Job ads are now laundry lists and applications are rejected by algorithms — it's no wonder everyone is frustrated

• Job ads have been getting too lengthy and have long lacked salary details.
• Hiring managers are being inundated with applications thanks to AI.
• The situation is untenable and something needs to change, hiring experts say.

Job ads need an overhaul. They're often too lengthy, too demanding, and may prompt candidates to lean more on their networks to avoid a relentless application-rejection cycle.

With an era of "revenge quitting" on the horizon, companies that want to attract top talent may want to rethink what they post on job boards, use AI sparingly but smartly, and remember that hiring is an inherently human process.

Research from the HR and recruitment software company iCIMS, shared with Business Insider, found that job openings were up only 3% between December 2023 and December 2024, but applications rose by 13%.

Rhea Moss of iCIMS told BI that this underlines a "self-fulfilling prophecy" in the job market: candidates can't help but contribute to the vicious cycle by applying for more jobs.

"There's an interesting confluence that's happening right now, of candidates feeling like their résumé isn't being looked at, and recruiters feeling like they have too many résumés to look at," Moss said. "Something has got to change here."

Too wordy and demanding

Job hunting can be frustrating. Susan Levine, the founder and CEO of the recruitment and advisory firm Career Group Companies, told BI that job ads "frequently paint an unrealistic picture of the roles they represent."

Using buzzwords to draw attention rather than accurate descriptions can contribute to the culture of love-bombing and ghosting in the jobseeking world, where candidates believe they are perfect for a role — only to hear nothing after an interview.

"This practice can mislead candidates, leading them to believe they are a strong match when their qualifications may not align with what the company truly needs," Levine said.

Ads can also be too long and demanding. Data from the recruitment software and hiring platform Applied, shared with BI, found more than a third of "entry-level" job ads sought an average of 2.5 years of experience.

Michael Horn, a lecturer at the Harvard Graduate School of Education and coauthor of "JOB MOVES: 9 Steps for Making Progress in Your Career," said: "Job descriptions are really, really broken at this point."

"They have gotten ridiculous in terms of the number of listed and credentials and qualifications," he told BI. "They read much more like legal documents."

Ashley Ward, the founder and CEO of the recruitment agency W Talent Solutions, said poorly constructed job ads contribute to a frustrating cycle for all involved.

"A job ad should serve as a compelling invitation, not a laundry list of unattainable qualifications," Ward told BI. "Yet, too many ads are designed more as exclusionary gatekeepers than as tools for engagement."

'Soul-crushing' process

Shannon Talbot, a former banking director and VP at an advertising agency turned career coach, told BI that hiring managers often "copy and paste old, potentially irrelevant job descriptions because they're in a rush to fill the role."

"These descriptions turn into wish lists of requirements rather than focusing on what's truly needed. Add to that the lack of transparency around salary and job levels, and it's no wonder candidates feel frustrated."

The language of job ads can be off-putting. The Applied report, which analyzed just over 7,500 ads, found that using masculine wording (including "individual," "challenging," and "driven") reduced the number of women applying by 10%.

There's also no guarantee the jobs being advertised actually exist.

A recent analysis from Greenhouse found that as many as one in five jobs advertised online may be "ghost jobs" — roles that are never filled, and companies may never have any intention of filling in the first place.

"The job market has become more soul-crushing than ever," said Jon Stross, president and cofounder of Greenhouse.

The human touch is missing

AI was supposed to make everything better, with job hunting becoming easier and more efficient than ever on both sides of the process.

But for all its benefits, using AI the wrong way could make everything worse.

Horn said hiring managers may receive thousands of applications, mostly from people wholly unsuitable for the job.

"Individuals applying to things are struggling to figure out, thinking, I don't even know what this means. Am I a good fit for this? I have no idea," Horn said. "Might as well let the AI apply, and then we'll figure it out later."

Meanwhile, good candidates may be automatically rejected by an algorithm.

Rise of the networks

When met with an unfulfilling market, people may instead turn to their networks for their next career move, said Horn.

This could have consequences for DEI. Managers have a tendency to want to hire candidates like themselves, whether they mean to or not. Networks becoming more important could have a disparate impact on underrepresented groups, Horn warned.

Hiring managers can help make the application process more transparent by maximizing automation while maintaining the human touch.

Lisa Frank, the founder and CEO of the recruitment and coaching firm LBF Strategies, said hiring managers should embrace AI but remember that it can't be fully relied on to make decisions.

"You're still dealing with humans, hiring other humans, humans working with other humans, or working for or managing them. We can't turn our backs on that," she told BI.