Getting hundreds of applications for an open position is a good problem.
For many employers, it isn’t.
A large applicant pool can create more work without making the hiring decision any easier. Recruiters may spend hours reviewing resumes, only to discover that relatively few candidates have the skills, experience or qualifications the role actually requires.
LinkedIn’s 2025 research highlights the problem. Nearly two-thirds of HR professionals said finding qualified talent had become harder over the previous year, while 73% said fewer than half of the applications they received met all the criteria listed for the job. More than one in five HR professionals also said they were spending three to five hours a day reviewing applications.
So why are employers seeing more applications without necessarily finding more qualified candidates?
More Applications Don’t Mean Better Candidates
Application volume is easy to measure, but it says little about whether a hiring campaign is working.
Someone can apply for a job without meeting most of the requirements. Another candidate might have the right experience but lack one skill listed in the posting. Others may apply broadly, hoping to get through the process even when the position is not a particularly strong match.
The result is a growing gap between the number of people who apply and the number who are genuinely suited to the role.
SHRM’s 2025 Talent Trends research found that 69% of employers were having difficulty recruiting for full-time positions. Among organizations experiencing recruiting problems, 51% cited too few applicants, while employers also pointed to candidates lacking the right work experience and skills as significant challenges.
That may sound contradictory: employers are struggling to find enough applicants while also dealing with too many applications that don’t fit.
But both things can be true.
The problem is not always the size of the applicant pool. It is whether the pool contains enough people with the capabilities the employer actually needs.
The Job Description May Be Part of the Problem
Sometimes the hiring problem starts before anyone submits an application.
Job descriptions often become wish lists. An employer may ask for several years of experience, a degree, industry knowledge, a long list of software tools, multiple technical skills and a range of soft skills — all for a single position.
Some of those requirements may be essential. Others may simply be habits carried over from older job descriptions.
That distinction matters.
If a candidate needs a specific technical skill to perform the job, it makes sense to list it as a requirement. But if several tools can be learned after hiring, treating every one of them as a must-have can unnecessarily shrink the pool.
LinkedIn’s research points to a broader skills mismatch. Nearly two-thirds of HR professionals surveyed said there was a gap between the skills job seekers have and those their organizations need.
Employers may therefore be looking for an exact combination of experience and skills that is difficult to find — while overlooking candidates who have the core abilities and could quickly learn the rest.
Skills Are Changing Faster Than Job Titles
The traditional resume is built around job titles, degrees and previous employers. But those details do not always tell employers what a candidate can do today.
That is becoming more important as technology changes the work itself.
The World Economic Forum’s Future of Jobs Report 2025, based on input from more than 1,000 employers, found that nearly 40% of the skills required on the job are expected to change by 2030. The report also found that 63% of employers consider skills gaps a major barrier to business transformation.
For hiring teams, that creates a practical challenge. A candidate’s previous job title may not accurately reflect the skills they have developed, while a degree may tell an employer little about whether someone can handle the specific work involved.
This is one reason skills-first hiring has gained momentum. Instead of asking whether someone’s background looks exactly right on paper, employers can focus more closely on the capabilities required for the position.
SHRM’s research on skills-first hiring found that organizations removing degree requirements for certain positions were able to hire candidates who might previously have been screened out.
AI Is Adding to the Volume
Artificial intelligence is changing both sides of the hiring process.
Candidates can use AI tools to tailor resumes, write cover letters and apply for jobs more quickly. Employers are also using AI to write job descriptions, screen resumes and search for candidates.
SHRM reported in 2025 that 43% of organizations were using AI to support HR work, with recruiting among its most common uses. Companies were using AI for tasks including resume screening, candidate searches and job-description writing.
That can save recruiters time, but it does not automatically solve the quality problem.
If the original job description contains unnecessary requirements, an automated screening system may simply process those requirements faster. And if candidates are using AI to optimize their applications, resumes can become increasingly polished without necessarily providing more evidence that the person can do the job.
Technology can speed up screening. It cannot replace a clear definition of what a good hire looks like.
What Employers Can Do Differently
The answer is not necessarily to reduce the number of applications. It is to improve the percentage of applications that are relevant.
Focus on the skills that actually matter
Before posting a job, hiring managers should separate essential skills from preferences.
A shorter list of meaningful requirements gives qualified candidates a clearer picture of the role and makes it less likely that good applicants will rule themselves out.
Make the job description specific
Candidates should not have to decode a posting to understand what they would actually be doing.
A strong job description should explain the main responsibilities, the skills that matter most and what success in the position looks like.
The goal is not to include every possible keyword. It is to give the right people a reason to apply.
Look at capabilities, not just credentials
A candidate does not need to have followed the exact career path the employer imagined.
Relevant experience, transferable skills, problem-solving ability and the capacity to learn can all matter when evaluating whether someone is likely to succeed.
That does not mean ignoring qualifications when they are genuinely necessary. It means being careful not to use credentials as a shortcut for assessing ability.
Make the hiring process efficient
A strong applicant who has to complete a long application, wait weeks for a response and go through unnecessary interview rounds may simply move on.
SHRM’s research found that streamlining the application process is among the strategies employers use to address recruiting challenges. Flexible work arrangements and stronger compensation can also affect an organization’s ability to attract talent.
The hiring process itself is part of the candidate experience — and candidates are evaluating employers just as employers are evaluating them.
Measure what happens after the applications arrive
The number of applications is easy to report, but it should not be the main measure of recruiting success.
Employers should also look at how many applicants meet the core requirements, how many advance to interviews, how many receive offers and, ultimately, whether the people hired perform well and stay with the company.
A job that attracts 500 applications but produces no strong finalists is not necessarily performing better than one that attracts 80 highly relevant candidates.
The Goal Isn’t More Applications. It’s Better Matches.
The hiring market has become harder to navigate from both sides.
Candidates are applying more broadly, while employers are dealing with changing skill requirements and difficulty finding people who fit their needs. LinkedIn’s research captures the disconnect clearly: 73% of HR professionals said fewer than half of their applications meet all the criteria listed in the job posting.
For employers, the solution starts with being more precise about what they need.
That means writing better job descriptions, separating essential requirements from nice-to-haves, looking at skills alongside traditional credentials and keeping the hiring process focused on finding the right person rather than processing the largest possible number of applications.
For remote employers, expanding the search beyond the local market can also open access to a much larger pool of professionals.
For a closer look at how different remote job boards approach hiring, see our comparison of Remote4Me vs. Online.jobs.
Looking to reach more qualified remote candidates? Online.jobs helps employers post remote jobs, review applicants and connect directly with remote professionals around the world.
Sources
- LinkedIn – More Applicants But Harder To Hire: Majority Of Job Applications Do Not Meet Listed Criteria
- SHRM – Uncertain Economy Adds to Recruitment Challenges
- SHRM – Candidate “Ghosting” and Employer Competition Are Fueling Talent Shortages
- SHRM – Beyond Degrees: A Skills-First Mindset
- World Economic Forum – The Future of Jobs Report 2025