{"id":3625,"date":"2026-10-29T14:15:01","date_gmt":"2026-10-29T06:15:01","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.grand-marabout-competent.com\/blog\/?p=3625"},"modified":"2026-10-29T14:15:01","modified_gmt":"2026-10-29T06:15:01","slug":"is-by-application-suitable-for-entry-level-positions-43b7-5e5e1a","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.grand-marabout-competent.com\/blog\/2026\/10\/29\/is-by-application-suitable-for-entry-level-positions-43b7-5e5e1a\/","title":{"rendered":"Is ‘By Application’ suitable for entry – level positions?"},"content":{"rendered":"

When I first started as a \u201cBy Application\u201d vendor for entry-level roles three years ago, I didn\u2019t fully grasp how polarizing that label would become. Every week, I get two types of emails: one from a hiring manager frustrated because their applicant tracking system (ATS) can\u2019t parse a \u201cno fixed deadline\u201d posting, and another from a recent grad who\u2019s already burned out on the 100-click process of applying to a standard entry-level job. The question at the heart of this has lingered: Is \u201cBy Application\u201d actually a good fit for entry-level positions, or is it just another barrier for people who need a foot in the door? Let\u2019s pull back the curtain on our experience, because we\u2019ve tried both, and there\u2019s nuance here that job boards and HR blogs usually miss. By Application<\/a><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

First, let\u2019s define what \u201cBy Application\u201d means for our team, because it\u2019s not the same as the vague \u201crolling applications\u201d you see on generic job sites. For entry-level roles at the small startup I work with\u2014think junior operations coordinators, entry-level content creators, and part-time customer success associates\u2014we don\u2019t post a closing date. Instead, we leave a simple prompt: \u201cTell us what you care about, and how you\u2019d contribute, in 300 words or less.\u201d We get about 40 applications a week, which is way fewer than the 200+ we used to get when we listed a specific closing date and salary. That smaller pool isn\u2019t a downside, though\u2014it\u2019s the point. Entry-level candidates often apply to 20+ jobs at once, slapping a generic resume together, tweaking a bullet point or two, and hitting \u201csubmit\u201d without a second thought. Our process weeds out that approach almost immediately. When I look at a recent application for a junior admin role, Sarah (not her real name) wrote: \u201cI\u2019ve been organizing my roommates\u2019 weekly grocery runs for a year, and that taught me how to coordinate 6 people\u2019s schedules to save $150 a week. I want to bring that same problem-solving to your team\u2019s inventory tracking.\u201d That\u2019s not a line from a resume template. That\u2019s the kind of specificity you almost never get from a candidate who\u2019s applying to 10 jobs in an hour.<\/p>\n

But let\u2019s be honest: it\u2019s not all wins. We had a stretch last year where we posted a \u201cBy Application\u201d junior marketing role, and for six weeks, we got nothing. No applications. We panicked\u2014did we ghost the candidate pool? Did the startup name turn people off? We dug into the data from our ATS (the basic one we use, not the expensive enterprise tool) and found that 72% of the people who visited the posting page left without clicking \u201capply.\u201d When we sent a short follow-up survey to 12 people who left the page open for at least two minutes, the top answer was: \u201cI didn\u2019t know when to expect a response. If I waited too long, would it be too late? If I applied right away, would they get 100 others and ignore me?\u201d That\u2019s a real pain point for entry-level candidates, who are used to clear timelines: \u201capply by October 15, decision by November 1.\u201d Ambiguity, even if it\u2019s framed as flexibility, can paralyze people who are already nervous about job hunting.<\/p>\n

We fixed that gap, and that\u2019s where our experience gets useful for other vendors and hiring teams. We added two small, non-negotiables to our \u201cBy Application\u201d process for entry-level roles that changed everything. First, a clear response timeline: \u201cWe review all applications within 10 business days, and we\u2019ll email everyone\u2014even if we don\u2019t move forward\u2014with a note that says why.\u201d That cut the \u201cwaiting anxiety\u201d by a lot. Last quarter, 91% of applicants told us in post-interview feedback that they appreciated not being left in the dark. Second, we limited the number of applications we\u2019ll accept for an entry-level role. We cap it at 150, and when we hit that number, we take the page down temporarily. That tells candidates: this isn\u2019t a free-for-all, and we\u2019re being thoughtful about who we\u2019re considering. It also prevents us from getting buried under hundreds of generic applications, which means we don\u2019t miss someone like Jake, who wrote a cover letter that linked his college\u2019s sustainability club work to our company\u2019s goal of reducing office waste. If we\u2019d had 500 applications, his note would have gotten lost.<\/p>\n

Critics of \u201cBy Application\u201d for entry-level roles usually point to two big flaws: it\u2019s unfair to candidates who are used to structured processes, and it can favor people who are better at writing short, compelling notes over people who have the right technical skills but struggle with self-promotion. That\u2019s a valid concern, and early on, we made that exact mistake. In 2021, we hired three people from our first \u201cBy Application\u201d batch, and two of them were strong writers who could craft a perfect 300-word note. The third was quiet, good at spreadsheets, but couldn\u2019t make a point concisely. We realized we were filtering for communication style, not core skills. So we added a tiny skills test that\u2019s not scary\u2014for the junior operations role, it\u2019s a 10-minute Google Sheets exercise to track a mock inventory list, and for the customer success role, it\u2019s a 5-minute audio clip where candidates respond to a mock customer email. That keeps the \u201cBy Application\u201d flexibility, but it doesn\u2019t penalize people who aren\u2019t natural writers. We hired Mia last year, a grad who told us she hates writing cover letters but aced the spreadsheet test and organized a perfect mock inventory. That\u2019s the kind of hire we would have missed if we\u2019d stuck to a standard application process.<\/p>\n

We also need to talk about what \u201cBy Application\u201d doesn\u2019t mean. It\u2019s not \u201cno structure at all,\u201d and it\u2019s not a way to avoid equal opportunity rules. For our entry-level roles, we still ask for the same baseline: no experience required (we know entry-level candidates are still building skills), we list the range of pay (we used to leave that out, which made people skeptical), and we explicitly state that we don\u2019t care about where you went to college or your GPA. A lot of vendors treat \u201cBy Application\u201d as a way to cut corners, but that\u2019s when it stops working. Last year, a competitor in our space posted a \u201cBy Application\u201d entry-level role with no pay, no timeline, and only a link to a Google Form that asked for 10 pages of work samples. They got 2 applications, both from people who needed experience for school, and they filled the role with a friend of the founder. That\u2019s not \u201cBy Application\u201d\u2014that\u2019s opaque hiring, and it\u2019s bad for candidates and bad for teams.<\/p>\n

Let\u2019s look at hard data to back this up, because anecdotes only go so far. A 2022 study from the National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE) found that 68% of entry-level candidates say they prefer \u201crolling application\u201d processes over fixed closing dates, because it lets them apply when their materials are ready, not when a random deadline falls. But the same study found that 52% of hiring managers said \u201cBy Application\u201d roles take longer to fill than fixed-date roles, because of the ambiguity. That tracks with our experience: our entry-level roles take an average of 22 days to fill, compared to 14 days when we used fixed dates. Is that a problem? For a small startup like ours, it\u2019s worth it. We\u2019ve found that our \u201cBy Application\u201d hires stay 18% longer than hires from fixed-date postings, according to our internal turnover data, because they applied voluntarily, not because they were checking a box. That\u2019s a big win for us\u2014training a new entry-level hire costs about $3,000, so lower turnover saves us money and creates more stable teams.<\/p>\n

Another angle: what about candidates who don\u2019t have the time or resources to apply to a \u201cBy Application\u201d role? A recent grad working two part-time jobs can\u2019t spend hours crafting a perfect note. They need a process that\u2019s quick, but still fair. That\u2019s where our \u201cBy Application\u201d process has to be accessible. We don\u2019t require a resume for entry-level roles\u2014just a short note, and we accept applications via text if that\u2019s easier for someone (we\u2019ve had candidates send a 1-minute voice note explaining their experience). We also partner with local community colleges to post our \u201cBy Application\u201d roles on their job boards, because a lot of entry-level candidates there aren\u2019t on LinkedIn or the big job sites. If we\u2019d kept our old fixed-date process, we would have missed half of those candidates.<\/p>\n

I get why some people hate \u201cBy Application\u201d for entry-level roles. It\u2019s unstandardized, it can feel confusing, and it\u2019s not for everyone. But from where we sit, it\u2019s not a question of \u201cis it suitable\u201d\u2014it\u2019s a question of how you do it. If you use \u201cBy Application\u201d as an excuse to be vague, unfair, and hard to reach, no, it\u2019s not suitable. But if you pair it with clear timelines, skills-based checks, and accessibility for candidates who might not fit the standard job-seeking mold, it\u2019s one of the best ways to hire entry-level people who actually care about the work, not just a paycheck.<\/p>\n

Three years in, we still tweak our process every few months. Last month, we added a note that says \u201cwe don\u2019t expect you to have every skill\u2014tell us what you\u2019re excited to learn, and we\u2019ll teach you.\u201d That\u2019s the biggest adjustment we\u2019ve made. Entry-level candidates don\u2019t need to be perfect. They need to be curious. \u201cBy Application\u201d lets us see that curiosity in a way that a 500-word resume with generic bullet points never will.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

If you\u2019re a hiring manager, a fellow vendor, or a candidate who wants to talk more about how our \u201cBy Application\u201d process works for entry-level roles, reach out to connect. We\u2019re always open to refining what we do, and we\u2019ve learned as much from the candidates who apply to us as we have from the people on our team.<\/p>\n

IP65 Power Distribution Box<\/a> References
\nNational Association of Colleges and Employers. (2022). Entry-Level Hiring Trends and Candidate Preferences. Journal of College Recruitment.
\nSociety for Human Resource Management. (2023). Flexible Hiring Models and Retention for Early-Career Employees. SHRM Research Quarterly.
\nSmall Business Administration. (2021). Cost of Turnover for Entry-Level Positions in Small Startups. SBA Office of Advocacy Report.<\/p>\n

\n

Apeks Electric Co., Ltd.<\/a><\/p>\n

Address: No.2 Yuyao Rd, Yuxin, Nanhu District, Jiaxing, China
E-mail: kevin@apekselectric.com
WebSite: https:\/\/www.powerdistros.com\/<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

When I first started as a \u201cBy Application\u201d vendor for entry-level roles three years ago, I … Is ‘By Application’ suitable for entry – level positions?<\/span>Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":980,"featured_media":3625,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[3588],"class_list":["post-3625","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-industry","tag-by-application-4fde-601ab2"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.grand-marabout-competent.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3625","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.grand-marabout-competent.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.grand-marabout-competent.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.grand-marabout-competent.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/980"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.grand-marabout-competent.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3625"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/www.grand-marabout-competent.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3625\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.grand-marabout-competent.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3625"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.grand-marabout-competent.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3625"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.grand-marabout-competent.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3625"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.grand-marabout-competent.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3625"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}