The LinkedIn Rube-Goldberg-Machine
- Karl Johansson
- 5 maj
- 3 min läsning
There is a counterproductive arms race between recruiters and candidates enabled and caused by the incessant and unnecessary use of software in hiring.
With several people in my life looking for work I’ve been thinking a lot about the backsides to the internet lately. The idea of applying online seems like an obvious benefit to jobseekers, but the more you hear about it the less efficient the system seems to be. It is a good case study in how technology is not a always a good thing, and of how relying on machines can produce worse outcomes than old boring human to human communication.
One of the issues with looking for work is that most positions are staffed through connections. But if you are a recent graduate or otherwise new to the labour market generally or an industry you cannot rely on connections you don’t have. As a tool to find and apply for job the internet and platforms it enables like LinkedIn are on the surface quite useful. Going to a bunch of companies’ career pages takes far longer than looking on LinkedIn, and you may find a position you would be interested in for a company you had never heard of when you see it on LinkedIn (as happened to me).
But the reality is that as with all technology one person’s benefit is another’s drawback. Aggregating can be a good thing, but it can also shift the balance of power between actors. In the case of the job market it helps companies far more than it helps individuals. Inceasing the visibility of a position means that more people will apply for it which helps companies but increases competition for jobseekers. This effect is amplified for mid-sized and boring companies. Few 10-year-olds dream of being a controller for a supermarket’s regional office, but with LinkedIn pushing that position to hundreds or thousands of jobseekers it may get more applications than any but the most prestigious and well-paying jobs would have gotten 30 years ago.
This in turn means that it becomes an ever-greater problem for companies to sort candidates; an issues which becomes exponentially more difficult when the ease of applying increases. New methods for sorting serious candidates from chancers must be devised, like logic tests (which strike me as pseudoscientific, but I digress) but these make the application process more arduous and time consuming for applicants. In addition, the selection process becomes far less transparent when companies don’t have time to read every candidate’s CV and cover letter (despite the fact that the company asked for it!). The company cannot give applicants feedback as no one has read what the candidate submitted which again serves to make the application process more arbitrary and frustrating for applicants.
Ironically, the arbitrary and opaque nature of the recruitment process drives candidates to change their behaviour. If you get the same response to a cover letter you spent hours on, crafting it to be perfect for a certain role and company, as you get on a 5-minute copy-and-paste job why would you ever waste time on a custom cover letter? Especially when that response is all too often a template email which the recruiter doesn’t bother addressing to you specifically but to a ‘Dear Candidate’.
The solution to this mess is in my view simple. Just ask applicants to show up at a specific time with a CV in hand. Instead of devising more and more elaborate filters, which you often have to outsource to a company like Alva Labs or other corporate remora, you can just sort the serious from the unserious by setting an appointment. You will learn infinitely more by chatting to someone for fifteen to thirty minutes than by putting them through the internet application Rube Goldberg-machine.
The idea that machines and tech are preferential solutions to corporate problems is so ingrained in Western culture as to not be questioned even in situations where is makes no sense at all. The point of a recruitment process is to find someone you will work with, collaborate with, and to some extent depend on for forty hours a week. How could a machine possibly help with that?
If you liked this post you can read a previous post about Ukraine's Kursk operation here or the rest of my writings here. It'd mean a lot to me if you recommended the blog to a friend or coworker. Come back next Monday for a new post!
I've always been interested in politics, economics, and the interplay between. The blog is a place for me to explore different ideas and concepts relating to economics or politics, be that national or international. The goal for the blog is to make you think; to provide new perspectives.
Written by Karl Johansson
Yorumlar