Community Feedback
We love to hear your feedback. Your suggestions and ideas are important to us. Our feedback forum is a great place to post your ideas and vote on others. Please share your detailed use case and how the proposed enhancements can increase value to your business. We do read all of your posts, but may not be able to respond to all comments.
More information on the status of submitted ideas can be found here
Currently, PageUp only allows applications to be disclosed or undisclosed individually. During large recruitment campaigns, we often have hundreds of applications in an "Undisclosed" status. Manually updating each one is time-consuming and inefficient.
Proposed Workaround (Not Ideal):
Create a new job requisition
Bulk apply applicants from the original job (in Undisclosed status) to the new job
Disclose applications in bulk on the new job
This workaround is cumbersome and risks data integrity issues, such as duplicating applications or losing tracking history.
Voting for the Suggested Enhancement:
Introduce a bulk action feature that allows users to:
Select multiple applications on a job
Disclose or undisclose them in one action
This could be implemented via checkboxes and a bulk action dropdown in the job's application list view.
Business Value:
Efficiency: Saves significant time during high-volume campaigns
User Experience: Reduces manual effort and frustration for recruiters
Data Integrity: Avoids the need for workaround solutions that may compromise reporting or audit trails
Scalability: Supports large-scale recruitment processes more effectively
My thanks John
Hi John - I will give you an example - we have large campaigns where we distribute the applicants to the actual jobs they have been appointed to. Splitting those 1k Plus applicants across multiple jobs and applying them to all those requisitions takes time. we have to apply them in an Undisclosed state, then when we are ready to offer them we need to manually disclose each application.
We can now bulk apply with copy of application form (thanks for that) and select to not disclose the application at the time - this is great. This is half the picture.
If we do not Hide the applications then the first applicants start talking to their peers (YAY! I got a position) and the rest start getting frantic asking where is their job??
But disclosing the application means having to crack each individual application and selection to Undisclose for everyone. and also run risk of missing one and leaving it Undisclosed
Ability to Bulk Undisclose/ (even bulk hide) would be extremely useful
Hi Mark - thank you so much for your feedback.
Based on leading practices, recruiters often decide not to disclose an application with a select or high-touch prospect with whom they are still in exploratory discussions but have not yet made the decision to move through with an application. This practice makes sense for recruiters who would like to keep track of their proactive sourcing activity in connection with the job that they are working on. An excellent example would be a passive applicant who was manually added to the job requisition for an executive position after the recruiter found them through a professional network. To my knowledge, this is one of the reasons why the undisclosed / disclosed option hasn't been added to the bulk actions list due to its ad-hoc use case nature.
Having said that, I'm extremely interested in finding out more about your use case and business reason, where you appear to have a lot of candidates in your campaign yet claim to want to keep their applications undisclosed.
Looking forward to your response.