Are you considering other approaches to reduce the number of out-of-scope applications?
For example, by getting people to fill out a form to make their application, which includes a clear, short question up front asking the applicant to confirm their application is related to in-scope topics and not letting them proceed further if they don’t confirm this (just a quick idea that came to mind, there might be better ways of doing it).
I like this. Along the same lines, explicitly communicating to desk-rejected candidates that they are clearly out of scope may discourage repeat out-of-scope applications (if this isn’t already being done).
Are you considering other approaches to reduce the number of out-of-scope applications?
For example, by getting people to fill out a form to make their application, which includes a clear, short question up front asking the applicant to confirm their application is related to in-scope topics and not letting them proceed further if they don’t confirm this (just a quick idea that came to mind, there might be better ways of doing it).
I like this. Along the same lines, explicitly communicating to desk-rejected candidates that they are clearly out of scope may discourage repeat out-of-scope applications (if this isn’t already being done).
Thanks for your suggestions! I’m out of the office, but I will address your comment upon my return.