[BinaryIdiot]

I would skip the entire step of sending in a resume that has to auto fill that type of information (if possible; not sure what industry you're in).

Almost every single time I've submitted a resume through whatever process a company has to do so (which almost always includes one of these systems) I RARELY hear back in any decent amount of time (if at all; the amount of technology companies that have never sent any type of response to me at all is absolutely staggering).

However, if you can find the recruiter's email address, the email address for the head of a group you want to work for or even a hiring post (like HN's Who's Hiring) where they give you a direct email address to send to, those are almost ALWAYS the best.

I'll never forget applying to one company a while back where I submitted through their online process then, later that day, saw their email address in the Who's Hiring on HN and directly emailed them. I went through two interviews as a result of my direct email then almost a month later got a call from whoever received my first application. The crazy thing is that one was FAST and actually responded to me; most are super slow or never respond to me.

[ThrustVectoring]

Direct email works wonders, especially if you have some kind of in. The first software development job I got was from a friend suggesting I email their CTO (after they had done particularly well in an interview). I hadn't heard anything back in a week through the standard process, got a reply to the direct email trying to schedule an on-site within fifteen minutes.

[stingraycharles]

I indeed have hired people that approached me this way. Some other sources land directly into my inbox (such as StackOverflow or some niche job sites), but generally it's best to take as short a route as possible. Not many people do that, so it's not something I would hold against a candidate.

[SmellTheGlove]

Most don't because it's taught that it's frowned upon. I don't mind at all if people try and connect. For a big company like mine, it's probably less of a risk than the ATS or the HR rep screening it out.

[ThrustVectoring]

I think it makes a difference if you have an explainable excuse to do so - it makes it a lukewarm email instead of a cold one. "You posted your email on a hacker news job thread" or "You interviewed a friend of mine who suggested this" or "I met you at a tech conference and got a business card" or whatever.

[SmellTheGlove]

Warm is certainly always better, but given how opaque ATS processing is and the number of submissions they get, I'm not sure that you're worsening your chances by taking a shot at direct. Look at it this way - if the manager just deletes it as spam but HR screens it in, they'll see it, or vice versa. And if the manager opens it, I don't know many people that would can a resume from a qualified candidate because it came direct. While ATS'es and HR screening are seen as huge obstacles from the outside, on the inside we're pretty happy to get a qualified candidate by any means. And if the candidate isn't qualified, no harm either way.

[BinaryIdiot]

> Warm is certainly always better, but given how opaque ATS processing is and the number of submissions they get, I'm not sure that you're worsening your chances by taking a shot at direct

Completely agree. I always try going the warm route but if I don't have a warm way I'm not going to just give up and go "oh well". Hell no, I'm going to find out as much as I can about the person / group I'm emailing and try to tailor the message so it sounds like they're getting something out of it by opening and reading it versus me trying to "sell them".

Worst case scenario they don't reply. Oh well, life goes on.

[SmellTheGlove]

Excellent advice. I've noticed that it's pretty common for in-house recruiters to be very open to connect on LinkedIn. Reaching out to them first would be my suggestion if you don't have any other connection in the company.