Many job advertisements contain a long list of requirements. The logic seems to be: the more requirements a job posting contains, the more attractive and demanding the position must be. However, this strategy is deceptive – not only for applicants but also for companies. In fact, such requirement profiles can actually deter the very talent you're actually looking for.
Generally speaking, the criteria in job advertisements can be divided into two categories.
These are clearly measurable and actually necessary for the role. Examples include regulated qualifications (e.g., medical licenses, technical certifications) or specific expertise essential for immediate job performance, as well as validatable soft skills.
These are rather arbitrary in nature and are not directly linked to actual job performance. They include, for example, minimum years of professional experience, vague personality traits such as "teamwork skills" or "high resilience," general academic degrees or further training, and optional language skills, etc.
The assumption that a long list of requirements automatically attracts more qualified applicants has been scientifically refuted. Studies show that detailed requirement lists unnecessarily reduce the applicant pool.
A well-known study by Tara Sophia Mohr, published in the Harvard Business Review, found that women only apply for jobs if they meet nearly all of the requirements, while men consider themselves suitable if they meet about 60% of the criteria. This suggests that strict requirements don't necessarily attract the best talent, but rather systematically exclude certain groups of applicants.
Additionally, an analysis by the German Economic Institute (IW) shows that many companies are suffering from a shortage of skilled workers despite numerous requirements for applicants. The reason: Unrealistic or unnecessary requirements reduce the number of applications and cause qualified, unconventional candidates to fall through the cracks.
Many job advertisements include requirements for personality traits such as "communication skills," "flexibility," or "resilience." These terms are not only vague, but their meaning is neither uniformly defined nor objectively measurable.
For example, what exactly does "team player" mean? An extroverted employee who dominates meetings could be considered a team player—as could an introvert who contributes to group performance through listening and targeted input. Without clear definitions and measurable criteria, such requirements remain subjective and unreliable.
Using stringent requirements to reduce the selection effort in the hope that only truly "suitable" candidates will apply is a fallacy. According to a study by LinkedIn Talent Solutions, too many requirements lead not to better applications, but rather to fewer applications – and often from candidates who, while formally meeting the ideal, are not necessarily the best for the job. Companies that have more flexible requirements fill positions faster and more successfully.
Companies should critically examine their requirements and distinguish between truly necessary criteria and superfluous hurdles. Instead of requiring long lists of vague personality traits, unnecessary university degrees, or minimum years of experience, job postings should emphasize concrete, verifiable skills.
The key lies in skills-based recruiting that focuses on the actual requirements of the role. Fewer subjective requirements mean more suitable applicants, shorter fill times, and a higher success rate for new hires.
360-Talents is a full-service recruiting platform that enables data-driven, skills-based recruiting. Interested? Register or contact us.
Making the world a better place through unveiling potential.
