A number of clients come to us asking why hiring feels even harder than before, especially since it’s been several years since the COVID-19 era shakeup in the labor market. Truthfully, you’re not imagining it.
The instinct is to assume the applicant pool has shrunk. In fact, one report found that five years ago the average job posting attracted around 100 applications. Today that number is 242, significantly up with the rise of AI in hiring (read more here).
It’s a strange whiplash if you think about it. Back in 2021, we were in the Great Resignation, when people were quitting in droves and employers couldn’t hold onto anyone. Now we’re in the opposite extreme, the Great Stay, where good, qualified people are holding onto whatever job they have and barely anyone is willing to move because they’re afraid of AI taking their job or losing their security. And somehow, through both extremes, hiring keeps getting harder.
So if it’s not that there are fewer candidates, then what’s actually going on? Well, the applicants are up, but the candidates aren’t.
Here’s what’s really happening in the market right now, and what to do about it.
The Data Confirms What You’re Feeling
We talked about this in our May jobs report blog, and the newer numbers tell more of the same story.
The BLS’s June 2026 jobs report showed employers added just 57,000 jobs, well under the 100,000 to 115,000 economists expected. April and May also got revised down, by a combined 74,000 jobs. This tells us that hiring is slowing down, not speeding up.
Now here’s the number that actually explains what you’re feeling. The most recent JOLTS data (through May) showed job openings sitting near a two-year high at 7.6 million. That might be true, but the hires rate held flat at 3.3%, and the quits rate held flat at 1.9%, both still near record lows. What this means is that openings are up, but the number of people actually moving into new jobs isn’t. Indeed’s Hiring Lab put it well: the market is “moving, but not moving along.” LinkedIn’s data tells the same story from a different angle, with hiring nationally down about 5% from a year ago and over 20% below pre-pandemic levels.
Put those two numbers side by side and here’s the problem: the market got louder, but it didn’t get fuller. More applications are showing up in your inbox, but far fewer people are actually changing jobs than there used to be. Those aren’t the same thing, and mixing them up is exactly what makes this so confusing.
Applications per job posting have more than doubled since 2021, but that’s not because more people are job hunting. It’s because AI made it effortless for the same relatively small group of active job seekers to apply to far more jobs than any one person used to (read more here). The market got noisier while the number of real, qualified, willing-to-move candidates behind that noise stayed stuck near record lows.
The bottom line? You’re getting more applications and fewer real candidates, at the same time.
So if the extra volume in your inbox isn’t extra candidates, where is the actual movement going? Increasingly, to your bigger competitors first.
The Candidates Are There (They’re Just Going to Bigger Companies First)
So obviously not all resumes are AI robots. There are many real job seekers out there, but as I hinted at the beginning, most are seeking security first, and our hunch is that’s with bigger, more stable employers.
BambooHR’s research looked at five years of hiring data across tens of millions of applications and found that as application volume has climbed, it hasn’t climbed evenly. Large employers (151 or more employees) grew their share of total applications from 41% in 2021 to 45% in 2025. Mid-sized employers held roughly steady. Small employers, under 25 people, saw their share of applications fall from 21% to 15% over the same stretch.
Not in the data, but our personal opinion: the largest of those large employers (think 10,000+) are probably seeing an even bigger slice of the pie than that 151+ bucket average suggests.
Think about it. The applicant pool isn’t smaller. It’s just increasingly flowing toward the big, recognizable names first, and growing companies are getting a shrinking slice of it.
That lines up with what we’ve been hearing directly from candidates. On the Growth Shift Podcast with Jennifer Stile, Mike put it this way: “there’s always the old tension between labor and capital. And in a lot of ways, capital is winning right now.” He also mentioned hearing that same fear on the Owner’s Diary podcast, where he described candidates who are “afraid to leave their job” over real concerns about whether the move is worth the risk in this era of AI.
That hesitation is exactly why the big, recognizable names are winning right now. When someone’s nervous about moving at all, they’re going to bet on the safest-looking option first.
Posting a Job Isn’t a Sourcing Strategy
If your hiring process still starts and ends with a job posting, you’re fighting for a shrinking share of an already selective pool, and you’re likely doing it in the most crowded, least efficient channel available.
CareerPlug’s most recent Recruiting Metrics Report, based on hiring data from over 60,000 small businesses, found that job boards produce 61% of applications but only 42% of hires. We’re not knocking job postings (even Amazon and Disney still do marketing, despite everyone already knowing who they are, because it still has its value and its place). Our argument is about that other 58%. Where is it actually coming from, and why aren’t you tapping into it?
My point is simple: stop treating job boards as your entire strategy, or you’re only ever playing for 42% results (or worse, depending on how competitive your market is). And we’re assuming you want to fill 100% of your open roles, not less than half of them. So what else should you do?
Glad you asked! Wouldn’t it be great if qualified candidates who aren’t even actively looking started noticing you, and were willing to take a chance on you anyway? Well, welcome to passive sourcing.
The Fix Is Going Out and Finding the Candidates Who Aren’t Applying Anywhere
Here’s the thing about that 58% gap job boards can’t close: roughly 75% of the workforce isn’t actively job hunting at any given moment. They’re not on Indeed, and they’re not scrolling job boards on their lunch break. They’re comfortable enough, or hesitant enough, or simply not thinking about a new job, but they still have the skills and experience you need. Reaching them takes a different approach than posting and waiting.
That’s the whole idea behind passive sourcing, which comes down to four things:
- Dedicated Sourcing Team. Big employers already have recruiters whose whole job is finding people who aren’t applying anywhere. That’s exactly the advantage you’re up against, and it’s the first thing you need to close the gap.
- Multi-Channel Outreach. A passive candidate ignores one message on one platform easily. They’re much harder to ignore across email, text, phone, and professional platforms at once.
- Network & Database Access. The more networks and databases you can tap into beyond a single job board, the more of that 75% is actually in play for you.
- Strong Employer Brand. This is the one that matters most against big-name competitors. A passive candidate is going to look you up before responding to anything. If your website, reviews, and social presence don’t tell a genuine, compelling story, you lose to the recognizable name every time, even if your opportunity is better (read more here).
None of these are meant to replace job boards. Together, they close the other 58%. Just like investing, you need to diversify to get ahead!
P.S. – We put all four pillars into a one-page cheat sheet, along with what to fix before you even start outreach (download the free cheat sheet here!).
Don’t Shrink Your Own Pool on Top of Everything Else
Final piece of advice, and it’s one a lot of companies do to themselves without realizing it. You just put in the work to go find candidates who weren’t even looking. Don’t turn around and filter half of them out with requirements you didn’t actually need.
Mike made this point on The Automated Advantage podcast with Greg Clarke: “we can tell you, hey, do you really need this certification? Because if you do, that’s going to take out 20% of the job market. If you don’t, you got a greater talent pool.” Every requirement on a job posting is a filter, and every filter that isn’t truly necessary is candidates you’re cutting before you’ve even started looking.
Before your next search, ask what the role actually requires versus what would just be nice to have. In a market this tight, that one distinction can be the difference between finding someone and coming up empty.
Stop Waiting for Candidates – Go Find Them!
The applicant pool didn’t completely dry up. It’s just increasingly flowing to the companies with the biggest names and the loudest job postings, while growing companies get left waiting on a shrinking share of it. Add in a market where candidates are only just starting to feel comfortable moving again, and posting a job and hoping is a losing strategy right now.
Going out and finding candidates who never applied anywhere takes real resources: a dedicated sourcing team, multiple outreach channels, access to networks most growing companies don’t have sitting in-house. We get it. That’s a lot to build yourself, especially if you’re a growing company without a full recruiting team behind you.
That’s the whole reason Hoops exists. We work with growing companies who want the same sourcing power as the 800-pound gorillas in their market, without the 800-pound price tag. You tap into a shared pool of sourcing resources and only pay for the slice you actually need, so a company your size can compete for talent the way a much bigger one does.
👉 Schedule a free discovery call with Hoops to learn more about our sourcing solutions
Build Your Winning Team. Hire and Scale Talent.
