid · · Score: 1

      In an attempt to deliver per your specification, please check this out: http://schema.org/JobPosting

      --
      You can't be ahead of the curve, if you're stuck in a loop.
    3. Re:Standardize by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Perhaps the standard can focus on just IT (or diff standards per industry) instead of try to fit all industries. That way it doesn't have to try to cast a wide net.

    4. Re: Standardize by AaronLS · · Score: 1

      This appears to be for the posting, not for the submission of applicant/resume. But essentially the same concept. I build my resume using a GUI, it generates XML submission as needed, employer parses what information they are interested in or throws feedback indicating missing required info.

  10. No relationship between online app & getting a by TrollstonButterbeans · · Score: 1

    There is no relationship between an online job application and getting a job.

    Online job applications are neglected because no one needs 10,000 online forms filled out for 1 job.

    --
    Priest: "Universe from nothing, no laws of physics, sped up time"+ huge discrepancies. Creationism? No. Big Bang Theory
  11. How about capitalization? by See+Attached · · Score: 1

    On my Android, the first letter of every word gets capitalized on many sites .. Whats up with that? Is that client side or server side nonsense?

    --
    Time for a new Political party in the US (or two!) One is off the rails Other cant pony up a leader.
    1. Re: How about capitalization? by Jakeula · · Score: 1

      That's client side.

  12. Because ... by PPH · · Score: 1

    ... applictions (on-line or otherwise) are just the first step in filtering out the riff-raff. So they don't get as much attention as the follow up interview.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  13. Shower Thought by DoomSprinkles · · Score: 1

    Maybe being able to get through an application form on a webpage is the first test that weeds out the incompetent.

    1. Re:Shower Thought by david672orford · · Score: 1

      Maybe being able to get through an application form on a webpage is the first test that weeds out the incompetent.

      I suppose if they were applying for IT jobs that might make sense. Then they could pick from those who found workarounds for the problems on the website which stopped other applicants in their tracks. But putting applicants for the position of cashier though a few hours of techno-torture before you will accept their applications doesn't make any sense.

  14. Duh ... because they're speced and designed by HR? by Qbertino · · Score: 1

    Applications and confidentials are usually built by people who don't have a clue. That's the norm these days and you should know that by now. The non-sense I've seen in the last 15 years in this area is bizar beyond words, both in type and amount, and I'm sure every slashdotter here has an evening full of stories to contribute on that subject.

    I personally wouldn't even fill out such an application. If I can't talk to the team beforehand to evaluate - for both sides - that an application would make sense, I don't even bother. And a short 2-liner E-Mail is enough to lead up to such a phonecall.

    My 2 cents.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
  15. It's supply and demand, stupid by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

    Online job applications are designed to make it as easy as possible for employers to trim the list of applicants quickly. There are a lot of people looking for not-a-lot of jobs. The logic here is that if someone can't fill out the application correctly they probably wouldn't be a very good fit for the job.

    Now, whether or not that logic is valid is another question to ask.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  16. 2 reasons by Triv · · Score: 1

    2 reasons:

    1. because they aren't designed to be easy for YOU, they're designed to be easy for HR to put in a database.

    and relatedly,

    2. because applying for jobs online can't be too easy because otherwise the signal-to-noise ratio suffers.

    1. Re:2 reasons by bobbied · · Score: 1

      3. Because programmers usually make horrible GUI designers and nobody is thinking "work flow" for the perspective employee.

      Just consider it your initial indoctrination into the inane filling out of forms, diversity training and yearly "performance review" processes designed by the legal staff in HR department.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    2. Re:2 reasons by geekoid · · Score: 1

      I used to hate performance reviews, then about 13 years ago I got a manager who taught me how to properly do them. Now I always get the highest ratings.
      basically, it's become a glitch I can manipulate to get the maximum raise each year.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:2 reasons by bobbied · · Score: 1

      I used to hate performance reviews, then about 13 years ago I got a manager who taught me how to properly do them. Now I always get the highest ratings. basically, it's become a glitch I can manipulate to get the maximum raise each year.

      Good for you... My first manager, when I worked for the government, introduced me to the "performance review" concept too. It was great and if you know the system and can work with your manager, good reviews are a given. If you cannot work with the manager or he's not communicating with you, it's a crap shoot and I have had to roll the dice a number of times and lost.

      But we are not talking about the performance review, but the horrible HR developed software tools that have Rube Goldberg like user interfaces that make no sense and because you only have to use them 3 times a year you never remember how to do everything and have to try and remember the necessary username and password then figure out how the blasted thing works. Huge waste of time.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    4. Re:2 reasons by bobbied · · Score: 1

      What's the secret?

      If your manager isn't telling you, you might try asking them the following question:

      "What can I do to get an excellent review next year?"

      Think about the answer to that question and set out to do what they ask. If you don't get an answer you think is reasonable and within your control, start looking for another job.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    5. Re:2 reasons by Polo · · Score: 1

      3. If a company has a clumsy resume interface, that frightens away the good developers that would be qualified to fix it.

      Why would a good developer want to work at a company with these obvious fundamental problems?

  17. No better than written forms by Russ1642 · · Score: 1

    Virtually every written form I've had to fill in has sucked just as badly. None of them provide enough space for the information asked. Even with things like phone numbers they won't give you enough room. They also force you to incorrectly summarize things, such as education. Do you have a masters, bachelor's degree, or high school diploma? Check one. It's ridiculous, but so far I've only ever had to fill them out AFTER I've gone for an interview and they only want them for their HR files.

  18. Human Resources by globaljustin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    the problem is HR

    the *concept* of an online job application is fairly simple from a coding perspective...making some kind of form requires some choices but this is basic stuff

    the systemic issue is with the people who define the parameters for the information...the HR people

    HR is usually full of people making decisions that affect whole systems they have no understanding of and have no way of receiving feedback systemically to improve, part of the general problem in US biz structure

    applying for a job is excruciating in the US today...it's just layers and layers of bad management

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
    1. Re:Human Resources by geek · · Score: 2

      My wife works in HR and I'm finishing off the HR section of my MBA. It's not HR that does this. The HR people have an HRIS system that includes the ability to do forms etc. The managers are the ones that create the forms and guidlines, HR just shuffles the papers around. HR takes the blame because they are the face of the mess but in reality it's middle managers, or in my company they are called "talent managers" who have their heads so firmly up their asses that they convolute everything to the point even HR can't stand them.

    2. Re:Human Resources by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      In my experience "talent managers" always work for HR. I have never seen this as a separate department.

    3. Re:Human Resources by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      My wife works in HR and I'm finishing off the HR section of my MBA. It's not HR that does this. The HR people have an HRIS system that includes the ability to do forms etc. The managers are the ones that create the forms and guidlines, HR just shuffles the papers around. HR takes the blame because they are the face of the mess but in reality it's middle managers, or in my company they are called "talent managers" who have their heads so firmly up their asses that they convolute everything to the point even HR can't stand them.

      Then HR should do their jobs:
          1) try the forms themselves
          2) get other employees to try the forms
          3) get upper management/CEOs to try the forms
          4) enact a refinement / revision process
          5) don't publish the forms _until_ they are easy to use and fill out
          6) ask for candidates' comments, ideas, etc., anonymously, after published.

      I can't tell you how many great-sounding job ads I've seen, only to be 100% shut out for one reason or another by the online forms.

      Since HR _is_ the employment face of a company, and a company's success or failure can be 100% due to the quality of its employees, most companies' upper management will want HR to fix these forms, and will/SHOULD give HR complete authority.

  19. Anti-resume spam filter by Kjella · · Score: 1

    If it was so simple to send applications everywhere, people would. It doesn't cost them anything, but it costs you time and/or money to have someone process them. If you make them jump through a few hoops, you'll at least filter away some of the worst spammers who can't be arsed unless they can email their generic application letter and CV. If it's a job you genuinely want, what's taking 5-10 minutes out your day to apply? Personally I've spent much longer tuning my application and CV to show I've read the advertisement and made a good effort to show what skills I have that's particularly relevant to that job. I suppose if I was out of a job it's different, but I don't need to carpet bomb the market. I look for jobs I'd really like and make a few, but serious efforts.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    1. Re:Anti-resume spam filter by sound+vision · · Score: 1

      5-10 minutes is what it should be like - you haven't run across the hour-long applications with the 100-question personality tests? I've spent over an hour on an application more than once, too. One that I remember being particularly bad had the 100-question personality test, and made you take the same test for each position you were applying to. Being that I checked off two positions, I had to do the test twice over. I'm just glad the results saved and submitted properly. It's common enough for these web apps to simply crap out and trash your entire application.

      When's the last time you looked for a job, and what sort of job was it? As little as 6 or 8 years ago, a lot of employers still used paper applications, or would accept a resume by email if you wanted to do it electronically. Even the ones that already had online applications have added all kinds of "assessments" and junk to the application.
      IME it seems more common for entry-level or sales jobs to have these sorts of things added - I suppose that's because those employers are looking to throw out 90% of the applications anyway. If you have yet to experience the application from hell, try applying for some positions with retailers in your area. Before you hit the fifth application, I guarantee you will find one that fits the description. The problem is definitely not exclusive to low-pay jobs, but that's where you can spot it with certainty.

  20. Blame HR ... by gstoddart · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Online job application systems aren't intended to find good candidates.

    They're designed to allow HR and recruiters to select the specific set of buzzwords they're looking for but have no understanding of, all while doing the minimum amount of work and the least amount of understanding.

    You don't really think HR reads and is capable of evaluating all of those resumes, do you?

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:Blame HR ... by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      They're designed to allow HR and recruiters to select the specific set of buzzwords they're looking for but have no understanding of, all while doing the minimum amount of work and the least amount of understanding.

      The bolded statement sums it up. These application systems are intended to offload as much data entry work onto the candidate as possible. From the company's perspective, why should they pay HR to do data entry when they can get the candidates to do it for free?

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    2. Re:Blame HR ... by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      but I thought the human resources department reads and is capable of evaluating the resumes. Then who evaluates the resumes?

      In my experience, HR sifts through for the appropriate set of buzzwords, and then sends a stack of resumes to someone -- who then looks at the stack and laments there are no qualified candidates.

      For technical jobs, HR is seldom qualified to understand what is actually being sought, they they go exclusively from the buzzwords.

      I believe the modern next step is to then see if you can get an H1B candidate, because it looks as if nobody with the appropriate skills applied.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    3. Re:Blame HR ... by dnebin · · Score: 1

      So my wife is in HR, so let me explain why they use these kinds of systems...

      First, for any particular job opening managers are putting pressure on to get the ad in the paper, get the notice up on every job posting board there is, get word out to employees, headhunters, etc. They want their position(s) filled as soon as possible, many times they feel like if they don't get the job filled right away some bean counter might realize that the job isn't really necessary and lots of money can be saved by eliminating the position.

      Now with all of those postings someone has to create the actual ad and job description. This is pretty tough since managers will tend to ask for specifics (must know how to use the 1980 version of drill press 123), but this has to be translated into something that is a little more open to receiving viable candidates. There's also the challenge of getting all of the requirements from the managers so the posting is complete.

      Then the fun begins. Headhunters want to provide 'screened' candidates (which end up being a result of a query on some database they have that kicks back a list of folks that may or may not have all of the skills necessary). There's also a lot of cruft and spam that come in for the job posting (lots of job bots out there), and there's also people who are not really qualified for the job applying anyway cuz they're looking to make that next big career move. And with the glut of unemployed out there, you get folks who are out of the area, folks who are overqualified, underqualified, etc. who all just need a job to keep their house, car, kids, dignity, whatever...

      Many of these sites that are used are not really picked or coded by HR in any way, they're generic sites (perhaps themed, but generic none the less) like zip recruiter (POS, if you ask me). These sites love applicants and resumes etc., but they also employ some sort of "qualified applicant" filter so that all applicants don't ever get to HR. And no, HR does not usually pick these kinds of sites, they'll get picked by business folks who are looking to save money in the organization and get convinced that zip recruiter will help them do that.

      Another thing companies are using are personality tests. They too are sold to executives as ways to automatically filter out 'incompatible' people. In some cases they may work, but in reality they can typically be gamed to get you through. Surprisingly though, many folks don't know they can be gamed and answer them honestly; unfortunately for them, the execs tweak the test so much that only supermen get through (i.e. like a salesman who can sell ice cubes to eskimos kind of perfect candidates). Many times these filters end up being over-aggressive and end up blocking what may otherwise be good potential candidates had they known how to game the tests.

      As far as the uploading resume goes, well those end up going to the hiring manager (because they want resumes, not forms or reports). The forms, however, are necessary for all of the computer filters, etc. to weed out unqualified applicants. They have no real HR function outside of that (although it is easier to work off of reports of candidates).

      Finally, just as it is in IT, if you want to screw something up really bad in HR just get the executives involved. They're the ones that mess things up over there just as much as they do in IT...

    4. Re:Blame HR ... by Khashishi · · Score: 1

      Ok, if she doesn't actually have the power to make any decisions, and the company is just using some filter product purchased by the executives, what exactly does she do?

    5. Re:Blame HR ... by dnebin · · Score: 1

      manages the relationships between the company and external vendors (benefits such as health, dental, vision, 401k, they all have different sources and require their own upkeep), is the proxy between the employee and those vendors, oversees the process of hiring and firing (to ensure no laws or rights are violated), etc.

      It's all management stuff, but when an exec says "Hey, we're using ziprecruiter because I played golf with a guy that just loved It", she's stuck with it until she can demonstrate that it is not all that it's cracked up to be.

  21. Because it's unimportant by reanjr · · Score: 1

    It simply doesn't matter. The job applications process doesn't affect corporate branding and is intended - primarily - to weed through a huge number of candidates and reject the vast majority of them. There's simply no value to spending time making these systems good. One might say they even serve to weed out people not dedicated enough to deal with the bullshit.

    The one exception is if you are web shop looking for developers. Then your application process better be flawless or you're going to attract some pretty terrible applicants.

    1. Re:Because it's unimportant by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      There's simply no value to spending time making these systems good.

      Apparently someone still sees value in spending a lot of time making all the overly complex multi-page forms and user account systems for the current systems.

    2. Re:Because it's unimportant by j-beda · · Score: 1

      There's simply no value to spending time making these systems good. One might say they even serve to weed out people not dedicated enough to deal with the bullshit.

      The difficulty is a feature. I doubt it is done by design, but probably has developed so in an evolutionary manner. A lower level job opening, with minimal qualifications, is potentially available to millions of applicants. If they all applied you could never decide on the best applicants. Most such positions would best be filled (from the employer's point of view at least) by someone who is dedicated enough to show up for their shifts, follow directions, and persist in the face of minor difficulties. Applicants not interested enough to put up with a flaky website probably have a higher likelihood of quitting or not showing up for work when scheduled.

      If there are going to be a million people who start to fill out the application, if your system pisses off 50% of applicants enough that they do not complete the application, that still leaves five hundred thousand applicants. Probably this pool has a larger fraction of "dedicated hard-workers" than the initial pool of a million, so it is better for the company to deal with a smaller pool of on average more highly desirable applicants.

      If you make the application process easy, you have to figure out a way of weeding out those with less good fit to the position. It costs real money to have to rehire people all the time, and makes for a bad environment for those who stay.

    3. Re:Because it's unimportant by reanjr · · Score: 1

      It takes very little time and money to hire a firm in India to build this. Once built, there's little reason to improve it.

    4. Re:Because it's unimportant by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      How much time and money does it take?

  22. Why? by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    Why Are Online Job Applications So Badly Designed?

    Um... Because, while not rocket science, good software and human-interface design is often hard?

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:Why? by gstoddart · · Score: 2

      Um... Because, while not rocket science, good software and human-interface design is often hard?

      With the corollary that most organizations don't see it as a value proposition, and just want it up and running as quickly as possible.

      So you get a half-assed solution due to minimum resources thrown at it, and a low perceived ROI.

      If your first interaction with a company is a shitty, poorly designed tool which makes no sense -- you can bet there will be numerous others within the company.

      I have often found the processes and tools used by the HR and Finance people are the most arcane, pointless, and quite often useless tools you can imagine -- and they're curated by people who are rigid, inflexible, and can't grasp when their tool is inadequate for the job.

      I have seen lots of tools which do not actually cover the breadth of the reality for which they're used. Something is either an apple or an orange, but you've got a coconut in your hand, and the system doesn't know anything about coconuts, and the people who run it don't care about coconuts. The coconut is your damned problem.

      They just keep acting like their system is useful and mandatory.

      And then it gets really fun when you need to use several useless tools to enter the same information so that another department can get it the way they insist on it.

      My wife enters her time into no less than 4 different tracking systems, all used by different departments for different purposes.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    2. Re:Why? by Mr+Z · · Score: 1

      I only enter mine into two, but both are crap.

      The crappier of the two, amazingly, was not written in-house. We apparently bought that turd! (A site-customized/bastardized version of SumTotal Unified Workforce Interface (assuming I found a link to the correct turd), in case you're curious. It's non-modular!)

  23. Because nobody cares.. by Codeyman · · Score: 1

    People just got to XYZ's job portal to apply for job, they don't rate or complain about the product. The job portal doesn't generate any revenue. Nobody says that they are not going to join/interview for a job at XYZ because their online job portal sucks. There is no competition in the space at all. Why would the portals be any better?

  24. HR by Ryanrule · · Score: 2

    HR is the problem.
    Totally useless dept set up to provide jobs for airhead daughters of executives 50 years ago.
    Now it shits all over everything.

    1. Re:HR by geekoid · · Score: 1

      I've worked with too many good HR people to agree with that.
      HR knows the rules of how things function. HR can help you if you have an issue. I've gone to HR and said 'My dad is sick, whats the best way for me to take time off? and they know the federal rules I would ahve had no clue about.

      I've work with bad HR as well, where they have no power, can't really help any one, and just hand out paychecks.

      BTW- executive don't need HR to get people they want hired, hired. You're whole assertions is flawed.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  25. Oracle iRecruitment by Cederic · · Score: 1

    A lot of companies use Oracle E-Business Suite as their HR and/or payroll system. An EBS module is iRecruitment, which includes candidate web application capabilities.

    Pretty much everything this article highlights as wrong with modern recruitment sites applies to iRecruitment. Even by EBS standards it's a horrific unusable mess and Oracle would do the world a favour if they deleted the code base and demanded all their customers remove the binaries.

  26. Online Job Apps by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

    If you are dealing with online job apps you have already lost.

    Over my 35 year technical career I've never found it necessary to use one of these.

  27. Useless forms by wiredlogic · · Score: 1

    I've always wondered why so many places expect you to fill out lengthy form fields when most applicants are going to be rejected anyway. Why have them enter their address and schools they attended and other minutiae that isn't needed to weed out candidates. I don't even understand why you always have to supply your race, disability, and veteran status in the US if all you're effectively doing is submitting a resume rather than formally applying for the position.

    All they need is name, email, phone, and a resume/CV. The rest can be pulled out with software that scans for relevant info.

    --
    I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
  28. like the Marines? by k6mfw · · Score: 1

    Perhaps by design they make the application difficult. It's tough, it's demanding, it's the hardest thing you will ever do. But if you have the perseverance, the skill to do it, then maybe you are worthy to join.

    --
    mfwright@batnet.com
  29. I'm faced with this right now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I work at a fairly large business that wants to add online application capability to its website. We have the in-house expertise to design a fantastic experience to applicants. Instead, we're going to go with the lowest bidder that can put a check next to a list of bullet points we provide. Later on it will cost us applicants and data management in the hundreds of thousands, but today it will be cheap.

    Race to the bottom isn't just for Walmart customers.

  30. HTTPS - lolwut? by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 2

    The majority of these online forms are multiple screens long, and because they're invariably HTTPS, they'll time out after a finite time which isn't always made known to the user.

    You realize that normal forms only open a connection to the HTTP{,S} server when you click the "Submit" button, right? You can sit there for infinite time because there's no open connection to time out until such time as you request it. What you're seeing is a combination of client- and server-side timers that have nothing whatsoever to do with the transport you'll be using to upload your information. And yeah, I'd mildly prefer my HR information to be encrypted en route, TYVM.

    --
    Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    1. Re:HTTPS - lolwut? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Likely you never used a form or multiple form survey your parent is talking about?

      It happens always that at some point you say next and it redirects you to the log in page and your work is gone.

      Worst thing I once had was that it simply continued to the next page and there was a small notice (which I did not see) at the top of the page "you are not logged on" ... 2 or 3 hours filling forms for nothing.

      The company even called me 4 weeks later telling me I have to fill out the form, I told them I did ... they claim dI did not ... so I did it again and noticed that "you are not logged on" indicator.

      I figured it was not worth filling out the form after all ...

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    2. Re:HTTPS - lolwut? by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 2

      Likely you never used a form or multiple form survey your parent is talking about?

      Perhaps not; I just write this stuff for a living.

      It happens always that at some point you say next and it redirects you to the log in page and your work is gone.

      As I said: "What you're seeing is a combination of client- and server-side timers that have nothing whatsoever to do with the transport you'll be using to upload your information."

      It has zero to do with HTTPS and everything to do with the webapp having a line of code somewhere like if((current_time()-last_posted_time)>900){logout();}.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    3. Re:HTTPS - lolwut? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Then I don't get your point.
      Ofc it has nothing to do with HTP/HTTPS but with servdr side time outs.
      Was that the issue/topic? I did not guess so. Sorry if I an my parent, you parent actually, misunderstood you.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    4. Re:HTTPS - lolwut? by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      OP said the problem of form timeouts was because they're using HTTPS. That is absolutely not the case, any more than it's because they're using Java or Python or Intel or CAT-5. None of those have anything to do with the real reason, which is that the server is programmed to time out idle connections after a set length of time.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    5. Re:HTTPS - lolwut? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Well, then I misinterpreted your post. You are obviously rigth about the technical concerns. My apologize!

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    6. Re:HTTPS - lolwut? by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      NP :-)

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
  31. Re:Don't even bother by bobbied · · Score: 1

    Bad advice. If you are really looking for a job, getting your name and specs searchable and in front of as many hiring managers as you can is only going to be a help.

    Now, I can tell you that companies that do this may not be the kind of place you want to work, but if the goal is to get a job, you need to get your name out there. Do be warned though, filling out the online searchable stuff on "job boards" (who shall remain nameless) should be done carefully to avoid ID theft and they are going to generate a lot of garbage contacts from head hunters.

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  32. Perhaps less is more? by Hollinger · · Score: 1

    Those are often driven by HR policies / databases / data retention policies / privacy policies.

    There's a local company that asks a more fundamental question, which is "How can you help us?" This must, however, require a person to sit and read through every submission. To avoid spamming them, the entirety of their application form is:
    Name:
    Email:
    Website:
    Phone:
    "How can you help us?" <== text box for free form entry. You could paste in a resume link, github, etc.

    This approach seems more interesting.

  33. Re:Blame HR ...(what about the Recruiters/Agents?) by SpzToid · · Score: 1

    How do the Recruiters/Agents submit their chosen candidate applications to HR? What value are Agents adding in the process to earn on average 1/3 of the fees paid by the client, for the contracted I.T. worker? Isn't it perhaps worth the effort to avoid recruiters at all costs and try to reach HR directly, using their broken application form process no matter how bad it is, because that directly broken process is preferable to involving Recruiters?

    p.s. Aren't the bulk of jobs advertised on Dice from these Agents/Recruiters, in which case has Dice ruined itself chasing the low-hanging fruit?

    --
    You can't be ahead of the curve, if you're stuck in a loop.
  34. also poor questions / choices and feilds where the by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    also poor questions / choices and feilds where they don't tell you what data format they want the info in.

    What about questions where they say have you worked with A, B, C, D, E, F. Yes / no with out putting each one on it's own line.

    Questions that have no room other then yes / no that you have to lie to pass / both yes and no do not fit you.

    Basic yes / no questions that have the number of years and skill level for each that is a poor fit questions like do you have a car. Or things like do you do have X certification.

    Skills Matrix's that have lists of old stuff / the same thing listed 3-4 with small name changes / poorly named ones as well.

  35. UI/UX is an after-thought by james_van · · Score: 1

    All to often, in business (of all types), the whole concept of designing something to be useful/usable is ignored, overlooked, and generally considered a waste of time. When presented with the idea of 1 hours to throw a crappy form together, or 1 day to lay it out properly (size text fields accordingly, put things in a logical order, set up server sessions to save data between pages, add decent validation, etc), most people at the management level will choose quick and cheap any day of the week. They don't care one bit how things look or work, as long as it doesn't affect them.

  36. Never used one by houghi · · Score: 1

    Here is what I have done in the past. I call them. I tell them I do not want to waste their time or mine. e.g. I tell them what I want to earn and if that is in scope of what they are willing to negotiate about. Or where the company is located or something else I did not pick up from their job at and that I know somebody from HR will be able to answer.

    I then also tell them my mini-resume (Last or current company, when I could be available) in 10 to 15 seconds and ask them if they are still interested in receiving my CV. If yes, I get the email adress.

    To me this has several advantages. First they can easily say no if e.g. my asking price is too high. No need to waste time. The second is that you get a better treatment that others who just send it in, because there already was a contact. This means when they look at your CV they will remember that you already past the first test (otherwise they would have saidf they were not interested.
    As you have spoken to the person who handles them and often send it to them personally, it will be read.

    And again, if they say no on the phone, I thank them for being honest and not wasting either of our time. When I say no, I also tell them the reason (e.g. not the specific job I was looking for) and on various occasions was invited for another job opening that was not even online (and in 2 cases known by anybody but the manager and HR)

    Sending CVs is not only what you you write in them. The main thing is that it is being read. That is however only the first step. The second is on getting an interview.

    Has it happend that they said "Fill out the form!"? Yes. Not often and what I said I would decline of working with them. My explanation was that I was looking for a company that has a more personal aproach to people and still thanked them for their time.

    Obviously looking for a job is selling yourself and as each person is different, what works great for one might completely not work for the other. In the end it is about both you and the company finding a common ground to work together

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    1. Re:Never used one by jandrese · · Score: 1

      In some ways getting a job is like dating. If you are beautiful you can skip a lot of the bullshit.

      Basically, Step 0: Be an expert at an in-demand technology. Step 1: Don't not be an expert at an in-demand technology.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
  37. That's an easy one by Minwee · · Score: 1

    I'm going to have to go with the same answer I give at most project post-mortems when asked the question "What was the root cause of our problems?"

    "Lax hiring practices."

  38. Well enough. by Raven42rac · · Score: 1

    They're like that because they work "well enough".

    --
    I hate sigs.
  39. Worst Is When They Don't Allow Overlapping Jobs by Little+Brother · · Score: 1

    I have filled out some applications that if the start date and end date of different jobs overlap, it kicks it out and doesn't allow it. Some people work more than one job at a time, I have one job that I had over five years, and periodically took on other side jobs for extra. It is impossible for me to list those side jobs on such applications, Or, if I do, I no longer have one job that lasts five years. Then they ask me to attest that the information is complete and accurate and that I've listed all jobs I've had in the last 10 years.

    --

    Little Brother, watching the watchers

    1. Re:Worst Is When They Don't Allow Overlapping Jobs by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Wrap them all up under 'consulting. So you were 'Consulting' for 5 years. Then in the body list consulting, with each place under it.

      That's what I do.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  40. This form is too hard! by RevWaldo · · Score: 1

    ~ Here's what I think of your form, Ms. HR Rep! (attach screenshot with dickbutt drawn on form with MS Paint) (send)

    ~ (bing) You stood up to us. That was the test. Congratulations, your hired.

    .

  41. You must be kidding by ruir · · Score: 1

    I am on expert on my field, with a CV longer than my arm, and some interesting technologies under my belt. I am not actively looking for a job. If someone calls me and ask me to fill up a form, I would say "next!".

  42. because they're invariably HTTPS, they'll time out by nedlohs · · Score: 1

    You've demonstrated you have no problems making stuff up about things you clearly know little about - possibly these forms are designed to weed out such people?

    The job positions do get filled at some point I assume, so there are people who can manage to work out how to fill out a form and jump through the hoops, Losing the few good potential employees who don't bother from the pool is probably worth eliminating the huge numbers of terrible employees who can't work it out.

  43. command-click when submitting by oneiros27 · · Score: 2

    Always use command-click when submitting a form, or whatever the key combination is to create a new window or tab. (might be shift-click, or control-click ... or right click, and select from the menu)

    I admit, this won't always work in the 'one page' applications built exclusively in JavaScript, but when it does, it means that the failure page is in a new window, and you can go back to copy & paste the content after you re-authenticate.

    Some of the nastier JavaScript 'enhanced' forms will try to make callbacks as you're typing, and when THOSE time out, they redraw the screen and you lose everything ... but luckily, in the case of HR applications, most of those were written 10+ years ago and never updated.

    --
    Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
    1. Re:command-click when submitting by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Doesn't work if the "Submit" is a button instead of a link.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
  44. No great mystery by sootman · · Score: 1

    Because ninety percent of everything is crap. This is not limited to job applications.

    I was signing up for an online service just this morning. The page made no mention of password requirements anywhere, nor did it have a colorful JavaScript "weak/OK/strong" indicator, which is pretty standard and I'm sure can be done with a line or two of jquery. It's not an essential account so I used a simple password -- just a series of lowercase letters. I clicked submit, then got a message that my password must have a number. I added a number, clicked submit, and was told that I need a special character. I added one, clicked submit again, and this time the message was that it must contain both upper- and lowercase letters. Fourth time was the charm. :-\

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  45. Conquering the application?! by bazmonkey · · Score: 1

    I certainly understand the frustration with filling in an online application, but if that's the biggest obstacle to getting the job, it's not that great of a job. Look at the fields required, copy them over to a text file, take your sweet time filling out the responses, and the online part can be a quick copy/paste. It's not that hard. Sure, find better ways to do it, but don't pretend it's this insurmountable challenge.

    1. Re:Conquering the application?! by david672orford · · Score: 1

      I certainly understand the frustration with filling in an online application, but if that's the biggest obstacle to getting the job, it's not that great of a job. Look at the fields required, copy them over to a text file, take your sweet time filling out the responses, and the online part can be a quick copy/paste. It's not that hard. Sure, find better ways to do it, but don't pretend it's this insurmountable challenge.

      I think you are assuming that the online application looks something like the one-page paper applications we went around filling out when we got out of high school. It is more like doing your taxes online with a state return or two thrown in. Oh, and you will be logged out a few times and sometimes the Next button will not work and the only way to get past it is to throw away some of your work and try again or try a different web browser. It could easily stretch to 50 pages and take several hours to fill out. No, I am not kidding.

  46. Most of them don't actually want to hire people. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    After a lot of job seeking online, I came to the conclusion 99.9% of online job listings were just for show. The companies needed proof that no American was qualified for their position, so they could hire on a VISA at a much cheaper salary. Making your online applications shoddy and hard to fill helps that little cheat come into play.

    HR doesn't want to hire Americans, they want to show no Americans are available meeting the qualifications.

  47. From an HR system developer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    As someone who has worked in the area for almost 20 years:

    1) As the original author of one of these systems, I can only tell you how we got here. In one word: age.

    The system was written in the late '90s and has had a lot of hands in it since. We are very responsive to customer requests, and so the application has gotten more and more complex over the years. Schedule pressure and entry level programmers resulted in some bad code. A lot of the usability issues are due to code rot and a UI that was designed even before CSS was useful. We were writing for IE 4 and NS 3, both of which were very buggy and required a lot of workarounds.

    Our system is driven by requests from customers (i.e. employers), not applicants. So much of the usability improvements we make are oriented towards the administrative UI. I think that is a problem we need to fix.

    Don't get me wrong. We have a good product and most of our customers love us, but we definitely pay for our code's age. In the last few years we have been doing heavy refactoring and are getting it up to modern standards. We can't do a complete rewrite because so many features have been heaped on it over the years, it would not be economically feasible for a company our size.

    2) Also, I've seen a lot of companies try to implement their own HR systems. Often they've done it with in-house resources. Of course, the result is often a mess, with lots of bugs and vulnerabilities. I've seen it done well, but only when they contracted out most of the work or threw a ton of money at it. These home-grown systems are often replaced by our product which is usually a huge improvement.

  48. Lack of Competition by Fuseboy · · Score: 1

    Simple - there's a lack of competition. It's the same reason renewing your driver's license or passport or whatever sucks, they're the sole vendor, so there's little incentive for them to make it easy or convenient.

    Also, it cuts down on spam. If it's hard to apply, then only the most enthusiastic applications will do it - or so one line of thinking goes. (That can backfire; talented and in-demand applicants might not find it worth their time to bother.)

    1. Re:Lack of Competition by geekoid · · Score: 1

      I would say:
      then only the most desperate applications will do it

      I have never waited longer then 15 minute at a DMV to get my DL renewed. Well, not since the 80's.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  49. Easy explanation by smooth+wombat · · Score: 1

    It's because the company broke one of three rules you should never break. Specifically, they let a web designer design their web site or in this case, their job application form.

    In an effort to show how relevant they are, how edgy and cool they can be, web designers will throw everything they have at what should be simple projects when in reality, all they need is the kitchen sink.

    No point having something simple when you can make it as complex and convoluted as possible. After all, this form isn't about the person who has to fill out the form, it's for web designers to show how much cruft they can throw at the system.

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
  50. Becasue by geekoid · · Score: 2

    they are designed by HR.
    HR doesn't know jack about interface design.
    HR gets the cheapest person they can because it isn't considered critical.
    Web entry forms are usually farmed out to people just getting into the industry.
    No one has to learn engineering techniques to become 'qualified' to write software.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  51. Re:No relationship between online app & gettin by Frobnicator · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There is no relationship between an online job application and getting a job. Online job applications are neglected because no one needs 10,000 online forms filled out for 1 job.

    It is well established (through most of history) that direct contacts and personal networks are the most likely way to get jobs. A few seconds on Google pulls up many research studies and sites that maintain real statistics (rather than just made-up numbers) on the topic. Like this one among many.

    That one linked to is interesting because of the various charts. For those companies they track, direct referrals are only 6.9% of the applicants but represent 39.9% of those actually hired. Job boards and web sites account for 74.9% of the job applicants and 35.8% of the hires. This means that while it is still important to apply through the web because they pull many workers through there, it is far more effective to get an employee referral. In other words, one hour of working your social network looking for a referral is equivalent to roughly 12 hours of submitting web-based job applications.

    The Internet is great for research and finding people in the organization, great for learning about openings. But when it comes to actually applying for a job, spend your time farming your social network to find someone who knows someone at the company rather than just applying through their site.

    --
    //TODO: Think of witty sig statement
  52. HR? What HR? by sehryan · · Score: 3, Informative

    I find it humorous that most of the comments are decrying the "HR" departments, when in reality a number of businesses using applicant tracking platforms are small business and do not really have any HR department to speak of.

    They (and I, as I am a small business owner myself) use them so that I can 1. have one place that IS NOT my inbox to manage candidates, and 2. I can ensure that I am getting consistent info across all candidates.

    And while I do not ask people to upload a resume and then fill out previous work experience fields, I can understand the necessity for such things, so that the small business owner can quickly scan over each applicant quickly, rather than trying to decode various resume layouts.

    Because at the end of the day, my time is valuable, and any system that let's me spend less time doing things is going to be a boon to me, even if the downside is that I lose an applicant here and there in the process.

    --
    The world moves for love. It kneels before it in awe.
    1. Re:HR? What HR? by wierd_w · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      What I find distasteful, is the inherent duplicity involved with "My time is valuable" when uttered in this context.

      For every minute you "avoid wasting", you force how many other people to waste how many of their minutes? How much MORE valuable is YOUR time, to THEIRS?

      How do you justify this disparity?

      More poignantly, how do you justify this, when parsing technology exists in such a fashion as to allow automatic population of your presented high-level form that YOU read, without forcibly requiring your applicants to MANUALLY populate redundant entries on your application forms?

      The option that wastes the least amount of time total, is to implement it correctly, so that information is asked for once, and populates it in many places automatically, so that no matter where the reviewer chooses to look preferentially, they will find the exact same data.

      But that clearly makes too much sense; Everyone is too lazy to do it the demonstrably correct way, and as long as any one side of the issue can claim an advantage to leverage in doing the least amount of work, the issue will always persist.

      Efficiency extends beyond just "It makes MY job easier!" It extends to the whole system, and what most improves useful results. There is a terrible problem with managerial myopia in this respect; Managers dont like being told that their policies are demonstrably poor-- Even more, they find ways to fire people that can actually prove it.

      What I am getting at here, is that the root of this whole problem, is the idea that "I am the manager, and thus my will is of the highest impact, no other considerations matter" is in force. I'm sorry your majesty, but you have no clothes on.

    2. Re:HR? What HR? by ttucker · · Score: 1

      How much MORE valuable is YOUR time, to THEIRS?

      They want the job, so in this case sehryan's time is immeasurably more important in the relationship. Perhaps when the economy changes, and there are less applicants than positions, things will need to change.

    3. Re:HR? What HR? by sehryan · · Score: 2

      How much MORE valuable is YOUR time, to THEIRS?

      Let's evaluate this from the perspective of my business, since that is the thing that they and I have in common:

      I am evaluating applicants, interviewing candidates, managing current employees, creating advertising, managing customer relationships, running payroll, keeping up with inventory, updating the books, and the 100s of other things that I do on a day-to-day basis to ensure that this business continues to exist. These tasks take 8-10 hours a day, sometimes 7 days a week.

      They are applying for a job using an online system, which can be accomplished in less than three minutes if they already have their resume together and ready to upload.

      So as you can see - from my business's perspective - my time is SIGNIFICANTLY more valuable than theirs.

      --
      The world moves for love. It kneels before it in awe.
    4. Re:HR? What HR? by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      If people can reliably fill out the online application in under three minutes (if minimally prepared), you're not what the thread is complaining about. Good for you.

      Have you tried the application yourself, with a fake resume, to verify the time? Watched a person who hasn't seen your application before use it?

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    5. Re:HR? What HR? by david672orford · · Score: 1

      They are applying for a job using an online system, which can be accomplished in less than three minutes if they already have their resume together and ready to upload.

      That is the way it should be. This discussion is about why it takes an hour or two and then it throws away everything you have entered.

  53. Hospitals are the worst by dorpus · · Score: 1

    Invariably, hospital application forms make a big deal out of what high school you went to, what type of diploma it was, what your high school GPA was, and whether you can drive to work. It's inappropriate for people with advanced degrees.

    1. Re:Hospitals are the worst by sound+vision · · Score: 1

      Ah, the required high school GPA field. That one particularly bothers me because my school (a public school in the US) did not assign GPAs to students. Our individual assignments were graded on a GPA-like scale from 0 to 4, but courses were graded pass/fail/honors, and no GPAs were ever calculated.

  54. Get Lazarus by Dalzhim · · Score: 1

    and text that's sometime taken a lot of effort to compile, cut and paste can be lost

    Install the Lazarus plugin and you'll never have this kind of problem again, whether it is a job application form or any other form for that matter.

  55. Re:because they're invariably HTTPS, they'll time by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    is probably worth eliminating the huge numbers of terrible employees who can't work it out.

    Maybe it's like making pre-meds take organic chem. It's not very useful to them as a physician (c.f. biochem), but if you can't make it through organic chem you're never going to make it through med school. It's a well-known 'weed class'.

    If you combine this with the fact that most high-level employees don't come through the front door, it starts to make some sense.

    And, yeah, Layer6/7 confusion isn't the best way to get a tech job.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  56. Why should they be any different? by vanyel · · Score: 1

    Most web sites are badly designed, why should online applications be any different? I swear site designers never actually use the sites they design.

  57. They are a test. by ttucker · · Score: 2

    If you can not put up with a BS online job application from Target, how could you ever possibly work for Target?!? Supposedly the best way to get hired, is to answer all of the questions as if you were Ned Flanders. Hard working and honest, but not too ambitious, compliant.

  58. I work for a major provider of ATS by netsavior · · Score: 3, Informative

    Applicant Tracking System - This is the buzzword for an "apply online" type thing. I work for one of the big ones.

    Here are some excuses
    1) Employers can get sued if it isn't done a certain way. All of the laws are based on horrible paper applications.
    2) Employers are scared of "the cloud" so you have to fill out a new application every time you apply to a new job even though the last 10 places you applied were using the same software
    3) The perspective employees "candidates" are not the customer, the HR Director is the customer.
    4) Statistically, longer, harder application processes result in higher employee retention rates.

    that last one is a big one. My software can do all kinds of pre-employment testing for all kinds of things... skills, personality, mental alertness, etc.
    The longer the testing process, the more "candidates" quit before completing. HOWEVER, the longer the testing process, the more likely an employee will be successful at their job.... To put it frankly, if you will wade through the shit to get hired, you will wade through it to stay employed. It doesn't even statistically matter what the results of the test were. Simply testing for anything at all will reduce employee turnover. The same can be said for unwieldy applications. If a candidate is not serious about filling out an application, they will not be serious about work either.

    That said... I promise our applications are better than most, at least our javascript works, and progress is automatically saved... Still it all sucks (blame the lawyers), we just try to suck less.

    1. Re:I work for a major provider of ATS by ruir · · Score: 2

      And if you give me shit, I will walk away. If your process is tuned to target sheep, sheep will do it. Sheep in, sheep out? ;)

    2. Re:I work for a major provider of ATS by ruir · · Score: 1

      Maybe I have, maybe I have not. Your reasoning, and his are flawed in several ways. At the end of the day, it will drive away people already employed and with a good job. 1)Slightly more experienced and older people dont take shit as when they where in their twenties. 2) The interview is a business transaction, no one is doing me (us) a favour 3) I expect respect as much as I expect to be respected. I bet they would not also like me to give them a senseless 10 page form to fill up about the company 4) I am already giving them my resume. My time is precious, and it is unfair to make me waste a couple of hours filling a long form/and or converting it to their internal format for them to present me to their customers *before* they hire me. 5) I wont put up with stupid requirements from the HR, And with stupid people. They reflect the imbalance of an organization which I am quite sure I do not wish to integrate. 6) If me as a seasoned professional, wont have the respect of HR, or even wont have the insight of being interviewed by someone with more IQ points and/or a rookie consultant interviewing me, you already lost points on an interview. I may decide it will be better to stay where I am, or to go to a competitor.

    3. Re:I work for a major provider of ATS by ruir · · Score: 1

      Putting it other way. I wont put up with filling up a stupid form instead of talking with an human. Do it first thing before even talking with me, and I will walk away. This is stupid, demeaning, and a better fit for organizations like the army. And often they have a lot of repeated questions, or questions phrased in a slightly different away to make sure you are not filling it at random. Go test the patient and waste the time of a sheep. On the other hand, I dont mind a grilling interview of 3 hours of technical questions, or a good and engaging chat, or being put through the interview process of amazon with that many interviews, but always with top-notch professionals and very attentive people. And mind you the best interviewers I have found till now, make you feel very at home. I even had people going out of the way to interviewing me in Saturdays when I was out of town. P.S. I hope this anonymous response is not just an answer from the original poster.

  59. It's like this.... by cshark · · Score: 1

    The old world job applications were not designed to let you highlight your skills or paste specific sections of your resume. The text boxes were built too small, and it was intentional. That’s because the objective of the old world job application was not to learn about your skills and competencies. To put it bluntly, they were designed to see how well you follow written instructions.

    The technology we have now was inconceivable when these old job applications were created, but the objective of the application stays the same whether you’re writing one out on paper, or filling out an online form. If you've reached a point where the form is timing out, you’re either over thinking the thing, giving answers that are too thoughtful for the context, or you’re not going in prepared.

    I can tell by the wording of the question that you've got entirely the wrong mindset. Applications are not resumes. Think of it like the good parts version, know that ahead of time, and you should be able to fill out just about any application in a few minutes.

    --

    This signature has Super Cow Powers

  60. Because u by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1
    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  61. Re: ZERO jobs "come from HR." by drainbramage · · Score: 1

    Business need first???
    You've never worked for the government.

    --
    No brain, no pain.
  62. It is a sign by ID000001 · · Score: 2

    The ability to catch up with technology and protocol is directly proportional to how forward thinking the practice is. You are not going to see a witch doctor with a carefully created and compliance list of potions. Similarly, you are not going to get an HR department to care about technology enough to build a compliance website.

  63. It's the web by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Despite all of the years, no one implements the W3C spec 100%. So you still get different behaviors on the different browsers. That and most of the forms I've seen for HR are either the result of sloppy generated WYSIWYG code or overdesigned by someone who understands client side technology but not how to write to a friggin' database.

  64. There has to be a better way: but what is it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Build a small XML form process in the browser language, JavaScript, .NET, etc. Let the user enter all their information into the XML file.
    This allows the applicant to complete the form in their own sweet time, hours, days, weeks, etc. They can go back and tune the data again and again. When done -
    Connect with the company application site and submit the XML file - done!
    Simple, quick, painless and complete.

  65. HTTPS == timeouts??? by amaupin · · Score: 1

    The majority of these online forms are multiple screens long, and because they're invariably HTTPS, they'll time out after a finite time which isn't always made known to the user

    I wonder why I even bother visiting Slashdot any more, when the basic workings of the web are not understood by the submitter nor the editors.

  66. Re:Sure I did. by Presto+Vivace · · Score: 2

    Not an option for most in this job market. When the job market gets tighter many employers are in for a rude awakening as to how objectionable their bsuiness practices are.

  67. Re:No relationship between online app & gettin by TrollstonButterbeans · · Score: 1

    >one hour of working your social network looking for a referral is equivalent to roughly 12 hours of submitting web-based job applications

    You have a very well phrased expression there. Communicates very effectively!

    --
    Priest: "Universe from nothing, no laws of physics, sped up time"+ huge discrepancies. Creationism? No. Big Bang Theory
  68. Invalid zip+4 forms by defaria · · Score: 1

    I've tried time and time again to get Kforce to fixed their fucked up form and accept zip+4 as a valid zipcode! How long has zip+4 been around? Since 1983! That's 31 fucking years and so many forms will not accept zip+4. Stupid.

    My resume is on my web site. I just point people there. It's also under GPL!

    Here's a neat tool: http://jobscan.co/ (don't know why it's .co but it is). It scans your resume and the job requirement and tells you how much of a match you are.

    1. Re:Invalid zip+4 forms by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      Here's a neat tool: http://jobscan.co/ [jobscan.co] (don't know why it's .co but it is). It scans your resume and the job requirement and tells you how much of a match you are.

      Then let me guess, sells all your information in your resume to advertisers?

  69. Wtf? by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

    and because they're invariably HTTPS, they'll time out after a finite time which isn't always made known to the user.

    HTTPS has nothing to do with server session timeouts.

    Obviously this person is not trying to apply for IT related jobs.

  70. #notallHRpeople by globaljustin · · Score: 1

    in my company they are called "talent managers" who have their heads so firmly up their asses that they convolute everything to the point even HR can't stand them.

    ouch..."talent managers"...

    maybe it is the middle managers (managers who are above both the HR person & manager of the position being filled) sometimes

    my second point was that there was no feedback mechanism for improvement

    some HR people are great...I can think of two specifically in my life...both for mid-sized companies in publishing

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
  71. mod down forms, mod up the machines by mpeaton · · Score: 1

    Would a master job / skills matching system be too Orwellian for the Slashdot moderators? See my rant on my start-up that doesn't start! http://wp.amdgtechnologies.com...

  72. Re: ZERO jobs "come from HR." by drainbramage · · Score: 1

    You might be right.
    HAL after all his memory had been removed.

    --
    No brain, no pain.
  73. Problems with Dice and Monster by LaughingRadish · · Score: 1

    Dice and Monster have the user interface down pretty good. A big problem, though, is with those employers who use those sites but then redirect applicants to their own broken application system -- or even worse, some broken application system provider like taleo.net. The first time you use that site, it fools you into thinking that once you put in your stuff, you'll be good for any other business that collects resumes through taleo.net. Not so. Each and every time you have to go through an account setup, then type in all your information, answer a bunch of questions, etc.

  74. Standard flaw by Kris_J · · Score: 1

    Requiring untrained people to enter data into your electronic forms and subsequently into your database is inherently flawed. Do you deploy a complicated new internal system and expect your staff to use it flawlessly without any training? No. Then why do you expect the untrained masses to cope with your forms and procedures?
    Take a structured narrative, say a CV with a cover letter from the person that isn't trained in your procedures and get someone who is to put it into your database.

  75. problem is using many pages for one logical form by PJ6 · · Score: 1

    For a multiple step data entry process that ends with a single submit to a database, I use an SPA that steps through partial views. To start I issue a URL with a new GUID, then it's all post-redirect-get to the same URL, so you have none of the forward-back state screw-ups, or the nonsense of F5 asking the user to "re-submit". I store the entered data in memory server-side, accessed via cache keyed on the URL's GUID. This way if the user hits F5, they don't lose everything. And POSTs are only what the user just entered, not the whole freakin form.

    Sometimes I get a protest that you can't use the browser's back or forward buttons to navigate the data entry process, but if your UI makes doing that easy and obvious, it's really not that big of a deal.

    I don't see a lot of other developers using SPA, but it's worked well for me.

  76. Not HR. Most online job app forms are 3rd party by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

    The job app forms are created by companies like Taleos. They are absolutely awful.

  77. Because they are ignored by cowtamer · · Score: 1

    Anecdotal evidence: I have probably gotten hundreds, if not thousands of phone calls from various companies and recruiters, some of which have hired me.

    I have NEVER gotten a single phone call from ANY 'online form' I've filled out, including ones for large companies.

    I imagine all input on these forms is ignored. Don't waste your time. Post on Dice, Monster, etc. If you can, have your friends enter you into an employee referral system at the company they work for. Referrals are the best filter for companies.

  78. Great - If you already HAVE a social network by GrantRobertson · · Score: 1

    What you aren't taking into account is that it can take years and hundreds of person-hours building up that social network in the first place. If you are new in town, just starting in an industry, or didn't spend four years at Stanford carefully planning who you partied with, then that whole "work your social network" rap is practically worthless.

    1. Re:Great - If you already HAVE a social network by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Not to mention that, in software, I'd be in a bit of a quandary over recommendations. I am willing to testify that numerous of my friends are smart and honest and do stuff, but I've almost never seen any of their code, so I can't comment on their technical proficiency and programming ability.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    2. Re:Great - If you already HAVE a social network by Frobnicator · · Score: 1

      It seems you missed an important part of my post:

      This means that while it is still important to apply through the web because they pull many workers through there, it is far more effective to get an employee referral.

      I did not state nor imply that you should not apply through the web sites. Instead I recommended that you maximize your efforts on the most effective path.

      Once that most effective path is exhausted, spend your time on the next-most effective path. Once that path is exhausted, work your way down through the various less-effective job hunting methods.

      While 40% of workers coming from direct referrals, 35% come through web sites. That is still a large number, but your application is less than one-tenth as likely to get the job. That doesn't mean "don't apply", instead it means "apply through the most effective method". One of those two methods is an order of magnitude more successful, so take it.

      As for not having a social network, that is a fairly rare thing. You probably have family members (unless you are perhaps an unadopted orphan with no siblings, and unmarried and childless). You probably have one or two friends or at least acquaintances. If nothing else you have a weak social network that includes several thousand active /. users.

      While a direct friend is best they may not work at the target company. You probably have a friend-of-a-friend-of-a-friend at every corporation in the world. Find that chain and you instantly boost your odds by an order of magnitude.

      --
      //TODO: Think of witty sig statement
    3. Re:Great - If you already HAVE a social network by Frobnicator · · Score: 1

      Not to mention that, in software, I'd be in a bit of a quandary over recommendations. I am willing to testify that numerous of my friends are smart and honest and do stuff, but I've almost never seen any of their code, so I can't comment on their technical proficiency and programming ability.

      That isn't how employee referrals work.

      For the existing employee, you get a copy of their resume and contact information and give it to the boss with the opening. You tell them "I got this from a friend [or friend of a friend], I have no idea how good he is, but we are offering a $500 referral bonus. He looks good on paper and they are very interested in working at this company." The referring employee does not need to forswear their firstborn child against the referral being the perfect worker.

      All it says is "this person is particularly interested in the job. I think they should pass or bypass the first two HR filters since it looks like they are qualified."

      --
      //TODO: Think of witty sig statement
  79. Why? by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 1

    Because they can be.

    People want the jobs, so they use the awful online systems. It's their first step in hating the company they may eventually work for, so it's a head start anyway.

    The real issue is that the job match market is so crowded, you have dozens of competing companies selling crappy SaaS job-app systems that various companies use to auto-sort applicants. The problem is that each of these wants to be the only one in the market and, thus, don't want to share information with any of the others. So you end up having to enter, edit, etc. the information for each crappy system and company you want to apply for.

    HR departments, job-app sellers? You want to be my friend? You want me to like your company? Here's how:

    • Download my fucking resume from LinkedIn. No I don't like them much, either, but at least it's centralized, accessible, and won't waste my time.
    • No, I don't want to send you a Microsoft Word formatted resume - frankly, text is much more easily parseable and, because I want a decent looking resume that looks the same on all screens, I'm using PDF's anyway. Frankly, there's enough people using non-Microsoft products to create these now days (heard of Google Docs?) that requiring resumes in Word format shows that (a) you're locked in the 1990's or (b) you're a recruiting firm too small and cheap to afford the tools that would allow you to edit a PDF.
    • There have been improvements in matching algorithms such that you don't have to go with Boolean criteria for your filters - use approximate matching and grading cutoffs rather than absolute criteria.
    • Always send an auto-response letting me know my application has been received and is under consideration. If possible, send me a response if I'm no longer under consideration, too. There used to be a thing called common courtesy - if you can't handle that, you're going to look like jerks (and most of you and, by extension, your companies look that way right now).

    For those of you looking - just be aware that it's not personal. The people who make or run these systems are just relatively incompetent fucks. You'd have better luck using networking, anyway.

    --
    That is all.
  80. Re:Blame HR ...(what about the Recruiters/Agents?) by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 1

    How do the Recruiters/Agents submit their chosen candidate applications to HR?

    They don't, if they're smart. They may start there, but they parlay their contacts there into contacts in the engineering department whom they start to contact directly to find out about openings. Really, it's all about networking now from the top down. Positions have become too specialized to allow random people to apply. Chances are your manager also knows enough people who need jobs that he doesn't have to go through HR (except for the final paperwork), anyway.

    --
    That is all.
  81. Re:No relationship between online app & gettin by cthulhu11 · · Score: 1

    It is well established (through most of history) that direct contacts and personal networks are the most likely way to get jobs.

    And what is one to do if there is no available GOBN to troll for a job? In my last search, pestering everyone I know about job openings got me nowhere. What did get me hired was applying for a position via a company's online job site. A well-designed LinkedIn profile is also valuable, though it does result in being spammed by offers for worthless contract jobs.

    This means that while it is still important to apply through the web because they pull many workers through there, it is far more effective to get an employee referral.

    And whose butt are those employee referrals supposed to be pulled from? I did once get a job this way, in 1989, though that was a bit of an anomaly. It's a different world now and a different market.

  82. Online application = digital version of round file by carbonates · · Score: 1

    Contacts, and sometime headhunters will get you interviews. My current job was introduced to me by a headhunter and then my existing contacts inside the organization did the rest. Not online forms. I have had two recent contacts from company HR departments that already had my online application. They were calling me to say they had found me on LinkedIn and wanted to know if I would submit a resume. One of them had accepted my online application back in February and sent me a generic email response the same day saying I would not be considered for the job. They are still trying to fill the job and called me because they were "impressed" by me. I told them they had my resume, and had already rejected it. They spent another two weeks just trying to arrange a phone interview and I simply stopped answering the emails coming from several people in HR. How hard can it be to pick up the damn phone and call me? The other one which is based outside the US has had my resume in their system for ten years, which I have regularly updated, and has even interviewed me twice before. HR called me to see if I would send them a resume and interview for a job. I knew they would not hire me for because I am too old (this company has a mandatory retirement age of 60). The HR rep sheepishly confirmed they do in fact have a mandatory retirement age of 60, that is set by the Kingdom, and not their company (who cares?). They used to tell me they could not hire me because I did not have enough experience. Now I have all the experience they want, but I am too old. They had no idea I was already in their system and that they already had my DOB. How hard can it be to run a query on job applicants that have exceeded the mandatory age of retirement? Obviously LinkedIn is their go-to system, not their internal resume database. I agree that the online forms are maddening, but I always approach the task with the knowledge that it will never make a difference. It may be used to cover due diligence and get some disclosures out of the way, but chances are they will make you sign all that stuff again because they know their online system is a digital version of the round file. It will never get you an interview in my experience.

  83. Re: Sure I did. by DaMattster · · Score: 1

    I would say, if the job market opens up, not when. There are only a finite number of jobs and there are even greater numbers of people competing for them.

  84. Online Application Design by Transaction7 · · Score: 1

    Agreed. The same thing happens with online registration for doctors' offices, etc.