Getting a lot of applications that don't meet your standard doesn't force you to raise you bar. You still just need someone who meets your standard.

It's quite rare for companies to have evidence to support their hiring methods, which unfortunately means it's heavily driven by trends.

And why would this be the case? Maybe the solution is to ban AI from the hiring process. This seems like companies being hoisted by their own petard. This is because they are the ones who drove the hiring market to be this way. They are the ones who started using AI in the hiring process. They are the ones who decided to make applying so much work driving applicants to use AI to survive.

Also, if you are having trouble hiring right now, that is 1000% a skill issue. It is easier to hire good talent right now than ever before. So I have absolutely 0 sympathy for this POV. Go down to your HR department if you want to see who is at fault.

PS You fix it by charging $1 to apply for jobs. Took me all of 30 seconds to figure that one out.

Maybe we should go back to show up in person to drop off your resume

Smaller companies is one fix. These are almost all problems of fast growth and scale.

Require paper application.

If someone has to pay for a stamp it will stop spam applications.

In the end companies don't need to hook up to the sewer pipe that floods applications. What worked in past was (heaven forbid) technical hiring manager looking at resumes, etc and reaching out to clearly qualified candidates. Not hr 20-somethings with humanities degrees. Sorry

Certification process like what Cisco has.

All companies attempt to give the same interviews, just have one centralized organization give two programing questions and two system design questions and some kind of proof once you pass it.

You filter every one that can't pass the interview in the first place, you get a better interview experience, and just focus on experience