.webp)
.webp)
Australian employers are finding it harder to identify standout candidates even as application volumes rise and unemployment remains low, according to research commissioned by recruiter Robert Half.
The study found that 93% of employers struggled to distinguish exceptional talent in the current hiring market. It also found that 82% had seen an increase over the past year in candidates applying for roles for which they were overqualified.
The findings suggest that more CVs do not necessarily lead to clearer hiring decisions. Employers said high application volumes and the growing use of AI tools in job searching are reshaping how candidates present themselves and how recruiters screen them.
The survey covered 500 Australian hiring managers across finance and accounting, IT and technology, and human resources. Respondents came from small and medium-sized businesses, large private organisations, publicly listed companies, and the public sector.
Overqualification trend
Overqualification was a widespread feature of the applicant pool, most pronounced in technology roles. In that group, 87% of hiring managers reported more overqualified applicants in the past 12 months, compared with 82% in finance and accounting and 73% in human resources.
The research framed overqualification as a potential risk rather than a straightforward advantage. While candidates may bring stronger experience than a role requires, employers can still question job fit and whether the applicant will stay engaged.
Nicole Gorton, Director at Robert Half, linked the rise in overqualification to patterns in technology and finance applications.
"There's been a noticeable increase in candidates applying for roles below their experience level, particularly in technology and finance. But overqualification is not necessarily a win. An overqualified candidate may bring experience, but if the role underutilises their skills, both engagement and retention can suffer."
Screening pressures
Employers pointed to screening challenges as the most immediate obstacles to identifying top candidates. The research found that 37% cited high application volumes as a barrier to reviewing candidates thoroughly, while another 37% said AI-generated CVs made it harder to assess candidate quality.
A lack of tailored, role-specific skills followed closely, cited by 35% of employers. Limited visibility into soft skills or cultural fit was cited by 31%.
Generic application materials also remained a concern. Some 29% said generic CVs and cover letters that failed to highlight unique strengths made it harder to distinguish candidates. Overqualification or mismatched experience levels was cited by 28%.
Overall, recruiters are facing quantity and quality challenges at the same time. High application volumes can compress screening time, while standardised templates and automated writing tools can make applications look alike, reducing the usefulness of traditional signals such as formatting and tone.
What stands out
The research also asked what helps candidates rise above the crowd. Three factors tied for first: 33% cited experience tailored to the role, 33% cited clear and concise communication in CVs and cover letters, and 33% cited evidence of adaptability or problem-solving skills.
Alignment with company values or culture followed at 31%. Professional presentation and attention to detail came next at 29%. Unique achievements or a distinct career story, and demonstrated understanding of the company or industry, each scored 27%.
The findings emphasise specificity and clarity in applications, even as employers report that more submissions look similar. They also show that hiring managers still value cues that are difficult to verify from a CV alone, such as problem-solving approach and cultural alignment.
Gorton said many hiring managers were grappling with higher volumes and uniform application materials at the same time.
"Hiring managers are navigating higher volumes of applications and many are struggling to distinguish the best person for their open role. Uniform formatting, templated language, and AI-generated content often blur the differences between applicants, making it more challenging to evaluate genuine skills and suitability."
She said employers were looking for signals that reflect fit for the specific job and the organisation.
"Amid the noise of high application volumes and AI-generated content, employers are focused on indicators of role-specific experience, problem-solving capabilities, and cultural alignment. Candidates who can effectively demonstrate these attributes stand out in an otherwise crowded and undifferentiated talent pool."