ATS - Applicant Tracking Systems

Are they friend or foe? Who are these ATS platforms actually working for?

But ultimately, who is ATS working for?

ATS, or, Applicant Tracking Systems, have been the enemy (according to job seekers) or friend (according to HR and Recruiters etc.) to many during this era of job hunting.

ATS is software that helps companies manage their recruiting process by centralizing job openings and applications. It scans resumes for keywords and specific qualifications to help recruiters filter candidates and manage them through the hiring pipeline, which makes the process more efficient.

And, most of you are familiar with many of them: Workable, Greenhouse, Lever, Workday (They’re in the middle of a racial bias lawsuit, but still won’t improve their system and make it more efficient. I mean, really SMH LOL), Pinpoint, iCiMS, et .al

It is very frustrating as an applicant applying for a job - most of us will spend time ensuring that our resume is ready enough to apply - formatting, spacing, the right bullets under each other title, skills sections, to add your degree(s) or not add them, etc. But, this additional step of adding key words adds an extra layer of stress and frustration on top of everything else a job applicant is facing applying for jobs.

Most of these ATS platforms aren’t helpful at all since most applications go into a void/repository IF they don’t have the keywords recruiters are looking for on the job description. So, I could be a strong candidate for a role, but if I don’t have the key words the recruiter is looking for, my application isn’t reviewed and is immediately rejected. Or, it’s never reviewed and stuck in that void.

That makes NO sense. As someone who has been in the job market nearly two years, I’ve stopped counting the number of times I’ve edited my resume to include those key words from the job description, taken them out and subbed others in etc. It’s exhausting.

And, to the recruiters who claim ATS platforms are more efficient and it cuts down on the time you normally have to review the hundreds, no, thousands of resumes that come in for a job, are you even REVIEWING the resumes? Or, are you just looking for key words? THAT can’t be remotely efficient if you’re rejecting applicants if their resumes don’t have them. Where’s the human element you claim you utilize when reviewing applications?

I get that your job is difficult with going through all of those resumes. I know those initial key words will get rid of applicants who are truly not qualified for the role you’re looking to fill. But, what about the applicants who DO have those key words in the resumes AND the experience you’re looking for? They’re still rejected.

So, are you actually looking for applicants? Or, are you looking for key words? And, why are you rejecting those who did fulfill whatever initial set of qualifications you are looking for? I mean, you could at least interview the qualified applicants before you send them off for 8-10+ interview processes that are dragged over a period of months for a role that your company has no intention of filling.

I am convinced that ATS isn’t benefiting job applicants, recruiters nor the company itself. But, until a more efficient ATS system is created that does a full and holistic review of an applicant objectively, we will continue to have the current ATS platforms that are being used.

Therefore, applicants will continue to apply for positions that they won’t even get the opportunity to interview for an show how they’re qualified because their resume lacks the key words needed to trigger the ATS. And, many recruiters aren’t bothering to even review the resumes that DO have those key words and met whatever initial qualifications needed to be seen.

How Lovely. SMH