Why "Entry" Level Jobs Now Need 3-5 Years Experience

stop me if you've heard this one before an entry-level job paying eight dollars an hour with no benefits at an unremarkable company oh and they want you to have at least three years experience in a similar role and preferably a master's degree why the [ __ ] are entry-level jobs not entry level anymore the latest jobs report found widespread hiring one man's quest to find a job is Raising questions about the labor shortage right now he says he applied to more than 60 entry-level positions ridiculately strong in Hospitality Leisure and health care we have created

more jobs in two years than any presidential term searching for a job is a difficult and time-consuming task most Americans do not have enough savings to survive for more than two weeks without going into debt which means it is also stressful no matter how efficient the hiring process is made you are never going to have fun looking for a job and nothing can change that but the corporate world has introduced a lot of obstacles that make the job of finding a job as painful as possible filling out online forms for information already on your resume

going through multiple rounds of interviews and getting ghosted by hiring managers for hundreds of positions is enough to drive anybody mad responded to me four of those went on to a phone call after an email exchange and then one of those turned into an interview zero of them turned into a job that was actually uh desperate for help it's also simply Bad Business attracting the right Talent is vital for business success if businesses make their application process too difficult they are going to filter out everybody but the most desperate candidates which are rarely the best

candidates companies that ask for multiple years of experience from applicants applying for entry-level jobs also expose themselves to a similar risk it might sound advantageous for the business to get an employee with years of experience that they can pay like a fresh graduate but company management frequently overlooks the reason that these applicants are looking for entry-level jobs and a field they have been working in for years and it's that they are not that good at their job and they need to keep moving companies before their poor performance catches up with them a recent study conducted

by Portland State University and published by the Harvard Business Review found that overqualified candidates did not outperform the control group and that paying significantly under Market rates for talent will cost most businesses more in other areas bloated hiring processes are also expensive sponsor job postings on sites like indeed LinkedIn and Glassdoor can cost hundreds of dollars per day easily more than the successful applicant will be paid once they are on board and working multiple rounds of interviews also take paid hours from HR hiring managers and third-party recruiters recruiters work on a commission basis for successfully

placed candidates but if a company makes candidates go through multiple rounds of interviews the recruiters can ask for a higher fee or they will be incentivized to send their best recruits to companies that have a simple hiring process so they can get paid quickly and reliably it's bad business and good company managers know it but there are three reasons why they still do it anyway the first reason is that it's become too easy to apply for a job Indeed has 60 million monthly users and Linkedin has over 200 million online job boards make it easy

for applicants to apply for hundreds of jobs every day based on convenient filters that let them search results by in industry seniority experience and salary range companies can get several thousand applications for a single position because the optimal job search strategy has become spamming your resume into as many positions that vaguely fit the description of the job you are looking for companies have attempted to adapt to this by having landing pages where users can fill in their details into the company's own database by manually completing an online form these forms typically ask for information that

should be included on any good resume but it enters it in a way that can be read by a computer instead of being read by a hiring manager saving them the time of manually going through thousands of applications by hand to find the attributes they are looking for in a candidate the back end of these forms will enable the hiring manager to search through their candidates by a similar set of filters that the candidates themselves used to find the job posting even in the arms race between the volume of applications and the people that check

those applications you're quantifying human behavior human Expressions human voices turning that into Data we're now using artificial intelligence to help companies find the very best talent some companies have studied using application tracking systems or ATS which use AI to scrape resumes for keywords to populate databases that can be filtered in the same way without requiring candidates to fill in a data entry form themselves and most likely you were being analyzed by an algorithm how does that make you feel I feel like that would Blindside me entirely this practice has become so common that there are

now ai tools like zetti jobscan and Rezi that check resumes against job posts and make sure that they are appealing to the AI system that check resumes before the hiring manager does so an AI will write a resume to satisfy another AI to stand out against thousands of other applications also written and checked by AI applying for a job has become easier than when you had to search the classifieds and call companies one at a time but this means people can apply for more jobs more applications means that the acceptance rate at each job is

much lower and the best way to deal with this low acceptance rate is to apply for more jobs which means that applying for a job has become harder all over again nobody is to blame for this new paradigm I love making fun of dumb corporate decisions on this channel but in this case they are just reacting to new technology that has made finding applicants easier than ever and everybody else is reacting to the same thing the competitive meta of job searching has shifted from a firm handshake to mass spamming resumes to get past increasingly difficult

spam filters but that's just one reason and there are plenty of things that companies are doing which are just dumb so it's time to learn how money Works to find out why entry-level jobs all of the sudden require three years experience and how you can take advantage of this benefit for your own career this week's lesson was sponsored by brilliant competing for a job in today's environment may be harder than ever before but if there's one thing that will set you apart from the others it's what you know most employers want to see that you

understand data analysis and have the ability to quickly interpret data and transpose it in ways that tell different stories fortunately brilliant has you covered their course on data analysis can help you prepare for your next gig so that you can stand out from the other applicants whether or not it's an item on your resume or useful for a case study for landing the job brilliant is here to help Brilliance approach promotes Interactive Learning and they make it fun and easy it doesn't feel like a dreadful School assignment it feels like a game but you're actually

learning best of all you can learn from anywhere on your phone computer or tablet when I was taking this course I was on the plane to visit my family for the 4th of July stand out from the other applicants and use brilliant to get that boost to get brilliant for free for 30 days go to brilliant.org forward slash how many works or click the link in the description and the first 200 of you will get 20 off Brilliance annual premium subscription the second reason that companies have made it so difficult to apply for jobs is

because they want to cover their ass there are lots of reasons why a hiring manager might want to pick one job applicant over another but not all of them are legal and even if they don't violate any equal opportunity laws some might be a bad look for the company by listing lots of unreasonable job requirements the company increases the likelihood that no applicant will tick every box which means they can hire whomever they want and cover themselves by saying all of the other candidates were missing one or more of the roles prerequisites it's rare that

companies get much pushback over rejecting an external candidate most people have just become accustomed to never hearing back from a majority of jobs they apply for if you have ever applied for a job recently you will know that no response is the new rejection letter first time if companies do respond they try to keep it as generic as possible so that they do not expose themselves to any potential unfair hiring practice lawsuits which makes a long list of job requirements redundant where these do help companies though is in rejecting internal hires according to a study

by Cornell University internal hires outperformed outside hires but only because they are more familiar with the business from day one requiring less training to get into a new role and because they were more likely to stay in a job longer than the outside hire a similar study by McKinsey Consulting found that a strong culture of internal promotions helped with staff retention and encourage staff to work harder to qualify because they could see it paying off for them the pandemic a lot of companies are are not flush financially so they can't afford to hire a new

person internal promotions are effective but they are also more difficult than outside hires if you get promoted or moved around within your company then someone else needs to be hired to fill your role and if someone gets promoted to fill your role then HR has to fill three positions instead of just one which is expensive difficult and triples a chance that someone won't be able to perform their new job people hired internally also don't have probationary periods so if they do underperform in their new role they are harder to let go internal hires have advantages

but external hires are easier and present less risk if a company has no strong internal candidates for a new role but it doesn't want to lose the benefits that come from occasionally promoting people from within then the most effective strategy for them is to increase the job requirements so they can tell their existing staff that Unfortunately they don't qualify based on the jobs criteria I know I say it a lot but this is another reason why the best thing you can do in your career in your early years is to consistently apply for new jobs

that are better than the one you currently have workers that change their jobs every two years earn on average 50 more than their colleagues who show loyalty to a company sticking around might get you a promotion but there's no way to know how long it will take for other people to move out of their positions having experience at different companies is also more valuable to new employers than long-term tenure at a single employer when employers ask for three years experience they are often satisfied with candidates that talk about dealing with similar challenges in different Industries

so you should apply anyway and just have some kind of experience to talk about even if it's not doing the same job or even a job at all and that's a third reason why employers make job requirements that are so out of touch with the job they are offering they want to see how Apple can deal with the challenge there is an old saying in business that even if you are not in sales you are in sales most people do not have jobs that require cold calling a list of leads to generate Revenue but those

soft skills are still important in every job dealing with difficult customers difficult co-workers being able to present a strong argument or simply showing empathy for a clients needs are all skills that could be demonstrated by an applicant when they are questioned about a shortcoming of their qualifications against the job requirements if you're in a job interview and can provide a strong response to a question like this that eases the interviewer's concerns without disregarding them you will probably end up doing better than someone who didn't even have that experience Gap if you can deal with an

interviewer's concerns then you have clearly demonstrated that you can deal with the other challenges as they are presented to you a skill that is worth more than anything you can write down on a resume and that's the fourth reason some managers do know what makes a good hire but most don't people are promoted into management positions based off having experience in a subordinate role managers are therefore naturally inclined to believe that when it comes to hiring someone more experience is more better it's a reasonable assumption that someone that has practice in a role should be

better than someone with no practice in fact I said it at the beginning of this video and you probably just accepted it but corporate rules to non-technical Fields change so rapidly today that the benefit is negligible a 30 year old study conducted by the internal Congress of Applied psychology in Madrid found no strong correlation between experience and job performance since this study was published follow-up studies including a publication from the Harvard Business Review in 2019 found the same thing most corporate managers do not read Journal articles about statistical correlations between hiring parameters and job performance

most go off their own experience which is the value of experience they do the same for other job require government because the safest move for them is to find a candidate that takes the most boxes experience can help a business but so can new ideas and neither is more valuable than the other in fact if it wasn't for an enthusiastically inexperienced employee Nintendo might still be a taxi company and proprietor of a love Hotel I'm not kidding go watch my video over on how history Works to learn about the really weird 130 year history of

Nintendo and remember if you want to get these videos a day early and read high quality articles that will never be made into videos go and subscribe to my newsletter compounded daily to keep on learning how money works