Killer questions not working? How to strategically reduce application volumes without compromising quality

You have a single job ad generating over 900 applications, do you:

A) Close the job earlier than planned
B) Add more killer questions
C) Add another stage in the application process
D) Introduce an AI tool
E) Just deal with it and review them all!

If this scenario sounds familiar to you, then you're not alone. Employers are increasingly battling high volumes of applications driven by more competition for fewer roles (especially in the UK) and a growing range of bulk application & AI tools available to applicants.

Why are high applications volumes a problem for businesses?

This change in behaviour is driven by wide-reaching external factors:

• Fewer open roles across some sectors
• Growing use of AI-powered bulk application tools
• “Spray and pray” application tactics from frustrated candidates

A packed applicant pool might sound like a good thing, but it creates headaches for TA teams. The issue here is not so much the volume itself (although that certainly creates a resource drain) but rather the quality, and the challenge of finding that quality within such a large amount of applications - in a short timeframe, with limited resources.

We've been talking to employers who, as a result of such high volumes have had their time swallowed conducting reviews & screening applications. For some, this even causes an overspend with their assessment providers and at the end of it all, confidence that the best talent has been secured is not high.

Employers are turning to high risk tactics in an attempt to stem the tide, including things like closing jobs in just 24 hours, adding obscure and irrelevant killer questions or simply introducing extra steps and stages, like video interviewing, to add another point to filter and reduce applicants. The result? A poor candidate experience, reputational risk and not a great deal of real impact on numbers or quality of hires.

Tactics like this further disadvantage those who are already on the back foot; working parents who see the job but can't stop to complete an application with 24 hours? Excluded. Neurodiverse candidates who might have difficulty answer obscure knockout questions? Excluded. This type of experience can only lower the amount of quality candidates actually making it past the first step, and ultimately harm productivity and performance of businesses.

How can you reduce application volumes without losing quality candidates in the process?

It's a mindset shift - quantity is no longer a KPI

This won't apply to everyone, but for some the first step is a cultural shift. Volume applications used to indicate brand awareness & affinity, popularity of roles and successful job advertising - especially for paid adverts. Whilst all of these things may still be true, there is a proportion of these applicants who are simply there because they needed a job, they bulk applied or perhaps even an AI agent applied without their knowledge. Quantity can no longer be a key metric of success, quality is the focus.

At the top of the funnel, we're looking at quality of applications. At the bottom, it's quality of hire.

“Generally, there is no one‑size‑fits‑all metric for quality of hire because it depends on what your priority is. Common quality‑of‑hire metrics include turnover rates, job performance, employee engagement and cultural fit measured by 360 ratings.”— Ji‑A Min SHRM

Focussing on the top of the funnel, measuring candidate quality without spending an inordinate amount of time analysing candidates is tricky. One of my top recommendations is building a candidate experience that passively collects as much data as possible and focusing on Candidate Intent in the early stages. This measurement can even start before application if you have the right tools in place.

Give candidates the tools to self-select

Use tools like Connectr Talent Technology to empower candidates to self-screen out. This is a hugely powerful and positive way to reduce applications without compromising on quality, and can produce great insight for employers on which parts of their proposition resonates most (or least) with their target audience.

Create pre-application journeys that surface content to candidates about:

• Whether the role aligns with their values and skills
• What success in the role looks like
• What a culture fit looks like
• Dispels myths or misconceptions (both good and bad ones)

This doesn’t just reduce poor fit applications. It improves conversion of the right-fit candidates, too - it creates an environment for those who may not have seen themselves in a role, to realise their potential. It's also great for brand alignment, in fact British Airways were able to positively shift perceptions of their brand by potential candidates through such a curated journey. You can read more about how they achieved this and the result here.

Are you wondering at this point, - "can't a candidate using an AI agent just click through all this content and still apply?" ?

Use of AI agents by candidates as yet has not been well researched, using GenAI to answer questions is much more common at this stage but there are ways to tackle with the right type of content and tracking. Interactive content journeys that require personal reflections and examples can be a great way to encourage genuine responses. Crucially, the interaction data (such as the time spent to complete pre-application content) is itself a bigger indicator of intent.

Start tracking which candidates are genuinely engaged. Platforms like Connectr Talent Technology allow you to capture and analyse candidate intent data before they apply – helping you prioritise quality.