The Black Hole of Recruitment - The Applicant Tracking System

I am completely annoyed with the Applicant Tracking System blackhole. Let me explain.

I am a Recruiter with 15 years of experience. And prior to Recruiting, I served staffing professionals as an Assistant. So, I have been in Staffing for a long time. My staffing experience pre-dates the automated systems available today. Yes, I grew up in the era of receiving paper resumes. Yes people, you heard correct. I said PAPER RESUMES. I had to physically keep a file cabinet with them - all organized in a way they could be retrieved during an OFCCP/EEOC audit. And yes, I actually lived through an OFCCP/EEOC audit during this timeframe too. The thought of having access to all of the resumes I had to physically file by hand, through my computer - OH JOY!! I couldn't wait.

And I've tried them all too: Resumix, Icarian, Webhire, StaffingSoft, Ceridian, FileMaker Pro, AIRS SourcePoint and Taleo. The first system I used was Resumix. And it really was just resume storage and retrieval. What started as more of resume storage and retrieval, has turned into recruiting without a person. I want to believe that ATS was never meant to replace a physical recruiter (a person) to still screen resumes. But sadly, this is what it has become.

Now all the bells and whistles of an ATS have been added to the mix. All the things engineers have listened to Recruiters dream about being able to do with their system: match a person's skills from a resume to a job requisition, a questionnaire to see if they truly match the job, etc. No matter how much an engineer tries to set this up, Recruiters still cannot only rely on the ATS to truly match resumes to jobs. Because recruiting is not black and white only. There are gray areas in recruiting. You simply cannot remove the 'human' from Human Resources. But that IS what's happening out there.

Which brings me to today. I am one of the unfortunate unemployed Recruiters out there. And I'm having to apply through these annoying Applicant Tracking Systems. On average, it takes 45 min to an hour to apply with all the questionnaires involved. And I get the question about education. And this is a 'gray' area I mentioned earlier. Although I don't have a degree, I have enough experience to be equivalent to a degree. ATS cannot determine this; it just marks me as 'not qualified' simply becuase I answered "no" to the degree question. And here is my favorite part -- I get no notification to let me know if I am 'in' or 'out'. I get no call to ask how I could have this much experience without a degree. What happened to that perfect ATS, people? You have it automated to screen someone out, but not to send them a simple notification.

Recruiters, really??? Do you ever READ the resumes you receive? Are you only relying on your ATS to automate this for you? If you are, I believe you are losing out on perfect GEMS! And really, you are no longer a Recruiter, but a Computer Administrator. And GREAT candidates are lost in the ATS Black Hole.

Next Post >

Comment by Paul Hanchett on June 29, 2010 at 1:12pm: Sadly you've discovered what other applicants have known for years-- though it has clearly gotten worse with the current shortage of real jobs. I recall reading a book by Dr. John Sullivan where he commented that, when resumes of current incumbents for some position had been fed into an ATS, they did not even show on the radar. What is missing is any sort of evidence that using an ATS results in applicant selections that are even as good as would result from a manual process, let alone better!

I have to admit that I'm troubled by the focus of some comments, re: serial applicants... Should the system be driven by the need to select qualified applicants to interview, or should it be driven by the personal preferences of the staff running the system? Where there is no conflict between the two goals, fine. But finding the golden nuggets has to be a priority.

As a former programmer, I agree that it should be easy for the ATS to let you know that your resume has been considered. Personally, I would like to also know what the system looked for and where I fell short-- Not to contest the decision, but to build a better resume.

Thanks for the article! I think recruiters, and in particular HR departments, need to think more about these issues.

Comment by John Hill on July 8, 2010 at 12:36pm: Becki, Hi and a great post, although I'm going to disagree with you, I think. It seems to us that the hiring paradigm is broken and part of that is how the ATS processes the applications. Given that there is plenty of evidence out there showing 30+% attrition rates and reputable organisations indicating that hiring is only around 20-25% effective we have been looking at redesigning the process.
It seems to us the standard process of CV (Resume) 2 Interviews (CV2IP) and a presentation is fundamentally flawed. Better and more effective by far is a "blind" system that filters competencies / skills at the first stage. CV2IP allows too much interpretation, and relies on the applicant being able to write a good CV, and on the subjective opinion of the interviewers.
We filter by an objective, job specific online screening process http://wp.me/pWNiR-3, then phone interview, CV sift and reference check. The hiring manager does not get to meet the candidate until this point, and you don't need an ATS because the evaluation filters based on competence/skills. With some jobs, such as sales, we get a 95% success rate, more if the client onboards properly. And who cares if you have a degree (asking is age discrimination) you can do the job.