Leda Stawnychko of Mount Royal University and Mehnaz Rafi of the University of Calgary discuss what is true and false about searching for a job in 2026.
Job searching has never been more accessible – or more confusing. Platforms like LinkedIn, Indeed and employer career pages let candidates submit applications with just a few clicks. What happens after they click ‘submit’, however, has become fertile ground for misinformation.
Social media is filled with ‘career influencers’, resume writers, recruiters and companies promising insider knowledge of how hiring really works. Much of this advice focuses on misinformed claims about applicant-tracking systems (ATS) and artificial intelligence.
These services profit from jobseekers’ uncertainty and convincing people they need specialised services, tools and products to ‘beat’ the ATS and secure interviews.
The result is that many job seekers spend time and money following advice that has no basis in evidence. Here are four common myths about the job application process and what the research actually says.
Myth 1: 75pc of resumes are rejected
Perhaps the most widely repeated claim online is that 75pc of resumes are automatically rejected by an ATS before a human recruiter ever sees them.
The statistic originated from a 2012 sales pitch by Preptel, a resume optimisation company that went out of business the following year. No methodology was ever published, yet the figure has spread widely.
In reality, an ATS is software that helps employers manage applications, and its capabilities vary widely. Some systems function as digital filing cabinets, simply storing and organising applications.
Others automatically screen for basic requirements, such as mandatory eligibility questions. At the most sophisticated end, systems use AI to rank applicants, recommend candidates and analyse asynchronous video interviews.
The advanced AI-powered tools are typically found in large organisations, including many Fortune 500 companies, which receive enormous volumes of applications. In Canada, most employers do not use AI in hiring, and small businesses – which employ more than 60pc of the workforce – are especially unlikely to rely on ATS.
Small businesses typically lack both the application volumes that make ATS worthwhile and the procurement infrastructure to adopt and maintain them.
For most Canadian jobseekers, the better strategy is to focus on clearly communicating how their skills and experience match the role, and on building relationships within their profession.
Myth 2: AI can write a winning resume
A common message from career influencers is that AI can generate a tailored resume or cover letter that dramatically improves your chances of getting hired. While AI can help candidates prepare application materials more efficiently, it is not a shortcut to a stronger application.
As more candidates rely on the same tools and prompts, applications increasingly sound similar and recruiters take notice.
Far from providing a competitive advantage, AI-generated applications may have the opposite effect. 74 pc of hiring managers report identifying them, and 80pc view them unfavourably.
The best approach is to use AI to augment your own voice. That means using it to refine and sharpen your draft, not replace its substance.
Research on Canadian hiring suggests candidates secure more interviews when their applications contain more detail, clarity and structure. Since today’s recruiters review a myriad of applications that look and sound the same, they tend to respond to the ones that stand out by communicating qualifications in an authentic voice.
Myth 3: Use ‘ATS-friendly’ resume templates
Resume writers and career influencers claim that using an ‘ATS-friendly’ template is essential for ‘beating’ the ATS. Some even sell templates that promise to ‘optimise’ your resume to secure interviews.
In reality, there is no universal ATS-friendly resume because the software employers use varies widely from one company to another. Additionally, modern ATS can extract information from common resume layouts, including columns or tables.
Their main limitation is that they are designed to process text, not images, graphics or icons. That means a clean, readable resume should be the actual target, not a template bought online.
If ATS doesn’t automatically reject resumes the way the influencer economy claims, then optimising for a system that largely doesn’t work that way is solving the wrong problem. The real audience for your resume is a person, not an algorithm.
The better approach is to write for both systems and people. Use clear headings, relevant keywords and concrete examples that show how your experience matches the role.
Myth 4: More applications, more interviews
Another myth is that, with the right prompts, the job search can be fully automated, allowing candidates to submit hundreds of applications with little effort. More applications should lead to more interviews, the logic goes.
In practice, this approach often comes at the expense of thoughtful job-seeking, such as identifying positions and employers that genuinely match your skills and interests, and crafting applications that reflect that fit.
AI is most effective when it enhances, rather than replaces, a candidate’s work, helping to avoid what has become known as ‘workslop’ – a term for generic, AI-generated content.
Candidates are best served by using AI for brainstorming and polishing while ensuring the final version accurately and authentically reflects your experiences, accomplishments and voice.
The fundamentals haven’t changed
Today’s labour market may look different, but the fundamentals of a successful job search haven’t changed much. In that sense, the best thing job seekers can do may be to ignore most of what they’re being sold.
The strongest applications are those that clearly connect a candidate’s experiences to the role, provide concrete evidence of their abilities and communicate in an authentic voice.
Technology may help employers manage applications, but hiring decisions are ultimately made by people. That makes professional networks, trusted referrals, strong communication and leadership skills more valuable than ever.
Put the time you’d spend on template optimisation into one good conversation with someone in your field. The research suggests it’ll go further.
By Leda Stawnychko and Mehnaz Rafi
Leda Stawnychko is an associate professor of strategy and organisational theory at Mount Royal University. She also holds adjunct academic appointments at the University of Calgary’s Haskayne School of Business and the Cumming School of Medicine. With more than two decades of leadership experience across international public, private and nonprofit sectors, she is dedicated to cultivating effective, adaptive and transformative leaders.
Mehnaz Rafi is a PhD candidate and sessional professor in the Haskayne School of Business at the University of Calgary. Before pursuing her PhD in organisational behaviour, she received her MSc in management from the Smith School of Business at Queen’s University. She is passionate about leveraging her decade of research experience in quantitative, qualitative and mixed-method designs to create meaningful impact in the world.
Don’t miss out on the knowledge you need to succeed. Sign up for the Daily Brief, Silicon Republic’s digest of need-to-know sci-tech news.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login