Career development

7h

LinkedIn Clone for Regional Market

I want to launch a professional networking site dedicated to our local market - think LinkedIn, but tuned entirely to job searching within one country. Users should be able to register for free, build a profile, and then decide whether to upgrade to paid membership tiers for added visibility or advanced tools. The platform must cater to both job seekers and employers: * Job seekers: create... résumés, search and filter openings, apply in-platform, and message recruiters. * Employers: post jobs, run deep candidate searches, and manage an employer-branding page that shows off culture, benefits, and open roles. Core requirements - Free email/social signup with secure authentication - Tiered membership system (stripe, paypal, or similar) with an admin panel to manage plans - Modern search engine for jobs and candidates, including location, keywords, and experience filters - Responsive web interface; mobile-first design is ideal - Real-time notifications (new jobs that match, application updates, candidate messages) - Scalable tech stack (React / Angular / Vue on the front end; Node / Django / Laravel or similar on the back end; SQL or NoSQL database) - Clear documentation and handover of full source code Acceptance criteria 1. A user can complete the entire job-application flow (one format for all registered companies) - from sign-up to submitting an application -- without errors. 2. An employer can publish a job, locate candidates via search, and view analytics on their branding page and we will standardize it. 3. Membership upgrade triggers immediate access to premium features and records the transaction in the admin dashboard. 4. All pages load in under two seconds on a standard 4G connection. If you've built job boards, social-network features, or SaaS membership systems before, let's talk through your approach, timeline, and any framework recommendations. more

Career development

12h

Patient Zero Wasn't the Virus - Conservative Angle

History rarely announces its turning points with a trumpet blast. More often, it whispers through a memo, a footnote, or in this case, an email quietly shuffled into digital oblivion.

And while Americans were told to mask up, shut down, and fall in line, one man allegedly treated transparency like it was a contagious disease.

Let's begin with the uncomfortable truth now clawing its way into... daylight: a top adviser to Dr. Anthony Fauci has been indicted for allegedly hiding information about the origins of COVID-19. Not misplacing it. Not misunderstanding it. Hiding it. As in deliberately steering facts into the witness protection program.

According to reports, Dr. David Morens, a longtime senior adviser at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, stands accused of conspiracy, falsifying records, and obstructing federal investigations. That's not a résumé enhancement. That's a legal avalanche.

This wasn't a sleepy agency filing tax forms. This was ground zero for pandemic policy. The place where "the science" was minted, polished, and shipped to the public as gospel truth.

And yet, behind the curtain, we're learning that emails were deleted, communications rerouted to private accounts, and discussions carefully curated to avoid public scrutiny. If transparency were oxygen, this operation was running at high altitude with a broken tank.

One email cited in the indictment reads like something out of a political thriller, except it's real life: Morens allegedly wrote about learning "how to make emails disappear" before FOIA requests could retrieve them. Not exactly the behavior of someone confident in the integrity of their work.

Another message suggested sending sensitive information to private Gmail accounts or even delivering it by hand to avoid creating a paper trail. At that point, you're not managing information -- you're staging a heist.

Because while this alleged shell game was unfolding behind the scenes, the American public was being told to trust the experts. Trust the process. Trust the narrative. Questioning any of it, of course, made you a conspiracy theorist, a science denier, or if you were particularly unlucky, a social media exile.

The irony isn't subtle. The same institutions that demanded blind faith were, according to these allegations, actively blinding the public.

Now let's talk motive, because deception without purpose is just chaos, and this was anything but random.

If the origins of COVID-19 pointed toward a lab leak tied to Chinese research, the geopolitical implications would have been enormous. It would raise questions about funding, oversight, and international accountability. It would also shatter the carefully constructed narrative that the virus emerged neatly from nature like a tragic accident.

And it might obscure the fact that Fauci partnered with the Chinese in development of the virus and the infamous "gain of function".

That's not science. That's storytelling with a budget.

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche didn't mince words, calling the alleged actions a "profound abuse of trust." That phrase carries weight, though it almost feels too polite. When citizens are making life-altering decisions based on information that may have been filtered or manipulated, "abuse of trust" starts to sound like calling a hurricane a light breeze.

And yet, don't hold your breath waiting for a chorus of apologies.

The architects of panic rarely circle back for accountability. The media outlets that spent years ridiculing alternative theories aren't exactly lining up to issue retractions with the same enthusiasm they used to mock dissent. And the public figures who insisted this was all settled science? Many have simply... moved on.

It's a fascinating phenomenon. When predictions of catastrophe don't age well, they don't get corrected -- they get archived and quietly forgotten, like embarrassing photos in a family album nobody opens.

Businesses shuttered. Schools closed. Families were divided over mandates that were presented as unquestionable. Careers were derailed for those who dared to ask whether the story made sense. And through it all, the phrase "follow the science" echoed like a commandment etched in stone.

Except now we're discovering that the stone may have been carved from selective data.

Historically, this isn't new. Governments have long struggled with the temptation to control narratives during crises. From wartime propaganda to intelligence missteps, the pattern repeats: information is curated "for the greater good," and the public is expected to accept it without inspection.

What makes this moment different is the scale. The COVID-19 pandemic wasn't a regional conflict or a contained incident. It was global, pervasive, and deeply personal. Every household felt its impact. Which means any manipulation of the underlying facts didn't just shape policy -- it shaped lives.

Because deception rarely travels alone. It brings friends. If one piece of data was suppressed, it's reasonable to wonder how many others were nudged, edited, or quietly shelved.

That doesn't mean every aspect of the pandemic response was fraudulent. But it does mean the foundation deserves scrutiny, not reverence.

The defenders of the old narrative will argue that decisions were made under pressure, that uncertainty justified aggressive measures, and that hindsight is unfair. There's some truth in that. Crises force imperfect choices.

But there's a line between imperfect decisions and deliberate concealment. One is human. The other is calculated.

And if the allegations against Morens hold up in court, we're not talking about a gray area. We're talking about a coordinated effort to manage perception at the expense of truth.

That's not a mistake. That's a strategy.

Skeptical, for starters. And perhaps a little less willing to accept declarations of "settled science" without asking who settled it and how. Trust, once fractured, doesn't snap back into place like a rubber band. It lingers, brittle and uncertain.

In a strange way, this indictment may accomplish something the pandemic itself could not: it might force a reckoning with how information is handled when the stakes are high. Not just by scientists, but by institutions, media, and government agencies that act as intermediaries between data and the public.

Because the real lesson here isn't about one man or one office. It's about a system that allowed narrative management to masquerade as objective truth.

And that's a far more contagious problem than any virus.

As the legal process unfolds, more details will emerge. Some will confirm suspicions. Others may complicate the picture. But one thing is already clear: the story Americans were told is no longer the only version on the table.

And when the truth finally steps out of the shadows, it doesn't ask for permission. It doesn't negotiate. It simply stands there, unblinking, daring anyone to look away.

The question is whether the people who once demanded unquestioning trust are ready to face it. more

Career development

12h

Is It Safe to Make Your Security Clearance Information Public?

There's always been something funny about the cleared world: the actual work is often wrapped in layers of "need to know," but the clearance itself is sometimes proudly advertised. We spend years learning not to talk about what we do... while simultaneously putting "TS/SCI eligible" in bold on LinkedIn and résumés. It's one of the few professions where the details are hush hush, but the ability to... access the details can become networking material.

Ironwill5 writes:

A friend of the family publicly posted "Secret Clearance" on a LinkedIn profile as part of the verbiage immediately seen on the person's landing page. I was shocked when I saw it.

I'm not an expert and don't know if this is a violation vs. stupid, but at a minimum it seems like it would be a security risk for bad actors to potentially compromise this person? Who BTW works in IT for DHS. I thought clearances were to be kept more on the down low and suggested to the person they remove the clearance and stop advertising it.

ADVERTISING YOUR CLEARANCE STATUS

Many cleared professionals voluntarily disclose their clearance status on resumes, LinkedIn profiles, and job applications because it's generally a hard requirement the cleared community. ClearanceJobs has even covered this directly in the article "Should I List a Prior Clearance on My Resume?" which notes that listing a prior clearance can help demonstrate that you are "clearable" and potentially easier to process for future access.

The important distinction is:

* Your clearance status itself is not classified.

* But details surrounding classified programs, SAPs, SCI compartments, systems, locations, or operational specifics should not be publicly disclosed and may be classified or sensitive.

There's a difference between professionally signaling your cleared experience and oversharing your digital footprint. Public networking sites like LinkedIn can be a playground for scammers, foreign intelligence collectors, phishing campaigns, and anyone looking to piece together information about the cleared workforce. Individually, a job title, clearance level, contract location, or program reference may seem harmless. Combined, they can paint a very detailed picture.

That doesn't mean cleared professionals should disappear from the internet. It just means being intentional about where and how you network. Platforms built specifically for the cleared community, like ClearanceJobs, offer a more controlled environment designed around security-conscious hiring instead of mass public exposure. In a world where operational security increasingly overlaps with online behavior, smart networking is part of the job.

Much about the clearance process resembles the Pirate's Code: "more what you'd call guidelines than actual rules." For this reason, we maintain ClearanceJobsBlog.com - a forum where clearance seekers can ask the cleared community for advice on their specific security concerns. Ask CJ explores questions posed on the ClearanceJobs Blog forum, emails received, and comments from this site. This article is intended as general information only and should not be construed as legal advice. Consult an attorney regarding your specific situation. more

Career development

13h

Steve Jobs asked this one question before hiring anyone

Apple founder relied on personality assessment and casual conversation rather than résumés to evaluate candidates for his team

Apple founder relied on personality assessment and casual conversation rather than résumés to evaluate candidates for his teamSteve Jobs had a secret to spotting talent at Apple: forget the résumé. The Apple founder relied on what became known as the "beer test" a... deceptively simple assessment that judged whether he'd enjoy a casual conversation with a candidate more than their technical credentials.

Instead of grilling candidates on skills, Jobs would take them out for walks and ask, a bunch of odd personal questions ,not exactly rehearsed. His go to favorite was, "What did you do last summer?" The actual details mattered less than the way they spoke about it.

He was basically reading the room, you know, checking whether the exchange felt fluid and sincere, sort of easy, not stiff. Then, later on he would sit with just one thought: "Would I actually sit down for a beer with this person?"

The "beer test" was Jobs' kind of proxy, for spotting people he could actually work with. He felt that personality, attitude, and this messy little interpersonal chemistry, mattered just as much as professional qualifications, when he was putting together teams.

And when the answer to his internal question was no, it would often become a quiet warning sign, even if the résumé looked super impressive, like, really impressive.

Jobs took hiring seriously . In a 2008 Fortune interview , he talked about discovering great talent as "finding the needles in the haystack." By then, he had interviewed well over 5,000 candidates across his career. Still, he admitted his call, it rarely came down to logic only.

"In the end, it's ultimately based on your gut, how do I feel about this person? What are they like when they're challenged?" Jobs said. It wasn't carelessness but a well-thought-out strategy. He knew that good teams weren't just competent; they also had to connect.

Other leaders too have followed a similar path. Amazon's CEO, Andy Jassy, focuses more on attitude than background, stating that initial career success depends on personality and behavior. more

Career development

13h

Professional Functional CV Development

I'm looking for a skilled résumé writer who can craft a polished, modern CV in a strictly functional format. My goal is to highlight transferable skills and core achievements so I can stand out to recruiters regardless of job title history. Scope of work * Interview me briefly (email or video) to gather background, accomplishments, metrics, and keywords. * Draft a functional-style CV that... foregrounds skills clusters, followed by concise work history. * Optimise wording for Applicant Tracking Systems (ATS) while keeping a human, engaging tone. * Deliver in both editable Word and ready-to-send PDF versions, with consistent typography and clean layout. * Provide one revision round to fine-tune content and design once I supply feedback. If you've created successful functional CVs before -- especially those that passed ATS scans -- let me see a sample. Clear, error-free writing, subtle design, and strict confidentiality are a must. more

Career development

14h

Doomjobbing: Expert explains how to avoid the trap of endless job applications - IFA Magazine

If you mix doomscrolling with job hunting, you get what's called: doomjobbing. If you've ever found yourself idly scrolling through jobs and applying for any role that vaguely fits your skillset -- you've doomjobbed.

Doomjobbing (like doomscrolling) feels draining and demotivating, as it involves applying to multiple jobs quickly without putting much thought into it. It often leads to rejection... emails or no response at all, which results in disappointment and frustration.

To help you avoid falling into doomjobbing, Peter Duris, AI career tool Kickresume's CEO and Co-founder, has prepared tips and advice for job seekers who are feeling demotivated in their search.

Peter Duris, CEO and Co-Founder of Kickresume, comments:

"Doomjobbing, which means applying to lots of jobs without much thought, ultimately leads to more disappointment than success. While it may be tempting to hit "Easy Apply" on everything that catches your eye on websites like LinkedIn, it's not the best way to go about job hunting.

"It's best to be intentional with your job search. Take your time applying to relevant roles and check multiple job boards . Don't fall into the trap of clicking 'apply' to every job you come across where you vaguely meet the criteria -- as this can become discouraging.

Tips for jobseekers

* Narrow down the search: To avoid doomjobbing, create a list of criteria on what you want from a future job. This can include only applying for jobs with relevant job titles, setting a salary range, and filtering by the type of work arrangement you want. You could also create a shortlist of companies you want to work for that align with your values, whether that's companies known for their sustainable practices or for their flexibility. Having clear filters makes it easier to focus on roles you genuinely want, instead of applying out of habit. Once you've found roles that match your criteria, make sure you also meet the requirements in the job description.

* Tailor each application: To improve your chances of landing an interview, it's worth tailoring your application to each role. You don't need to completely rewrite your resume for every role, but make sure it focuses on the skills and experience most relevant to the job you're applying for. If a cover letter is required, it should be personalized to the role and company. You can also use AI to save time, but always review and edit everything before sending it.

* Make sure your resume is ATS optimized: Applicant tracking systems (ATS) are software tools that filter resumes for hiring managers. By scanning for relevant keywords, these scanners are used to narrow down the volume of applicants and select the most relevant ones. To make sure your resume gets into the hands of recruiters, optimizing for ATS is vital. You can do this by embedding keywords into your resume and using a clear and easily-scannable format with simple headings and bullet points. There are online tools available to check if your resume is optimized or not.

* Turn on job alerts: On some job boards, you can turn on job alerts to get notified when a relevant role is posted. This way you're only notified about the jobs you want and can be one of the first applicants to apply. This can help boost your chances while streamlining the process.

* Don't feel demotivated by the competition: On platforms like LinkedIn, job ads might show how many people have applied for the job -- while this figure might look very high, it often includes everyone who clicked "Apply", not just people who fully completed their application. Many applicants won't have tailored their resume to fit the role, and may not have the right skills or qualifications, so they won't necessarily be a meaningful competition.

If you're a job seeker struggling to find a relevant role, there are many people in the same boat right now. The job market is tough, and more and more people are relying on AI to help them land a role. In Kickresume's recent research, they found that 1.2 million people used AI-powered features last year. more

Career development

15h

I was rejected for a job 6 minutes after I applied. I told the company that AI was screening out strong candidates.

Tellez said he told the company's HR chief that AI was filtering out qualified candidates.

This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Tony Tellez, a 49-year-old IT professional based in Indianapolis. This story has been edited for length and clarity.

I started my career at the entry level and worked my way up to essentially running IT companies in the managed-services space,... overseeing IT operations for multiple clients. Recently, I found myself on the job market for the first time in 10 years. It's changed a lot.

I got some interviews right away, but I also got a lot of rejections. Nobody likes to be rejected. I've got children, rent, and animals to take care of, and those responsibilities start to weigh on you.

One Sunday night, my frustrations reached a breaking point. I had applied for a senior position at a managed-services firm that I was more than qualified for around 11:15 p.m. About six minutes later, I received an email that simply said, "We have declined your application." The company didn't even provide a reason like, "we're pursuing other candidates."

It didn't make any sense. I applied at a time when no one was likely to be manually reviewing résumés and rejecting them. I reread the job listing, and it clearly said that a bachelor's degree -- something I don't have -- was preferred but not required.

Also, my best friend is an HR consultant, and she made sure my résumé included all the necessary keywords. I even ran it through an open-source applicant-tracking system to check that it was well-optimized.

So, after I saw that rejection email come in, I went to the company's LinkedIn page, found their HR director, and sent him this message.

I sent it partly because it's already frustrating for someone to lose a job and have to search for a new one. It's even worse when you have to deal with rejection from a robot.

Another reason is that I've developed and deployed applicant tracking systems, so I understand what it takes to configure them properly. There's a problem here, and the company's leadership may not know that they're potentially missing out on quality candidates.

I haven't heard anything back, and I probably won't. The job listing is no longer up, so I don't know if it was filled. I just know that I'm not ready to retire anytime soon. I love working. I love fixing things.

I've since used AI to make my résumé more AI-friendly. You've got to fight fire with fire. However, I've also started targeting companies that say in their job listings that every résumé submitted is reviewed by a human. In some of my past jobs, I was responsible for hiring people, and I prided myself on reading every résumé that came in. It's crazy how much the job market has changed.

Read the original article on Business Insider more

Career development

15h

Steve Jobs had a simple question he asked every job candidate and it had nothing to do with work

Steve Jobs had an unusual way of deciding whether someone should be hired at Apple. Instead of relying only on technical skills, formal interviews or résumé details, the Apple founder is said to have used what became known as the "beer test." The idea was simple: if Jobs felt he would not enjoy having a casual conversation or grabbing a beer with a candidate, the person was unlikely to get the... job, as highlighted in a Fortune report. Jobs believed personality, attitude and the ability to connect with people mattered just as much as professional qualifications when building teams at Apple.The "beer test" was not actually about alcohol. Instead, it was Jobs' way of understanding whether a candidate could hold a natural conversation outside a formal interview setting. Reports say Jobs would sometimes take candidates on walks during interviews and ask unexpected personal questions instead of focusing only on technical topics.One of the questions he reportedly liked asking was: "What did you do last summer?". The purpose was not to find a correct answer but to see how naturally the person responded and whether the conversation felt comfortable and genuine.At the end of the interaction, Jobs would reportedly ask himself: "Would I have a beer with this person? Would I talk to him or her in a relaxed way while taking a walk?"If the answer was no, that often became a warning sign for him.In a 2008 interview with Fortune, Jobs explained how seriously he took hiring decisions. "Finding the needles in the haystack," Jobs said while describing the challenge of recruiting the right people. By that time, he said he had interviewed more than 5,000 candidates during his career. Jobs also admitted that interview decisions often came down to instinct rather than just qualifications. "So in the end, it's ultimately based on your gut," he said. "How do I feel about this person? What are they like when they're challenged?"Other CEOs also use personality testsJobs was not the only business leader known for unusual interview methods. Many executives today use informal tests to understand a candidate's personality and behaviour outside rehearsed interview answers. For example, Amazon CEO Andy Jassy stresses on the importance of attitude. He once said that success early in a career often depends heavily on personality and behaviour. more

Career development

15h

An IT pro was rejected for a job 6 minutes after he applied. He reached out to the company.

This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Tony Tellez, a 49-year-old IT professional based in Indianapolis. This story has been edited for length and clarity.

I started my career at the entry level and worked my way up to essentially running IT companies in the managed-services space, overseeing IT operations for multiple clients. Recently, I found myself on the job market for the... first time in 10 years. It's changed a lot.

I got some interviews right away, but I also got a lot of rejections. Nobody likes to be rejected. I've got children, rent, and animals to take care of, and those responsibilities start to weigh on you.

One Sunday night, my frustrations reached a breaking point. I had applied for a senior position at a managed-services firm that I was more than qualified for around 11:15 p.m. About six minutes later, I received an email that simply said, "We have declined your application." The company didn't even provide a reason like, "we're pursuing other candidates."

It didn't make any sense. I applied at a time when no one was likely to be manually reviewing résumés and rejecting them. I reread the job listing, and it clearly said that a bachelor's degree -- something I don't have -- was preferred but not required.

Also, my best friend is an HR consultant, and she made sure my résumé included all the necessary keywords. I even ran it through an open-source applicant-tracking system to check that it was well-optimized.

So, after I saw that rejection email come in, I went to the company's LinkedIn page, found their HR director, and sent him this message.

I sent it partly because it's already frustrating for someone to lose a job and have to search for a new one. It's even worse when you have to deal with rejection from a robot.

Another reason is that I've developed and deployed applicant tracking systems, so I understand what it takes to configure them properly. There's a problem here, and the company's leadership may not know that they're potentially missing out on quality candidates.

I haven't heard anything back, and I probably won't. The job listing is no longer up, so I don't know if it was filled. I just know that I'm not ready to retire anytime soon. I love working. I love fixing things.

I've since used AI to make my résumé more AI-friendly. You've got to fight fire with fire. However, I've also started targeting companies that say in their job listings that every résumé submitted is reviewed by a human. In some of my past jobs, I was responsible for hiring people, and I prided myself on reading every résumé that came in. It's crazy how much the job market has changed. more

Amalia White

Career development

2d

I’ve worked in the loan department for 5 years and I have good experience and a strong resume. But I think I may not get promoted because of my hair - it’s very curly and messy. Someone hinted that a manager should look neat. I can’t really control my hair. Do you think this could really be a reason not to promote me?

1

Joe Giandonato
22h
I once shaved my head and used packing tape to adhere a krobylos of urinal cake contents to my head. I got the job, but only because my dad is the... president of the company. more
Debo Adeyemi
1d
Your hair is a part of you. Speak to a hair specialist or stylist and the y can help you come up with a way to manage it. You may find yourself... putting more efforts to keep your hair looking decent but that is life. That is the price to pay to move up in your carreer . So yes it could be a factor in the bank as well as any area where you interface with people. If your work in IT or accounts reconcliation where you do not interface with people, then you have nothing to worry about in terms of your messy hair. But to deal with the public....is a no no. more

Anonymous member

Career development

3d

Hello! My boss expects me to be available 24/7. She even calls me after 10 p.m. and on weekends, usually about unimportant things. I feel like she just likes controlling her employees and bothering us even outside of work. Maybe I should just stop answering her calls?

2

Joe Giandonato
22h
My boss once implored me to tow his 2001 Mitsubishi Galant with eyelashes on the headlights from Proxima Centauri to the Oort Cloud where his mechanic... was exiled to after emitting radio signals about the imperial commander’s PED use when participating in a bicentenarian pickleball league in 2380 AD. more
Mike Keane
1d
In our country it’s it’s against the law to contact an employee outside of hours

Career development

23h

FPE #1: Why economics can explain your love life

In today's Finshots Pocket Economics (FPE), Edition #1, we're telling you how economics plays a role when you shop, date, or go job hunting.

But before we begin, here's a quick recap of what we wrote over the past week. On Monday, we explained why SEBI is overhauling India's share buyback rules. On Tuesday, we did a story on the strange economics of data centres. On Wednesday, we wrote about why... gold worries the Prime Minister. On Thursday, we told you why Royal Enfield set up its first plant outside Tamil Nadu. And on Friday, we broke down how German FMCG giant Henkel AG ending its Pril and Fa licensing deal could affect Jyothy Labs, the makers of Ujala.

With that out of the way, let's dive into FPE, Edition #1.

Hey folks!

A few months ago, I was browsing the internet looking for a gift for my newborn niece. And in Indian households, any auspicious occasion usually means just one thing for gifts -- gold.

Now, gold prices have touched the sky. So naturally, like any rational person trying to find something that looked great while still fitting the budget, I began searching for lower-karat options. It took me two whole days to find something acceptable -- a pretty baby bracelet with a fairy on it and her initial, the letter "A", that could also be personalised, despite it being slightly over budget. Then came the final hurdle: getting approval from the real decision-makers at home, my parents-in-law.

And just when I finally decided to buy it, I realised it was gone. Out of stock. Vanished!

Little did I know that it was probably the last piece available (the website never mentioned it). Which meant that I now had to settle for something I liked less, and do it much faster because I was running out of time.

A few days later, I stumbled upon a podcast that said you could understand the world differently and make better everyday decisions if you simply started thinking like an economist. And that's where the inspiration for this series came from.

Because, as it turns out, even the gift I eventually settled for could be explained using an economic principle called search theory.

Which made me go, "It's been a while since we tried something new at Finshots. Why not explain how economic theories quietly shape everyday life and how understanding them could help you make better decisions?"

So, welcome to the very first edition of a new series we're calling Finshots Pocket Economics. And to kick things off, we're talking about search theory, that funnily enough, can also explain your love life and dating scene.

Wait... what?

Yup. Economists may have something to say about why you keep swiping left, swiping right, or wondering if you should settle down with the person you're already with. We'll come back to that a little later.

But before we get there, what exactly is search theory?

See, in a perfect world, buyers and sellers would find each other instantly. But that's not possible in reality because information is incomplete, people are in different places, prices vary, and negotiations take time. Search theory is simply the study of that gap or, essentially, the economics of how long to keep looking before you settle on something.

And there are four factors that decide how long you search:

This is your personal cut-off price -- the minimum you'll accept or the maximum you'll pay. You keep searching until you find something good enough within that limit. Think of it like this. You're buying a second-hand car and your budget is ₹4 lakh. You keep searching until you find a car of decent quality at or under that price. That ceiling is your reservation price.

If the costs keep increasing or the stakes keep reducing the longer you search, your search time will automatically become shorter. Basically, the more painful the search itself becomes, the sooner you'll settle. Say you're looking for a job in the IT or finance sector, but new skills keep emerging every day. Like AI in data analysis or coding, and you're not familiar with them. You may simply accept a job offer sooner because your existing skills could become outdated quickly compared to someone with more future-proof skills.

This is about how different the options are from one another. If every job offer you get is roughly the same, there's no point holding out. But if offers vary wildly in salary and quality, it may feel worth waiting because the next one could be dramatically better.

This is how much uncertainty you can handle. A long job search often means burning through savings. If that scares you, you'll settle faster because the anxiety of continuing to search can keep growing.

And now that you know the basics, we know what you're waiting for. How does search theory show up in real life and how can I actually use it?

Well, let's start with the most obvious example -- job hunting.

Imagine you've quit your current job and started applying for a new one. The first offer comes in quickly. It's decent, but not great. Do you take it or keep looking?

Most people usually get this wrong in one of two ways. Either they panic and take the first offer because job hunting is stressful, or they keep rejecting offers while chasing some perfect job that may not even exist. And honestly, both can be costly.

So how do you decide?

Search theory says there's no perfect answer, but there is a useful rule of thumb. Decide your minimum acceptable salary or your reservation wage before you begin searching, not when you're already stressed a few months in. Then treat your first few interviews as a way to understand the market. Here, you're not trying to accept anything immediately, just learning what companies are actually willing to pay.

Let's take a simple example. Say you've resigned from your current job. Your notice period is 2 months and your savings can support you for another 2 months. So, effectively, you have 4 months to find a job.

You currently earn ₹10 lakh a year and hope for ₹13 lakh. But that's your expectation, not your reservation wage. Your reservation wage could instead be the minimum raise that makes switching worthwhile. Let's assume that is ₹11 lakh.

Now imagine that by the end of month one, you already have three offers: one at ₹11 lakh and two at ₹12 lakh. And based on what you're seeing, companies don't seem eager to offer a 30% hike. So, do you accept ₹12 lakh or continue searching?

Search theory suggests comparing the value of accepting now versus continuing to search. Basically, you ask yourself two practical questions:

If the market isn't handing out 30% hikes easily, it may not be very likely, no?

If you reject ₹12 lakh, you might find ₹13 lakh later. But you could also end up with another ₹12-lakh offer or worse, nothing better, while burning through time and savings.

And remember, waiting has a cost. As your 4-month runway shrinks, financial stress and the pressure to accept a weaker offer can grow.

So, if you already have offers above your reservation wage and one clearly stands out, say ₹12 lakh, it may make sense to accept it, especially if the market doesn't seem likely to offer ₹13 lakh anytime soon.

This doesn't mean that you're "giving up" on ₹13 lakh. You're simply locking in a good outcome today and can always aim for more later in your career.

But there's also another interesting scenario you can end up with. Even after mentally accepting one ₹12-lakh offer, you still have another ₹12-lakh offer in hand. Maybe both companies are very similar in terms of culture and growth prospects. But while one company isn't willing to negotiate, the other is open to discussion. If they raise it to ₹12.5 lakh, great! You can take it. If not, you still have a solid fallback option.

That fallback is what's called a BATNA (Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement). In simple terms, it's the backup option that gives you the confidence to walk away if negotiations don't work out.

Next, the one we promised we'd explain at the start -- finding a potential match, whether while dating or looking to get married.

Think about how most people use apps like Hinge or Bumble today. They swipe for weeks, go on a handful of dates, feel exhausted, and either give up or settle for someone who seems "fine".

So how do you work this out?

Well, it's surprisingly similar to job hunting.

Just like you have a reservation wage in a job search, you could think of a reservation standard in dating. This is the minimum threshold of compatibility, values, humour, attraction, and shared goals that someone must meet before you seriously consider them.

If your standards are very high, you'll search longer and reject more people. If they're lower, you may settle sooner. And while dating apps have made searching almost effortless, they've also created a problem: the feeling that the "perfect person" is always one swipe away.

Another thing to remember is that once you reject an option, you often can't go back to it.

So, to decide when to stop searching and commit, you could use something interesting called the secretary problem, which we briefly touched upon in the job-hunting example. The idea is simple. Don't rush into a decision immediately. Spend the early part of your search just learning what's out there and calibrating your standards.

Some mathematicians even suggest a rough rule. Use the first 37% of your dating pool as a learning phase and don't commit during that period. Then, choose the next person who feels better than everyone you've met so far.

Now, you'll probably ask us, why such a specific number, 37%?

Well, it's not something we whipped out of thin air. Mathematicians tested this problem thousands of times and found that if you spend too little time searching -- say just the first 10% of options, you haven't seen enough to know what "good" really looks like. You'll likely settle too early.

But if you spend too much time searching -- say over 50%, you may understand the market really well, but you've probably already rejected some fantastic options and don't have enough chances left to find something better.

So there has to be a sweet spot between "too early" and "too late". And when mathematicians modelled this trade-off, the answer landed at an oddly precise number: 36.8%, usually rounded to 37%.

Now, before you panic, no, this doesn't mean rejecting your soulmate because they showed up "too early". The point is to simply understand that big decisions often need a fair amount of time.

And if you find yourself endlessly rejecting people, search theory would say something else. Maybe it's time to lower your reservation standard a little. Instead of looking for someone who ticks every single box -- say someone of a certain height, who loves pets, shares your hobbies, and has the same sense of humour, focus on what matters most. Maybe compatibility, shared values, and whether you genuinely enjoy spending time together.

Also, unlike job hunting, this is one place where you probably shouldn't use a BATNA, folks. Keeping someone around as a backup while waiting for a "better option" rarely ends well.

So yeah, maybe Indian Matchmaking's Seema aunty wasn't entirely wrong when she told people to "adjust" and say yes if 60-70% of expectations matched. Maybe she was unknowingly quoting economics after all!

And finally, you can definitely apply search theory while shopping. To give you an example, let's say you need a new phone. So you search and scroll through Amazon, Flipkart, some review sites, watch three YouTube comparisons, read a Reddit thread, and two hours later you're more confused than when you started and you haven't bought anything. A week later you panic-buy something mid-range that you're not even sure about.

That's what you call "the paradox of choice". More options exhaust your decision-making capacity. So you either freeze or grab something random at the end.

The solution here is almost embarrassingly simple. Before you open a single tab, write down your budget ceiling and two or three things the product must have. Not a wish list, but a minimum bar. Then buy the first thing you find that clears that bar.

Stop there.

Because research consistently shows that people who do this end up happier with their purchases than people who spend hours optimising, because the optimisers are haunted by everything they didn't buy.

With that, that's a wrap. And all of this probably explains why I didn't end up buying the bracelet I originally liked for my niece and had to settle for another option that I liked less. Ironically, despite working on this series for weeks and clearly defining my reservation bar upfront, I kept looking for better options. And when I finally found it, the bracelet had gone out of stock. I also had no clear BATNA to fall back on, or even the time to start shopping all over again, so I had to make a quicker compromise than I'd planned.

But now, you tell us. Would you use search theory to make better job, dating, or shopping decisions?

We'll see you next Saturday!

Until then... tell us what you thought of today's edition. Just hit reply to this email (or if you're reading this on the web, drop us a message at morning@finshots.in).

Or even better, share it with your friends and family on WhatsApp, LinkedIn, and X.

Finshots Weekly Quiz v2.0 🧠

Hey folks! As you probably already know, the Finshots Weekly Quiz has a new avatar. If you missed out on it in the last couple of months, don't worry. Click here to check out the rules and set a reminder to participate consistently starting next month!

Next, let's move on to the top scorers from our previous weekly quiz. There were a whole bunch of you who participated, and many of you ended up with the same scores. So we're calling you Bulls, Bears, Unicorns, Blue Chips, and Rising Stars. Here's how the leaderboard looks right now:

If your name has been featured on the leaderboard, then congratulations! If not, don't lose hope. If you attempted last week's quiz, keep at it and answer all the weekly quizzes this month. You never know when the turntables! Click on this link to take this week's quiz, which is open till 12 noon, Friday, 22nd of May, 2026. The more answers you get right, the better your chances of appearing on the Finshots Weekly Quiz leaderboard. We'll publish it every Saturday in this edition. And the winner will be announced in the first week of June. more

Alex Flynn

Career development

1d

We have a work chat, but people often use it to talk about movies, bars and weekend plans. Because of all those messages I missed an important message saying we had to come to work one hour earlier today. Now my boss wants to fine me, but I think it’s not my fault because the chat is not only for work. How can I prove I’m right? Thanks

Joe Giandonato
23h
We also have a work chat, but we mainly discuss cropdusting, SBDs, and “blowing it up”.

Collette J

Career development

4h

Hello everyone,
I’m new here and currently expanding my network with professionals who are open to new job opportunities. I’m actively engaging with candidates across various roles and would be happy to connect with anyone exploring their next career move.

Feel free to reach out or connect I’m always open to meaningful conversations.

Career development

1d

Are you 'doomjobbing' while looking for work? Know the signs - and do this instead.

'It was soul-crushing,' says one job hunter, who only found work once she stopped making this popular application mistake

"Doomjobbing" - or mass-applying to jobs with little hope of success - has become a buzzword during this challenging job market.

You've heard of doomscrolling on your phone to pass the time - but what about "doomjobbing" while looking for work?

Doomjobbing is a new term... picking up buzz this spring that describes mass-applying to job postings - anything that even remotely fits your preferences and qualifications - without putting much thought into each application, and often with little real hope of landing a gig.

This mass-application process often leads to rejection, or worse: no response at all.

"It was soul-crushing every single day," said Kristen Haskell, a 56-year-old mechanical engineer living in Maine, who spent five months doomjobbing after she was let go from her job last February. She started mass-applying almost immediately to several hundred new positions, but her efforts yielded little results.

"Between ghost jobs and being ghosted, it was infuriating," she said - referring to "ghost job" listings for positions that are either already filled or don't really exist. "It was so bad for my mental health."

'It was soul-crushing every single day.'Kristen Haskell, who spent several months "doomjobbing" to find work

Job seekers might think Haskell had the right idea: send out as many applications as possible, as fast as you can. And now that job hunting has gone mostly online, it's never been easier to apply for a job. Oftentimes, job boards like LinkedIn or Indeed let you upload your profile to the platform, where you can apply to dozens - or even hundreds - of jobs with a single click. But employment experts disagree with this approach.

"While it may be tempting to hit 'Easy Apply' on everything that catches your eye on websites like LinkedIn, it's not the best way to go about job hunting," Peter Duris, CEO and co-founder of Kickresume, a career and resume-building platform, told MarketWatch. He added that doomjobbing and mass applications often "leads to more disappointment than success."

Just look at the data: Approximately 37% of job seekers are applying to more jobs than ever, but they are hearing back less from those companies, according to Linkedin. The total number of job applications submitted on LinkedIn spiked more than 45% from 2024 to 2025, a figure first reported by the New York Times - likely aided by the website's Easy Apply feature and the rise in using AI in job applications. LinkedIn is receiving an average of 11,000 applications per minute.

"It's rational that doing more feels good in the short term," said Andres Lares, CEO of Shapiro Negotiations Institute. "But if [it's] not productive, it's worse in the long term when you don't land anything."

So if it's not about how many applications you send out, then what is most important?

Quality over quantity

"It's best to be intentional with your job search," Duris said. "Take your time applying to relevant roles and check multiple job boards."

Here are a few best practices:

-- Narrow your job search. Set filters so you're only seeing and applying to jobs with relevant job titles that fit within your desired salary range and location. That can also include the dream companies you want to work for.

-- Tailor your application. This is the complete opposite of doomjobbing, and improves your chances for an interview. "You don't need to completely rewrite your resume for every role, but make sure it focuses on the skills and experience [that is] most relevant to the job you're applying for," Duris said. "If a cover letter is required, it should be personalized to the role and company."

-- Tap specific keywords and alerts. Make sure your resume is tailored to applicant-tracking systems (software tools that filter resumes for recruiters) by utilizing keywords that pertain to the position, and turn on alerts on job boards for posts that fit your criteria. The latter feature is free for nearly every major job board.

Being more intentional about your job search accomplishes two goals. For one, it's likely to increase your chances of landing a job you want, because recruiters can see your experience fits the position more precisely. But this method also keeps your spirits high, as your inbox is less likely to be flooded with hundreds of rejection emails for a job that you maybe weren't a good fit for to begin with.

'Don't fall into the trap of clicking 'apply' to every job you come across'Peter Duris, CEO and co-founder of Kickresume

"Don't fall into the trap of clicking 'apply' to every job you come across where you vaguely meet the criteria, as this can become discouraging," said Duris.

Haskell didn't get another job until she stopped doomjobbing, and instead created a worksheet for herself to create more targeted applications. (Check it out below.)

The worksheet Haskell used to craft more targeted job applications, which led to landing her current gig.

She also began applying directly to companies' career pages instead of through the big job platforms, and narrowed her search by role, company and her preference to work remotely.

"I had way more focus on targeted buckets," Haskell said.

But keep in mind that there does come a point of diminishing returns. If you are spending eight hours on a single application, for example, then you might be taking too much time and overtinkering. Finding the right blend is key.

How many applications should you be sending?

Indeed's Career Guide recommends applying to about 10 to 15 jobs per week, which breaks down to spending some extra time on just a few applications a day.

"With two or three applications each day, you can make sure that you're able to customize each job application based on the specific company and position," Indeed's Sabina Macari wrote on the company's blog.

The doomjobbing trend comes at an uncertain time in the labor market, when unemployment is low but workers without jobs are hurting - especially new college graduates. The Federal Reserve Board on Wednesday released its Economic Well-Being of the U.S. Households in 2025 report, which showed a stable but softening labor market. An estimated 42% of adults said "finding or keeping a job" was either a minor or major concern, up from 37% in 2024.

Haskell's pivot to a more intentional approach to job hunting led to her current role managing construction projects for the state of Maine. She hopes her experience can motivate others to rethink their job search in a tough market.

"It is really bad out there, and we the people need help," she said.

You can start to help yourself by not hopelessly mass-applying to jobs. Here are some more guides to navigating this job market:

This content was created by MarketWatch, which is operated by Dow Jones & Co. MarketWatch is published independently from Dow Jones Newswires and The Wall Street Journal. more

Ted Setterfield

Career development

4d

Hi everyone! Does anyone else get annoyed when a job ad doesn’t say the salary? Yesterday I had an interview and asked the HR how much they could pay. He said it depends on my skills. So in the end, I still don’t know what salary I can expect. Is that normal?

Mike Keane
1d
Well it depends on the job is it a skilled job
Paul seth
1d
i think this depends on your experience and what you are applying for putting in place the current economic status ,the company and also the working... location.e.g fieldwork more