3 ms·

HR and hiring software for companies that don't make software is so incredibly, gob-smackingly broken that it's disgusting. My dad lost his job in the Hostess

HR and hiring software for companies that don't make software is so incredibly, gob-smackingly broken that it's disgusting. My dad lost his job in the Hostess bankruptcy (save yr Twinkies jokes) and seeing the difficulty of navigating the labyrinthian, poorly-designed interfaces set up by the kind of companies hiring stationary and facilities engineers was shocking. And a lot of it isn't just bad, it's literally broken, like, full of bugs that would preclude you from actually submitting a resume if you didn't have your kid around to think of a clever workaround. I think this is partly due to the fact that professions like my dad's are basically invisible to hackers, so even if you are making killer HR and hiring software, your sales department probably isn't even aware of some of these companies. He kept saying, over and over, "hey, you should start a company to fix this mess", but I can't fathom the idea of spending even 5 years doing something that boring (even though it would be incredibly lucrative). Any takers out there?

unimpressive 14y ago
Can you give an example of a bad interface for submitting resumes?
- redmattred 14y ago
  Taleo, oracle peoplesoft, iCims
- codegeek 14y ago
  Taleo. As bad as it can get.
  - girvo 14y ago
    When applying for a retail position, I had to write a user script to get my application to submit. It really is terrible. I got the job, at least.
- beatpanda 14y ago
  Here's what my dad said: the resume submission systems for DST Output (this one is completely broken), Kaiser, Dignity Health, Sutter Health, and, shockingly, Stanford University, are particularly bad (I don't know who the vendors are). He said a big part of the frustration is the resume formatting requirement — some systems will only take resumes in either PDF or Word, and sometimes Word 97 or lower, and sometimes these requirements aren't explicit, or the application system will take a file format the HR department won't actually accept. He said another problem is the lack of an automatic "receipt", or some kind of response letting you know a resume has been received or when it's been rejected. He also said that in general, he feels like the automatic screening performed by some of these tracking systems (for instance, looking for key words from the job description) weeds out qualified applicants and selects for people that are best at gaming the software.
  - redmattred 14y ago
    DST Output is Brassring/Kenexa, Kaiser, Dignity, and Sutter are Taleo, and Stanford is Trovix. Taleo and Kenexa are both market leaders in the corporate ATS space. The standardized formats are so the ATS can do keyword matching and place a score on the candidate. Qualified candidates are often screened out for not choosing the right words, while others jump to the top for keyword stuffing. IMO, the quickest way towards a job is typically to circumvent HR and reach out directly to the hiring manager, department head, or get referred in if you have a connection there. In this economy, HR departments are simply dealing with such a high volume of unqualified candidates applying for anything and everything, that its hard to filter through to find the qualified ones without the help of an automated system.
eli_gottlieb 14y ago
I'm actually working on something for this problem, but it's been slow finding a web designer to help make the interface. On the upside, the core technology for solving the problem is dirt simple. So any web-design help or interest from a potential customer would be really helpful.
ig1 14y ago
The ATS (Applicant Tracking Software) market is actually hugely competitive, with dozens of players doing over $10m/revenue a year.
redmattred 14y ago
Lots of drivers behind this: - For many companies, the main buying criteria for an ATS is EEOC compliance and the ability to report on their % diversity, veteran, etc hires. - The buyer in an ATS sale in many cases is the CFO, not the HR dept. HR is often not seen as a strategic part of the organization, so even if they understand the value of a streamlined applicant process, they don't always have the policitcal capital to lobby for a better system. - Often an ATS is purchased as part of a suite of other software (payroll, onboarding, etc.) and a software vendor basically just needs to check the ATS box. - The switching cost for replacing an existing ATS is high, so even if there are better alternatives, many companies will avoid changing unless they have to. - Application processes are sometimes designed to be more cumbersome than they need to be to screen out more candidates upfront. This is common especially in lower level positions. - Certain more user friendly application workflows are patented. It's an extremely crowded market with long buying cycles that requires an enterprise sales force and also requires you to keep up with employment law in 50 states. Your best bet is to specialize on a niche with unique demands.

unimpressive 14y ago

Can you give an example of a bad interface for submitting resumes?

redmattred 14y ago
Taleo, oracle peoplesoft, iCims
codegeek 14y ago
Taleo. As bad as it can get.
- girvo 14y ago
  When applying for a retail position, I had to write a user script to get my application to submit. It really is terrible. I got the job, at least.
beatpanda 14y ago
Here's what my dad said: the resume submission systems for DST Output (this one is completely broken), Kaiser, Dignity Health, Sutter Health, and, shockingly, Stanford University, are particularly bad (I don't know who the vendors are). He said a big part of the frustration is the resume formatting requirement — some systems will only take resumes in either PDF or Word, and sometimes Word 97 or lower, and sometimes these requirements aren't explicit, or the application system will take a file format the HR department won't actually accept. He said another problem is the lack of an automatic "receipt", or some kind of response letting you know a resume has been received or when it's been rejected. He also said that in general, he feels like the automatic screening performed by some of these tracking systems (for instance, looking for key words from the job description) weeds out qualified applicants and selects for people that are best at gaming the software.
- redmattred 14y ago
  DST Output is Brassring/Kenexa, Kaiser, Dignity, and Sutter are Taleo, and Stanford is Trovix. Taleo and Kenexa are both market leaders in the corporate ATS space. The standardized formats are so the ATS can do keyword matching and place a score on the candidate. Qualified candidates are often screened out for not choosing the right words, while others jump to the top for keyword stuffing. IMO, the quickest way towards a job is typically to circumvent HR and reach out directly to the hiring manager, department head, or get referred in if you have a connection there. In this economy, HR departments are simply dealing with such a high volume of unqualified candidates applying for anything and everything, that its hard to filter through to find the qualified ones without the help of an automated system.

eli_gottlieb 14y ago

I'm actually working on something for this problem, but it's been slow finding a web designer to help make the interface. On the upside, the core technology for solving the problem is dirt simple. So any web-design help or interest from a potential customer would be really helpful.

ig1 14y ago

The ATS (Applicant Tracking Software) market is actually hugely competitive, with dozens of players doing over $10m/revenue a year.

redmattred 14y ago

Lots of drivers behind this: - For many companies, the main buying criteria for an ATS is EEOC compliance and the ability to report on their % diversity, veteran, etc hires. - The buyer in an ATS sale in many cases is the CFO, not the HR dept. HR is often not seen as a strategic part of the organization, so even if they understand the value of a streamlined applicant process, they don't always have the policitcal capital to lobby for a better system. - Often an ATS is purchased as part of a suite of other software (payroll, onboarding, etc.) and a software vendor basically just needs to check the ATS box. - The switching cost for replacing an existing ATS is high, so even if there are better alternatives, many companies will avoid changing unless they have to. - Application processes are sometimes designed to be more cumbersome than they need to be to screen out more candidates upfront. This is common especially in lower level positions. - Certain more user friendly application workflows are patented. It's an extremely crowded market with long buying cycles that requires an enterprise sales force and also requires you to keep up with employment law in 50 states. Your best bet is to specialize on a niche with unique demands.