Online Applications- Was that ever a good idea? (cover letters, job opening, applying)

[sbyman]

I honestly can only see the benefit of online applicants for jobs that welcome people with very specific skills that may not be present in the area the company is looking. But on the other hand, so many jobs that actually benefited from face to face and actually talking to applicants, seeing their appearance, learning bonus things about them, and actually being able to weed out bad eggs. I mean why would companies give that up?

[Hesky]

Well, the company where I work definitely accepts online applications. We obviously interview them tthough, generally via phone/Skype, but if the candidate is local we'll ask him or her to stop by our office. Generally, if the candidate can interview in person, he/she already has an advantage.

But the online application itself is just the first step.

[macroy]

Originally Posted by sbyman

I honestly can only see the benefit of online applicants for jobs that welcome people with very specific skills that may not be present in the area the company is looking. But on the other hand, so many jobs that actually benefited from face to face and actually talking to applicants, seeing their appearance, learning bonus things about them, and actually being able to weed out bad eggs. I mean why would companies give that up?

Seems like you're comparing the initial application submission (which is what the online applications do) with the subsequent steps. They aren't using online applications in place of interviews etc.

[Hemlock140]

Originally Posted by macroy

Seems like you're comparing the initial application submission (which is what the online applications do) with the subsequent steps. They aren't using online applications in place of interviews etc.

Back in the 70s-80s when people applied by filling out an application at the HR (or "Personnel") Department, the hiring manager would never have seen the applicant or talked to them until the interview, anyway. HR would not be making any kind of decision on who was to be interviewed based on appearance or personality. They would simply accept the application, say "Thank You" and move on.

[FBJ]

Originally Posted by Hesky

Well, the company where I work definitely accepts online applications. We obviously interview them tthough, generally via phone/Skype, but if the candidate is local we'll ask him or her to stop by our office. Generally, if the candidate can interview in person, he/she already has an advantage.

But the online application itself is just the first step.

Not really a good idea because you spend a lot of time completing the application and only a 5% chance you will get a call back. So it's better to focus on job postings that gives you the opportunity to email your resume directly like careerbuilder, idealist.org or indeed. Plus those types of applications doesn't take much time and you have a 50% chance of getting a call back

[jdm2008]

Originally Posted by FBJ

Not really a good idea because you spend a lot of time completing the application and only a 5% chance you will get a call back. So it's better to focus on job postings that gives you the opportunity to email your resume directly like careerbuilder, idealist.org or indeed. Plus those types of applications doesn't take much time and you have a 50% chance of getting a call back

It doesn't take much time so tons of people are shotgunning their resume to 10 companies a day, and those adds are getting thousand of applications for each posting so yea for those people aren't reading cover letters.
On company websites that are harder to find postings and that take more time to fill out applications, people are more likely to read them. So I strongly disagree with this advice.

[FBJ]

Originally Posted by jdm2008

It doesn't take much time so tons of people are shotgunning their resume to 10 companies a day, and those adds are getting thousand of applications for each posting so yea for those people aren't reading cover letters.
On company websites that are harder to find postings and that take more time to fill out applications, people are more likely to read them. So I strongly disagree with this advice.

If you are qualified for the position it would not matter if other people are applying for the job. And that would be because they are probably shotgunning resumes and not qualified for the job at all which makes a qualified stand out even more.

[jaypee]

Originally Posted by FBJ

Not really a good idea because you spend a lot of time completing the application and only a 5% chance you will get a call back. So it's better to focus on job postings that gives you the opportunity to email your resume directly like careerbuilder, idealist.org or indeed. Plus those types of applications doesn't take much time and you have a 50% chance of getting a call back

80% of all statistics are made up 35% of the time.

Originally Posted by FBJ

If you are qualified for the position it would not matter if other people are applying for the job. And that would be because they are probably shotgunning resumes and not qualified for the job at all which makes a qualified stand out even more.

You are assuming there's only one qualified candidate per job opening?

[thunderkat59]

I did actually get a call-back from a long and ponderous Taleo app, and one from Northrup Grummann, too, so people do read them. But to me, I can never express what I want to and feel if a real resume sent in paper or PDF form is a much better indicator of the person applying for the position. My real or PDF version of a resume usually get response because it is very unique. So no, I don't think they are a good idea, but this is what we are stuck with, so I guess we all (oldies ) better get used to the new world.

[Bo]

From the employer's perspective, it saves time and money to minimize the paper in the application process. It also makes it easier for management to make big-picture decisions about the recruitment and hiring process.