In this episode, Doug Berg from Match2 and I discussed a critical problem plaguing the recruiting industry: the one-sided, inefficient systems that leave candidates frustrated and employers exposed to legal risk.
The Problem: A One-Sided System
The recruiting industry has built itself around what Burr calls "screening out technology." Companies invest heavily in ATS systems, CRMs, and career sites designed to process candidates—but these are fundamentally transactional, not relational. Candidates apply, disappear into a black hole, and rarely hear back.
The result? Ghosting at scale. One candidate reported applying to 100 jobs and hearing back from only 44—with 56 companies ghosting them entirely. This isn't just a candidate experience problem; it's damaging employer brands and creating legal liability.
Why Candidates Don't Apply
Here's a sobering statistic: 80% of candidates who are 75% or better matched for jobs don't apply. When researchers asked why, the answer was telling—many candidates said they won't bother applying to an ATS because they're never going to hear anything back anyway.
This creates a vicious cycle. Candidates resort to spray-and-pray job applications, flooding systems with noise. Employers respond by deploying AI screening tools to filter out the noise. But those tools often reject candidates without explanation, creating legal exposure and further damaging the employer brand.
The Solution: Pre-Apply Validation, Not Post-Apply Filtering
Berg's core argument challenges the industry's decade-long obsession with post-apply AI scoring. Instead, he advocates for pre-apply validation—letting candidates see how well they match a job before they apply.
The benefits are remarkable:
Candidates self-select: When shown they're only a 50% match, 90% of candidates opt out rather than waste their time.
Better data quality: Fake and bot applications drop by 90% when candidates are informed about their match score.
Improved experience: Candidates feel respected and included in the process rather than rejected in the dark.
Legal protection: By keeping candidates in the loop, employers reduce bias and discrimination risks.
Universal Candidate Profiles: The Missing Piece
The core innovation is a universal candidate profile—essentially, a candidate-owned resume that travels with them across platforms. Think of it like sharing a Google Doc with employers.
This solves several problems at once:
Fragmented data: Candidates are currently scattered across multiple systems at the same company—career site, CRM, ATS—with no way to update their information once.
Ghosting: When candidates can easily broadcast their status (took another job, off market, back in the market), recruiters finally have real-time information.
Passive candidate engagement: Companies can finally connect with the 90% of career site visitors who never apply, without adding recruiter workload.
Match2: Overlaying Intelligence Without Disruption
Rather than forcing companies to rip-and-replace their existing systems, Match2 integrates with any ATS or CRM. It works like this:
Candidates upload their profile and see intelligent job matches
Pre-apply validation shows fit scores
When candidates apply, the application goes directly into the company's existing system
As recruiters update dispositions in the ATS, candidates see real-time updates
If a job closes, candidates automatically see similar opportunities
The result: better data, better candidate experience, and no additional work for recruiters.
Transparency as Competitive Advantage
One of Berg's most compelling points: transparency isn't just ethical—it's a business advantage. When a physician uploads their credentials and sees three great matches, and a recruiter reaches out the same day with personalized questions about relocation and EHR systems, that's a consumer-grade experience that fills hard-to-fill roles.
Compare that to the typical ATS experience—which Berg describes as "as hard as doing a tax return just to be in consideration for a job."
The Legal Landscape
Law firms are already proactively recruiting plaintiffs for civil suits against ATS vendors over AI bias. However, Berg makes an important distinction: while vendors are being sued, the real responsibility lies with employers who configure the AI systems. The solution isn't to avoid AI—it's to deploy it transparently, with candidates in the loop rather than in the dark.
Looking Forward: A Two-Sided Marketplace
Burr's vision is ambitious: transform recruiting from a one-sided employer-controlled system into a true two-sided marketplace, similar to Facebook Marketplace or eBay.
Key developments on the horizon:
Application receipts: Candidates should receive confirmation of what they submitted and how they were scored.
Job throttling: When a position receives enough applications, it should pause to let recruiters process them before accepting more.
Candidate-owned "personal ATS": Candidates manage their own profile and can see which companies are actively recruiting them.
Re-recruitment: When companies lay off employees, they can maintain connections and re-recruit them later.
The Bottom Line
The recruiting industry's obsession with post-apply filtering has created a broken candidate experience and legal exposure. The solution isn't better AI screening—it's better pre-apply validation, universal candidate profiles, and transparency at every step.
By putting candidates in the loop, companies can reduce noise, improve quality, and build the kind of consumer-grade hiring experience that actually fills hard-to-fill roles.