Jobseekers should be aware of the
Applicant Tracking System (commonly known
by its acronym ATS). Rumors abound as to how an employer can electronically
scan your résumé or app, and in nanoseconds have an algorithm pluck the most desirable,
qualified candidates.
For
the average jobseeker, it remains a bewilderment—akin to black-box technology.
In reality, ATS is little more than advanced algebra, where your words are
reduced to binary true-or-false values such as 1 if true, and 0 if false.
To accommodate variables such as and,
or and not functions, a subarea of algebra known as Boolean
math is used. Unlike basic algebra, which reduces everything to addition and multiplication, Boolean math can perform those additional
operations. Another way of viewing this is algebra solves numerical relationships, whereas Boolean math calculates logical relationships.
So,
how does this ATS software apply to jobseekers? What are its limitations in
ascertaining logical relationships? Will it discern the jobseeker’s sincerity
or authenticity?
In
laymen terms, the software’s algorithm looks for keywords as those words relate
to a posted job opening. When matches are found, it returns a true value in the
form of a binary number—usually one. When
no match is found, it returns a zero
to indicate false or no.
To
provide a simplified example, suppose a major employer wants to hire a Staff Accountant
with more than two years’ experience. Hundreds will apply. Manually sorting
through mounds of résumés (or online
applications) poses a time-consuming challenge. The ad for the position
will contain most of the keywords,
but not all of them!
It
is that not portion where the counter-intuitiveness
comes into play. Too often, jobseekers will attempt to game the system by
copying and pasting large portions of the advertised text into their résumés or
the online application to fool the software into generating a ‘perfect’ match.
Today,
most major employers use an online application process, and then request the
applicant to attach a résumé. This method saves enormous time. The online
application automatically parcels the information into major categories such
as (a) contact information, (b) skillsets, (c) employers, (d) experience, and
(e) education.
In
the above Staff Accountant example, the software merely has to look for
relevant keywords. The most likely keywords will include budget(s), forecast(s), report(s) or reporting, variance or financial
analysis, fixed asset(s), depreciation and/or amortization, reconciliation,
journal entry, etcetera.
The
software then looks for experience with anything equal to (=) or greater than
(>) two years, and ascertain the relevancy of the college degree, in this case
probably accounting or finance. As previously indicated, if the items exist,
the system’s algorithm returns a binary number to indicate true or yes. When the
system cannot locate these items, the algorithm returns a zero (0), indicating false or no.
The
software might also scan to see if CPA appears after the applicant’s names, and
tack on a bonus point to the assessment score. It might also assess the
applicant’s zip code to determine potential socioeconomic standing. (Such statistical information is available
from the US Census Bureau.)
This
Boolean logic process can be applied to each critical item (or criteria), be
that education, current or former employer(s), positions held, dates, job
duties, related skillsets and so-on. The numbers easily add up, and applicants are
sorted and ranked according to accumulated point values. The closest matches
return the better scores.
The
greatest value of ATS software lies in its ability to scan text for experience relevancy. At first blush, it might
appear that it would be ever so clever to include mounds of precise details—aka added minutia. The
software, however, searches only keywords
relevant to the position. Redundancies and added fillers, strung together
with prepositions, rarely prove beneficial.
Applicants,
whose careers lie outside preset parameters, will not pass muster. The
non-relevant keywords will be skipped over. The jobseeker’s positions or
employment often relate to something else. (There
exist endless numbers of jobseekers who routinely apply for anything and
everything—qualifications notwithstanding. Most companies view them as time wasters.)
Interviewers
rarely see the online application. Once the ATS has assessed the online apps
the system can either print the top 10 or 12 attached résumés, or
electronically forward them to the interviewer. Now, instead of culling through
hundreds or thousands of résumés, the interviewer(s) have a manageable handful.
At
this juncture, the interviewer can assess what the ATS could not—the general feel and feng
shui of the candidate’s presentation. Some applicants can have all the
right keywords, and not be in-sync with hidden criteria. In some cases, the
applicant simply does not appear to be authentic.
The
moment an experienced interviewer spots irregularities, the gig is up. Those applicants
are often deemed outliers or prevaricators, and their résumés are inevitably tossed
aside. The elements of authenticity, sincerity and chemistry are where ATS software comes up short.
This
is where the counterintuitive aspect comes into play. While ATS can efficiently
identify the tangibles, it cannot gauge or calculate subjective attributes that
might make one candidate more desirable over other equally qualified applicants.
Until
a reliable subjective-profile algorithm can be integrated into the ATS
application process, the need for personal interviews will continue. Solve that
equation and you will be worth a million bucks!