banner



How Many Jobs Should I Apply To

This is probably one of the most frequently asked questions a job coach will receive. This, or some variation, like "I've been applying to X jobs per week. How have I not gotten one interview?" The emphasis on the "math" of a job search comes from two places, I think.

First, there is a bit of a numbers game in any job search. Second, when we do something that is stressful or seemingly subject to chance or the randomness of other people's expectations, we want to find a secret code that will make everything simpler.

My answer to this question is pretty nuanced, but the short answer is: apply to as many jobs as you want to have and can apply to with quality. The longer answer is that the number of jobs you apply to per week depends a lot on the self-inventory we talked about last week. How you self-motivate, your career stage, the nature and quality of your professional network… all of these things will influence your job application strategy.

The Numbers Game

Many of us have heard the frightening numbers about job applications. According to a blog post from Lehigh University's career services department, for example, it takes between 100-200 applications to get a job and each application has about an 8.3% chance of turning into an interview. The lesson that many applicants take from hair-raising stats like this is to open up the funnel by applying to lots and lots of jobs.

From a purely mathematic standpoint, that makes a lot of sense. Let's look at 2 job seekers:

No alt text provided for this image

Candidate A and Candidate B are both reviewing about 300 job postings over their course of their job search, but Candidate A wants a big funnel of jobs. They're applying to 200 of those 300 jobs, while Candidate B is only applying to about 75. If we use pure math, Candidate A will inevitably get more interviews (17 versus 6 for Candidate B). Logic dictates that more interviews lead to more offers.

But…

…Job Searching Isn't Just 'Pure Math'

As we advance in our careers, the next opportunity is less and less about pure math and more and more about multipliers.

Multipliers are those things that can make our application stronger than the other person's. Things like skill fit, organizational alignment, our network and other differentiating factors. As we apply to more senior positions, we also start paying a penalty for misalignment, lack of differentiation, or for not having clearly thought about why the role is the right fit for us.

Let's assume that Candidate B is being selective about where they are applying. Candidate B applies only to roles where they have been thoughtful about role fit, skills, and how they are different from other potential applicants. They're also applying to more roles where they have good network connections.

Now Candidate A's "big funnel" looks less like a strategy and more like a scattershot approach. They are cranking out cover letters based on a template, with screeners and hiring managers wondering whether they've really given this role that much thought. They are not clear on the unique value they bring to the role. Maybe when they do get into an interview, they have a hard time articulating their interest in the role.

No alt text provided for this image

Candidate A and Candidate B now end up in relatively the same place (6 interviews for Candidate A, 5 for Candidate B). Candidate B, however, has put in relatively less effort to get there, and is likely interviewing with more roles they actually want!

The 'pure math' also doesn't take account of another key factor in job seeking…

…Job Offer = Sustained Effort Over Time

When people look at the math, it is very easy to think, "you should apply to five jobs per day." But applying to five jobs per day is not sustainable for most job seekers. There are four main reasons for this:

  • Stock of 'New' Jobs Declines Over Time. When we first enter the labor market, it's pretty easy to find 5 jobs per day to apply to. Jobs have been, in a sense, 'sitting around' waiting for us to discover them. Over time, however, the number of 'new-to-me' opportunities generally goes down because we've been consistently checking job boards and company websites, talking to my network and going to job fairs consistently. In short, six weeks into my jobs search there may not be 5 new jobs a day to apply to, even if I wanted to.
  • Job Searches Generally Become Less Efficient Over Time. Disappointment, the need to take on 'gig' work to make ends meet, caring for a child or a parent, speaking the dominant language as a second language…these are some of a number of factors that may make job searches less efficient the longer they go on. A strictly numbers-based approach to a job search sets up talented people for failure and disappointment. For example, advising a highly skilled single parent of two children who is applying for roles in New York but is not fluent in English to "apply to five jobs per day" can be worse than useless. It may turn out to be counterproductive, leading to candidate exhaustion.
  • Pure Math Encourages a 'Rip and Run' Approach. Most people don't enjoy job searching. They find it tiresome, disappointing and exhausting most of the time. As I said last week, a successful job search requires doing the right things over and over again until they work. Often times, at least in my experience (as both a job coach and job seeker), a Pure Math approach to job seeking leads job seekers to explosive periods of action, followed by exhaustion and longer periods of inactivity while we rebuild our energy. While taking breaks in a job search is important for self-care, this Rip and Run approach leaves the job seeker exhausted and keeps us from sustained engagement with the job market.
  • You Don't Build Up a 'Store' of Applications. In job seeking, sustained engagement is more important than raw total of applications. If Candidate A applies to 90 jobs in the first two weeks of their search, but is inactive over the next six weeks, they will likely have less success than Candidate B, who has only applied to 32 jobs, but has applied to 4 jobs each week.

No alt text provided for this image

The chart here illustrates what I'm talking about. When people tell candidates to apply to 5 jobs per day, they often imagine what I call the "B.S. 'Ideal' Candidate." While this person may exist, I have never met them. This is the job seeker who is a machine who generates applications. Each application is of more or less the same quality. They are also able to find 35 opportunities every week that will make them happy and fulfilled, put them on the career trajectory they want in an organization they for which they enjoy working.

Outside the realm of make-believe, we have three 'Real' candidates. Candidate A is trying to apply to 5 jobs per day every weekday. They can sustain this for about 2 weeks before crashing. After rebuilding their energy, they have another explosion of activity. After each recovery period the job seeker's activity becomes less and less productive. Exhausted and disappointed, they are unable to sustain their engagement for an extended period of time.

Candidate B, our more selective candidate, is probably setting themselves up to be most successful. They have an understanding of how many roles they can apply to with quality and a high likelihood of success. They are able to stick to that, keeping time for outside work and engagement with family and community, exercise and just thinking about something else. They can get to every interview fresh, can clearly state why they have chosen the job, and have used their network to ensure their hiring manager knows how great they are.

Candidate C, a single parent who is not fluent in the dominant language and has to have an outside job to make ends meet, takes her job coach's advice seriously and tries to apply to 30 jobs per week. This quickly becomes disappointing and exhausting, as each application and each interview is more tiring than their well-meaning job coach (perhaps a white man who is a native speaker of the dominant language) understands. Increasingly despairing about their options, they pick up more hours at their 'gig' job and drop out of their job search entirely.

Change the Math. Don't Play It.

There are very good reasons to set ambitious job application targets and stick to them. You might be an early-career job seeker, or exploring a career change, or you may not have been on the market for a long time and need to train yourself. You may also be someone who likes to set that kind of target. But over time, especially for candidates who are more advanced in their careers, finding ways to change the math is more important than playing the math.

Early career job seekers tend to have fewer multipliers. After graduating from college or a workforce program, our skillset is generally not very differentiated from other candidates'. We're still building a network and we often have little direct experience in our chosen field. In those circumstances, we have to play the numbers more. A big funnel is much more important.

We encounter similar circumstances in a career change. If we have been working as an Executive Assistant for fifteen years and recently received a coding certificate, we may find ourselves in a similar position to an early career job seeker. The goal is to get a foot in the door – get to that interview so that we can demonstrate we are job-ready, and then start a role that will allow us to build our experience and credibility in the field.

Finally, we may have not been on the job market for some time. After spending nearly a decade with my former employer, I entered the job market in earnest in the fall. I set a goal of 15-25 applications per week less because I was deeply interested in any particular role and more because I needed to retrain myself to be a person who sits down and does applications as part of their daily and weekly routine. Since then, I've scaled back my applications and focused more on roles that are an excellent fit. It was important for me to get aggressive with my job search, though, so that I could re-develop that discipline.

 Overall, however, and especially as we seek more senior opportunities, we are looking for ways to change the math. Rather than say "how many roles should I apply to if only 8.3% of applications will turn into interviews," we want to start saying "how can I turn 8.3% into 10% or 12% or 25%?" That requires thinking deeply about where we fit, defining how our skills and experience make us different from the "average" candidate to the position, and being thoughtful about our networks and how they can be helpful to us.

For some of us, setting a goal of X number of applications per week is a helpful motivator. It can allow us to feel a sense of accomplishment in the job search work that we're doing as we wait for that interview or offer. If you know that about yourself, have at it! But you don't feel obligated to set an aggressive goal, especially if it will leave you exhausted, disappointed, or feeling overly stressed.

There is No 'Magic Number'

I hope that I've made clear a couple of things. First, while it is good to have job application targets, both job seekers and job coaches benefit from an individualized approach that emphasizes a candidates' particular strengths and reflects their own limitations. If a job seeker is devastated by every rejection, 35 applications a day is probably not a durable strategy. Second, the job search can be stressful and unpleasant, so it's a very human thing to want a "magic number" or "secret code" that will make it all make sense. Really, a job search is more art than science.

That knowledge is an opportunity to say, "I don't need to tie myself to my computer and crank out applications all day." It means we can think creatively about what kind of work we want to do, how to express the unique value that only we can add, and to build and nurture connections that put us in the best position to find a place where we feel satisfied and happy.

I hope everyone has a great week and I wish all my fellow job seekers and career coaches good health and good hunting!

Charlie

How Many Jobs Should I Apply To

Source: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-many-jobs-should-i-apply-charles-brackett-he-him-

Posted by: reevesscouned.blogspot.com

0 Response to "How Many Jobs Should I Apply To"

Post a Comment

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Iklan Bawah Artikel