Introduction: The Silent Cost No One Talks About

You don’t notice it at first.

You post a job. You get responses. You tell yourself this is a good problem to have, plenty of interest, high reach, strong demand.

But soon, the volume becomes noise. The inbox becomes a black hole.
And before long, you’re making decisions based on who’s left, not who’s best.

Welcome to the modern hiring experience, where fatigue quietly reshapes outcomes, where great candidates are buried under bad processes, and where the system fails not because it’s malicious… but because it’s misaligned.

This isn’t just a job seeker’s story.
It’s also a founder’s. A recruiter’s. A manager’s.
Because no matter which side of the hiring table you sit on, the cracks are showing.

Let’s walk through it, clearly, honestly, and practically.

When “Good Enough” Becomes the Goal

Years ago, I hired three people back-to-back under pressure. We needed to fill roles quickly. The candidate quality was poor, but the vacancies couldn’t stay open.

I compromised.

I told myself we’d manage the gaps.
They didn’t make it past probation.

It didn’t bankrupt us. It didn’t explode in drama.
But it cost time, momentum, and energy I didn’t have.

The real cost wasn’t just restarting the hiring process.
It was the loss of belief, the moment you go from, “Let’s build something great,” to “Let’s just get through this.”

From Fatigue to Friction, A Day in the Process

Now switch seats.

You're a job seeker in South Africa, or anywhere with a wide job gap and limited opportunities.

You’re unemployed, qualified, and actively applying.

You find five roles. You apply.
Then another five. And another five.

Hours pass. You’re exhausted. You’ve only submitted 15 applications.
Not because you weren’t working, but because each site, each portal, each form demands the same information over and over again.

Your CV holds it all. But the system doesn’t care.
You’re forced to retype your history line by line.
Your time is devalued before the hiring process even begins.

The friction builds. The fatigue sets in.
And by the 20th application, your energy is gone.

This isn’t laziness. It’s inefficiency.
It’s a workflow that drains the very people it’s trying to attract.

The Joke That Isn’t Funny

Ask any recruiter or hiring manager, and they’ll tell you, with a half-smile:

“Just wait until the job goes live. The flood begins.”

They’ve said it so often, it’s become a meme.

Because they know what’s coming:

• Dozens of applicants with no relevant experience

• Pages of buzzwords and keyword stuffing

• People applying out of hope, not fit

It’s not that job seekers are wrong to try.
They’re being forced to be aspirational, there aren’t enough jobs to go around.

But that sheer volume dilutes signal.
Even great candidates blend in.
The inbox becomes white noise.

Recruiters don’t talk about this like a crisis, they laugh about it because they’re tired.

What Gets Missed (and Who)

Years ago, I rejected a candidate.

She made it far in the process, but something in the interview didn’t click.
Later, I found out she joined a competitor.

They raved about her.

Turns out, she was exactly what we needed just not in that moment, not in that mindset, not with the energy I had left.

I was drained.
I needed clarity.
I settled for comfort.

She got away.

Multiply that story by thousands.
Now imagine how many high-potential hires never even get the callback.

The Fear Beneath It All

Hiring isn’t just about skills.
It’s about impact.

Founders, managers, and recruiters carry a quiet fear few talk about:

What if I hire someone who breaks the team?

You’ve built culture. You’ve built momentum.
And one wrong person can poison it from the inside.

So you hesitate.
You delay.
You rationalize inaction.

The cost of hiring the wrong person is high.
But the cost of hiring no one can be just as bad.

This fear, unspoken, constant, shapes the fatigue behind every screening decision.

The System is the Problem, Not the People

Let’s get honest.

This isn’t a story about lazy job seekers.
It’s not about careless recruiters.
It’s not even about overworked founders.

It’s about systems that can’t scale gracefully, processes built for compliance, not connection.

We designed workflows to filter for efficiency.
We forgot to build for humanity.

• Resume screeners that penalize formatting

• Applicant portals that bury strong candidates

• “Open door” cultures where no one dares speak

• Hiring loops with no closure or feedback

No wonder everyone’s burned out.

The system’s not just flawed, it’s exhausting.
And exhaustion never produces great outcomes.

What Better Looks Like (and Feels Like)

Here’s the contrast.

You run a hiring process that works.

The job ad is clear.
The portal respects the applicant’s time.
The recruiter feels supported.
The founder trusts the process.

You get ten great applicants.
They all show up prepared.
The interviews are productive.
The hardest part? Choosing who to hire.

That’s not a fantasy.
That’s a system designed with alignment in mind.

And when the decision’s made, even the rejections are handled well.
You leave candidates with clarity, respect, and direction.

They may not have gotten the job.
But they walk away better informed and better equipped.

That’s what real hiring feels like.
Not perfect, but human.

A Different Way Forward

The tool I’m building isn’t a silver bullet.
But it’s designed around a simple premise:

Reduce fatigue. Increase clarity. Preserve dignity.

Here’s how the core system works:

• Vacancy holder posts a job

• Applicants submit their CV + psychometric-aligned inputs

• The system returns a short list based on alignment and culture fit

• The vacancy holder interviews from a clear, manageable pool

• Everyone else receives an intelligent rejection, with redirection

Not “Sorry, you weren’t selected.”
But:

“Here’s why it wasn’t a match.
Here’s where your skills align better.
Here’s what you can work on if this is the kind of job you want next time.”

This isn’t fluff. It’s function.
It’s the kind of system that gives everyone back their time, and some of their hope.

Conclusion: Less Noise. More Signal.

The hiring process isn’t broken because people are lazy.
It’s broken because we’ve normalized misalignment.

Recruiters are expected to be gatekeepers and nurturers.
Job seekers are expected to be resilient and robotic.
Founders are expected to move fast and make no mistakes.

That’s unsustainable.

But there’s a better path, one that respects attention, context, and humanity.

Hiring isn’t just a transaction.
It’s one of the most high-leverage decisions any company makes.
Let’s stop treating it like admin.
Let’s start treating it like the system it really is.

One with friction.
One with fatigue.
One we can rebuild, if we’re honest about what it’s doing to all of us.

Like this post?
You can subscribe to the newsletter for more grounded insights on how we fix hiring, from both sides of the table.