If you're the kind of person to be a friend, you'd likely be hired. If you're the kind of stranger looking for a job, you'd be unlikely to be hired. If you're the kind of person to hang out on HN or some Facebook/Slack meme groups, we couldn't afford your salary.
Out of that, it would be roughly 90% of applicants who don't qualify, 5% who we can't afford, and somewhere in between which we just settle for. Many new graduates can't do FizzBuzz, many people who apply for a senior position can't reverse a linked list.
Google Software Engineer I - 100 total jobs, 2000 applicants (click here for a breakout by region). Based on historical data and the current applicant pool, you have a 8% chance of scoring an interview if you apply to [All Locations] and 5% if you apply to Mountain View only.
Aerojet Rocketdyne Inc. Software Engineer I - 10 total jobs, 150 applicants (Sacramento only). Based on historical data and the current applicant pool, you have a 20% chance of scoring an interview.
I know that withholding such statistics is advantageous for the employer and maximizes the number of applications. However, my question is directed more at job platforms like LinkedIn. At most, they only show the number of applications. When I apply, I don't have the faintest idea whether I'll get a response or whether my application will go into a black hole. I believe a more applicant-friendly job platform, which publishes more statistics, aggressively penalizes outdated/lame listings, and incentivizes updates from the employer will attract more applicants. Those applicants will in turn attract more companies, so on and so forth.
The job search grind is a major unsolved problem. Unless you have the most fungible skillset and level of experience, applying to jobs is soul crushing. We don't even have read receipts for resumes. There are so many low hanging fruit which haven't been touched by the major job platforms. People are not opposed to long job applications. What is deeply problematic is that there doesn't seem to be a correlation between the length/redundancy of a job application and your chance of getting a callback. With ML, it doesn't seem impossible for LinkedIn to modify its platform such that it can give you reasonable assurance as to your chance of getting a callback. Solving this issue will be nothing more of revolutionary. It would single-handedly make the economy more dynamic. I'd love to hear an informed take on this issue though, maybe I'm missing a key constraint.
If they are getting much less than one applicant per job it's clear they are doing something wrong.
Jobs get spam applications and it might be that anything from 50-90% don't get a second glance; if you are a fit for the job that won't be you, your odds will be much higher.
STOP applying to positions immediately.
Every Bozo jobseeker is applying to those posts.
And worse still, the candidates are sorted and selected by Flunky HR types.
Instead, consider your target audience.
ASK: Who is the guy/gal you can most help? What are their title(s)?
Think - CTO/CIO, VP or Director of Engineering
Where do they sit? What companies?
Now, hop on Linkedin.
Sort for individual profiles of people you can help.
Reach out to them directly. Engage in a live conversation.
Do this 100 times.
You will find competing opportunities.