What do job applications and Tinder have in common?

After a particularly horrible day at work, I like to spend my train ride home applying to 27 job adverts using the handy 1-click apply tool on LinkedIn. Even if I’m not the perfect fit for the job, I apply anyway. It’s stress relieving and pretty fun, sort of like swiping on Tinder. I’m not serious about the jobs I apply for–or the guys I swipe right on–but if it were to lead to something, I wouldn’t turn down a new opportunity.

But let’s be honest, when is the last time that actually happened?

Sure, now we can 1-click apply on LinkedIn. And express interest in a local ‘boo’ with just one swipe. We have access to thousands of roles at our fingertips across hundreds of job boards. And thousands of potential new suitors on dating apps. Yet somehow, neither make it easier or bring us closer to achieving our goals.

Because our ‘applications’ end up in a pile with hundreds of others, leaving us ghosted and wondering where we went wrong.

All joking aside, applying for a job is a daunting, time-consuming and monotonous process. Typical form-based applications are outdated and of little value to both employers and potential employees. It’s no surprise that 80% of candidates drop off before completing a job application, 48% of which drop off due to a complicated ATS system (Glassdoor). On the contrary, conversations with chatbots in relevant channels–rather than one-way data exchanges in application forms–lead to a candidate application completion rates of over 60%.

Is your technology helping or hindering your candidate experience?

Meanwhile, the candidate journey experience–every interaction between company and candidate that happens during the hiring process–is growing in impact.

But terrible application experiences can’t possibly be the norm, right?

Wrong. We submitted job applications to over 124 companies across five verticals and 36 industries, while measuring a number of factors to give each company a candidate experience and create a benchmark for each vertical. What we learned only confirmed our suspicions: applying for a job sucks. Even when you go to a company’s website and apply through the proper channels. Here are our results:

Average number of clicks to apply: 73 clicks (up to 189)

Average time to apply: 17 to 40 minutes

85% of companies sent an automated email to acknowledge our job application

70% of companies didn’t respond to our application

The good news is, a simple rejection will not have the same impact. Those same candidates said they would be 3.5 times more likely to reapply in the future if the company followed up with a simple email or phone call to notify them that they were declined.

Companies that did respond took an average of 22 days

Whether you accept it or not, candidate experience has a dramatic effect on every metric that matters: cost per hire, job-offer acceptance, and even revenue generation. IBM found that applicants who were satisfied with the recruiting process were 38% more likely to accept a job offer than those who were dissatisfied.

While recruiting can be expensive, having a broken candidate experience can be more costly. Great candidate experience isn’t a “nice to have.” In a competitive job market, timely follow-ups, clear communication, and personalised interactions all have a big impact on revenue, hiring costs, and your ability to attract the best talent.

Before you leave work today, apply to an open job on your company’s career website.

Throughout the process ask yourself: Is this a company I would swipe for?

EVA.ai HR Tech Automation Platform successfully optimises enterprise processes by personalising the experiences of Talent, Recruiters and Leaders at scale.