Making Sense of an Outdated Job Application Process
Summary
Overview
Challenge: A hiring process was losing candidates mid-stream either due to digital application difficulties or due to the lengthy review of a complex job packet
Project Type: A combination of UX and CX Research to create a Product Recommendations Document
Timeline: 3 months
My role: Sole UX / CX Researcher
My team: Content Strategist, Business Analyst
Outcome: Evidence-based requirements for a new state agency job application system, along with a clearer understanding of cross-team dependencies that helped siloed teams align around the hiring process.
Context & Problem
What Was the Issue to Be Solved?
A major state agency’s job application platform was more than a decade old, and riddled with usability and compliance issues. Recruiters were forced to rely on paper applications when tablets or authentication tools failed, creating bottlenecks in the hiring process.
Why it mattered:
This outdated experience directly impacted hiring for critical public-safety positions across the state. Every system failure translated to longer vacancies, slower onboarding, and lower morale.
My Role and Responsibilities
Key Responsibilities
As the sole UX/CX Researcher, I led the research from discovery through synthesis. Then I handed off findings and supporting documentation to our Lead Content Strategist for development of the final Product Requirements Document.
Methods & Process
Process Overview
Heuristic Review: I started here to identify usability issues and discovered a lot of main menu items pointed at content other than internal pages.
Outcome: The client decided to pivot and start from scratch. I welcomed this as a great opportunity to create something without legacy bias.
Survey of the recruitment staff: I captured front-line recruiter pain points to get the client’s point of view.
Survey of new hires: I captured pain points from the potential new employee’s point of view.
Service Blueprint Workshop (Tool: Miro): I facilitated several interactive workshops with HR staff to fill in the gaps between what was documented and what wasn’t listed in the hiring process.
Outcome: Each task was aligned with the current tools, documents, and tests used plus who was responsible for each step.
PRD Handoff: I synthesized the research and documented findings, dependencies, and unresolved gaps so our Lead Content Strategist could translate them into the final Product Requirements Document.
Below is a zoomed out, birds-eye view of how complex their hiring process is currently. Each square represents a task, tool, document, test or person responsible. (That’s a lot of squares to navigate from start to finish.)
Insights & Findings
High Level Overview
Internal staff: Recruiters frequently resorted to paper applications because the digital process wasn’t reliable in the field. Entries could be lost, Wi-Fi wasn’t always available for two-factor authentication, and some required fields asked for information applicants were unlikely to have with them at job fairs.
Applicant feedback: There were so many steps, forms, tests and time spent waiting on social media checks etc. the process felt overly long to them.
HR staff: No single person managed the full hiring pipeline. Dependencies between HR, IT, and security teams caused data silos and delays.
Impact & Results
Getting Silos in Alignment
The final Product Requirements Document (PRD) became a north star for redesign and redevelopment. It gave the client a shared view of both the digital roadmap and the organizational dependencies required for success, helping leadership, HR, and technical teams align around the work ahead.
14 structured sections with clear MoSCoW priorities (Must / Should / Could / Won’t (this time)
Functional and non-functional requirements tied to user pain points
Neutral placeholders for unresolved technical specifications so gaps could be addressed collaboratively as more information became available
Challenges & Reflection
Pulling Together Isolated Process Fragments
Because of the agency’s strict hierarchy, no single stakeholder had visibility into the full process or all of the technical details. Rather than let those unknowns stall the project, I documented them transparently so gaps in the service process could be addressed when the client was ready.
If I could do one thing differently, I’d advocate earlier for joint scoping sessions between UX and the client’s business analyst. That would help surface technical blind spots sooner in the process.