During the kickoff process for a new client recently, one really interesting piece of data became apparent after talking about their application process.
This company, a regional staffing firm, advertised jobs on Indeed, but was using two application formats – Indeed Apply and also sending the candidate back to their website to apply. There was a technical reason for the two formats (not important) but during our kickoff process, it became apparent the different application processes were drastically increasing the cost per application.
Cost Per Application:
Indeed Apply: $1.33
Indeed Company Apply: $5.98
When a candidate could just fill out the quick apply right on the Indeed platform, the cost per application for this company was only $1.33. That’s right in line with the industry average for standard jobs in the industry. When a candidate had to navigate back to the company website, they had to complete the standard information (name, email, etc.) but also include work history.
That friction resulted in the application soaring by 349%!
Let’s take it one step further
Conversion of Application Start to Application Completion
Indeed Apply: 91.4%
Indeed Company Apply: 4.9%
When a candidate clicked on “Apply Now” on Indeed when the application process was Indeed Apply, that candidate completed the application more than 91% of the time. When a candidate clicked on “Apply on Company Site” on Indeed, they completed the application 5% of the time!
That candidate dropoff is enormous. It’s the perfect illustration of wasted spend. This staffing company worked hard (and spends a lot of money) to get the candidate interested and click on the job. But if 19 of 20 candidates were not filling out the application, that’s an incredible black hole!
OK, so what can we learn here?
Most importantly – dig into your data!
The reason this company was using two different application formats? Because they were under the impression this would limit the budget spent on the jobs and prevent runaway applications. The thought process on the surface seemed logical but the data proved something totally different.
By sending candidates back to the website, yes, applications weren’t running away, but the amount of wasted spend was much higher than anything being sponsored with the Indeed Application format.
How can you look into that data? Two ways:
- Cost Per Application: the easiest metric to look at but make sure to know your cost per application with all sources. Indeed, ZipRecruiter, Facebook, Google, etc.
- Candidate Conversion: focus on these two data points – apply starts and applies. The apply starts should be exactly that – when someone starts the application process. Applies are when someone fully completes the application. Applies divided by apply starts will tell you the conversion percentage from the point of a candidate starting your application process.
Sharing this data with the client was truly eye-opening and process changing. They eliminated the tactic of sending candidates back to their website to apply. Everything will be a quick apply process. Yes, there are pros and cons to everything, but when looking at their data, they couldn’t continue to lose that many candidates in the application process.
If you’re looking for help with analyzing the data from your sponsored job performance or any aspect of your recruitment marketing, our team is here to help! Contact us today to get started.
(And don’t forget to watch LinkedIn Live on Tuesdays at 11 am Eastern – don’t worry if you can’t make it, they’re archived!)
