If one could figure out how to get companies to actually use it which seems highly unlikely.
In a presumably asymmetrical information process where one side has more information that’s valuable to the other but not shared the only reason the informed side would share is for their benefit or they were forced to share.
So if sharing all that info you mentioned would somehow improve their hiring process i.e lower costs, decrease false positives (hiring bad candidates), increase overall quality of hired candidates, etc. then some companies may be interested in that value trade off.
Other option being forcing companies to share info through say lowering access overall to candidates (we all left LinkedIn and others and only communicated, applied, etc through your new site).
* I would say only good candidates could move leaving only bad ones on LinkedIn but “good” is subjective and I think the lower threshold on quality companies will accept in candidates is sadly lower than many of us like to think.
Also there’s an assumption of information asymmetry here but in reality we have as little information on companies hiring processes as they potentially do on our individual job searches.
If your site also included visibility into candidates search, how many you applied to, how many interviews you got and success/failure rate, why you didn’t call that company back or ultimately didn’t choose one offer over the other then it actually would be lifting the information veil on both sides so to speak.
Of course, many candidates may not be comfortable revealing that info if currently working due to possible retaliation (even if technically illegal). So you’re left with candidates that are unemployed currently who are at disadvantage in favor of hiring companies.
Put another way, if you were the world’s most desirable candidate for whatever field and level you’re at, it was known and agreed far and wide, would it benefit you to share where you applied, how you did, etc?
All this being said, my aim is never discourage someone from trying to solve a problem they believe is important nor flatly deny that something could work just providing some things to think about to hopefully help somehow.
As a job applicant, I wouldn't touch a site that did this. I don't want the details of my application (or even whether or not I submitted one at all) to be publicly accessible.
there might be some privacy implications
This is a staggering understatement. It would be instantly banned in Europe for a start.
it feels like it would probably tip the balance far more in favour of the prospective employee than the employer for once
The majority of job applicants are already employed. Publicly declaring they are applying for jobs elsewhere would be career suicide.
Ghost jobs would be easily spottable, since no one would be marked as 'hired'.
You give way too much credit to companies. Most companies are terrible at keeping their own internal Applicant Tracking Systems up to date as it is.
Sounds great in theory.
If one could figure out how to get companies to actually use it which seems highly unlikely.
In a presumably asymmetrical information process where one side has more information that’s valuable to the other but not shared the only reason the informed side would share is for their benefit or they were forced to share.
So if sharing all that info you mentioned would somehow improve their hiring process i.e lower costs, decrease false positives (hiring bad candidates), increase overall quality of hired candidates, etc. then some companies may be interested in that value trade off.
Other option being forcing companies to share info through say lowering access overall to candidates (we all left LinkedIn and others and only communicated, applied, etc through your new site).
* I would say only good candidates could move leaving only bad ones on LinkedIn but “good” is subjective and I think the lower threshold on quality companies will accept in candidates is sadly lower than many of us like to think.
Also there’s an assumption of information asymmetry here but in reality we have as little information on companies hiring processes as they potentially do on our individual job searches.
If your site also included visibility into candidates search, how many you applied to, how many interviews you got and success/failure rate, why you didn’t call that company back or ultimately didn’t choose one offer over the other then it actually would be lifting the information veil on both sides so to speak.
Of course, many candidates may not be comfortable revealing that info if currently working due to possible retaliation (even if technically illegal). So you’re left with candidates that are unemployed currently who are at disadvantage in favor of hiring companies.
Put another way, if you were the world’s most desirable candidate for whatever field and level you’re at, it was known and agreed far and wide, would it benefit you to share where you applied, how you did, etc?
All this being said, my aim is never discourage someone from trying to solve a problem they believe is important nor flatly deny that something could work just providing some things to think about to hopefully help somehow.
> and there might be some privacy implications
Huge implications. It sounds like a data broker's dream. I would never apply to a job that had a process like this.
As a job applicant, I wouldn't touch a site that did this. I don't want the details of my application (or even whether or not I submitted one at all) to be publicly accessible.