
簡歷投出去如同石沉大海,這種徒勞感從未如此強烈。
僅今年2月,雇主就裁減了9.2萬個崗位。去年7月,初級職位的失業率達到13.3%,創下37年來最糟水平。三分之二的企業暫停招聘,以觀望AI填補崗位空缺的潛力;與此同時,自去年以來已有117萬個工作崗位被裁撤。
于是,你和大多數人一樣:開始用AI寫一封求職信,稍微“美化”一下大三的實習經歷。這也無可厚非,畢竟四分之三的簡歷根本不會被人類看到。這意味著,你正在用AI生成內容,而它最終也只會被AI讀取——仿佛形成了一種荒誕的“銜尾蛇”式的自我循環,即便是讓蘇格拉底之類的哲學家來解釋,恐怕也會大費周章。
但在賓夕法尼亞大學沃頓商學院商業經濟學教授賈德·凱斯勒看來,其實有一個更簡單的替代方案:放棄那些“虛假的熱情”,直接拿起電話聯系雇主。這位著有《設計你的幸運:用隱秘經濟學達成目標》(Lucky by Design: The Hidden Economics You Need to Get More of What You Want)的教授認為,求職信這一傳統做法,已經走到了盡頭。
凱斯勒對《財富》雜志表示:“我預計在不久的將來,求職信將會消失。要么公司繼續要求提交求職信,而所有人都用AI炮制出優秀的范本,最終卻被忽視;要么雇主意識到求職信毫無參考價值,且沒有人會閱讀,從而索性取消這一環節。”
凱斯勒認為,求職過程正逐漸回歸“傳統模式”:關鍵在于人脈。他論點的核心是“隱性市場”的概念,即在分配稀缺資源時,不能簡單依靠出價高低來決定歸屬的體系。比如,泰勒·斯威夫特的演唱會門票定價為99美元,但有數百萬粉絲愿意支付10倍價格;或者一所大學有5萬名申請者,卻只提供2,000個新生名額。在這些情況下,無法依靠價格來決定歸屬,于是其他規則開始發揮作用——例如,你認識一位能帶你進后臺的工作人員,或者有校友為你背書。這些都屬于隱性市場中的“信號”。
而勞動力市場正是規模最大的隱性市場之一。
凱斯勒表示:“我們希望分配稀缺資源,但又不愿意僅僅由價格驅動。我們發現,通過篩選過程來找到最適合該崗位的人,效率更高。”
在這種機制下,像求職信這樣的“信號”曾經非常重要,因為它意味著求職者愿意投入時間和精力,來表達自己的熱情與誠意。
凱斯勒表示:“求職信曾經是求職者發出的成本較高的信號,用來表明其對某個崗位確實感興趣。其成本在于寫一封高質量的求職信極度耗時費力,而且你不可能為每家公司都準備一封。”這種信號很難被忽視:畢竟,如果候選人寫了求職信,說明其態度是認真的。
AI的自我吞噬循環
當AI能信手拈來三段辭藻華麗卻空洞的文字來“偽造熱情”時,一切都發生了改變。
凱斯勒表示:“生成式AI的出現,讓原本需要花幾個小時才能寫好的東西,現在只需幾秒鐘,最多幾分鐘就能完成。于是曾經的高成本信號,一下子變得非常廉價。經濟學上稱之為‘廉價言辭’:你可以毫不費力地表現出對這家公司的強烈向往,仿佛這個崗位就是為你量身打造的,但這種信號的生成成本極低。”
研究也證實了這一觀點。凱斯勒提到由經濟學家崔靜怡(音譯)、加布里埃爾·迪亞斯和賈斯汀·葉開展的一項研究。該研究追蹤了某大型招聘平臺引入AI求職信助手后的影響:求職信的質量因為精準度提升而有所改善,而更精準的求職信帶來了更多面試機會。但凱斯勒表示,隨著該工具的普及,“雇主開始不再依賴求職信來做招聘決策。求職信變得更好了,但整體上反而變得沒那么有用了。”
他表示:“過去只有少數求職信出類拔萃,這是識別最匹配候選人的方式。而現在,幾乎所有求職信都達到了某種標準門檻,它們不再是加分項,而只是入門條件。”
當每份申請看起來都足夠精致時,便意味著沒有哪一份能脫穎而出。理性的雇主要么把篩選工作交給AI,要么干脆不再閱讀求職信。凱斯勒表示:“這時候,你就會把這件事交給AI來處理。”
凱斯勒在自己的招聘過程中也親眼見證了這一趨勢。他笑著說道,盡管過去15年來,他一直在沃頓商學院挑選研究助理,“但質量最高的求職信都集中出現在過去12個月里”,而且這些求職信突然都開始提到他的研究論文。
凱斯勒表示:“我曾經會根據哪些人引用我的論文來判斷誰真正有興趣,但如今每個人都會這么做。我猜并非所有人都真的讀過那些論文,而是大家都發現AI能精準總結我的研究內容,并把它自然地融入自薦敘述中。這就意味著,我無法再通過求職信,來準確識別誰是真正渴望與我共事的人。”
相比之下,凱斯勒如今更看重其他“隱性市場信號”:“他們有沒有選修我的課程?有沒有來參加答疑?有沒有嘗試當面見我?這些才是我更依賴的信號,因為求職信已經不夠用了。”
回歸“咖啡社交”
凱斯勒表示,求職信已走向終結,隨之而來的是求職信號重新回歸傳統方式:主動聯系與經典的人脈拓展。
他表示:“求職者如果想主動發出‘我真的很想加入這家公司’這類信號,未來需要更多依賴在那些無法被AI復制的行為。”
他補充道:“比如與公司管理層成員進行線下交流,請在公司工作的人喝咖啡,參加公司組織的咖啡社交活動等。這些都是真正有成本的信號,因為它們無法被AI替代。當我選擇花時間去和某家公司的人交流時,我就無法把這些時間用在其他公司身上。”
凱斯勒指出,咖啡社交并非新鮮事,但如今重新強調面對面交流與其他信號,意味著求職信的終結幾乎不可避免。
凱斯勒表示:“我常說,求職信的時代已經過去了,是AI殺死了求職信。”(財富中文網)
譯者:劉進龍
審校:汪皓
簡歷投出去如同石沉大海,這種徒勞感從未如此強烈。
僅今年2月,雇主就裁減了9.2萬個崗位。去年7月,初級職位的失業率達到13.3%,創下37年來最糟水平。三分之二的企業暫停招聘,以觀望AI填補崗位空缺的潛力;與此同時,自去年以來已有117萬個工作崗位被裁撤。
于是,你和大多數人一樣:開始用AI寫一封求職信,稍微“美化”一下大三的實習經歷。這也無可厚非,畢竟四分之三的簡歷根本不會被人類看到。這意味著,你正在用AI生成內容,而它最終也只會被AI讀取——仿佛形成了一種荒誕的“銜尾蛇”式的自我循環,即便是讓蘇格拉底之類的哲學家來解釋,恐怕也會大費周章。
但在賓夕法尼亞大學沃頓商學院商業經濟學教授賈德·凱斯勒看來,其實有一個更簡單的替代方案:放棄那些“虛假的熱情”,直接拿起電話聯系雇主。這位著有《設計你的幸運:用隱秘經濟學達成目標》(Lucky by Design: The Hidden Economics You Need to Get More of What You Want)的教授認為,求職信這一傳統做法,已經走到了盡頭。
凱斯勒對《財富》雜志表示:“我預計在不久的將來,求職信將會消失。要么公司繼續要求提交求職信,而所有人都用AI炮制出優秀的范本,最終卻被忽視;要么雇主意識到求職信毫無參考價值,且沒有人會閱讀,從而索性取消這一環節。”
凱斯勒認為,求職過程正逐漸回歸“傳統模式”:關鍵在于人脈。他論點的核心是“隱性市場”的概念,即在分配稀缺資源時,不能簡單依靠出價高低來決定歸屬的體系。比如,泰勒·斯威夫特的演唱會門票定價為99美元,但有數百萬粉絲愿意支付10倍價格;或者一所大學有5萬名申請者,卻只提供2,000個新生名額。在這些情況下,無法依靠價格來決定歸屬,于是其他規則開始發揮作用——例如,你認識一位能帶你進后臺的工作人員,或者有校友為你背書。這些都屬于隱性市場中的“信號”。
而勞動力市場正是規模最大的隱性市場之一。
凱斯勒表示:“我們希望分配稀缺資源,但又不愿意僅僅由價格驅動。我們發現,通過篩選過程來找到最適合該崗位的人,效率更高。”
在這種機制下,像求職信這樣的“信號”曾經非常重要,因為它意味著求職者愿意投入時間和精力,來表達自己的熱情與誠意。
凱斯勒表示:“求職信曾經是求職者發出的成本較高的信號,用來表明其對某個崗位確實感興趣。其成本在于寫一封高質量的求職信極度耗時費力,而且你不可能為每家公司都準備一封。”這種信號很難被忽視:畢竟,如果候選人寫了求職信,說明其態度是認真的。
AI的自我吞噬循環
當AI能信手拈來三段辭藻華麗卻空洞的文字來“偽造熱情”時,一切都發生了改變。
凱斯勒表示:“生成式AI的出現,讓原本需要花幾個小時才能寫好的東西,現在只需幾秒鐘,最多幾分鐘就能完成。于是曾經的高成本信號,一下子變得非常廉價。經濟學上稱之為‘廉價言辭’:你可以毫不費力地表現出對這家公司的強烈向往,仿佛這個崗位就是為你量身打造的,但這種信號的生成成本極低。”
研究也證實了這一觀點。凱斯勒提到由經濟學家崔靜怡(音譯)、加布里埃爾·迪亞斯和賈斯汀·葉開展的一項研究。該研究追蹤了某大型招聘平臺引入AI求職信助手后的影響:求職信的質量因為精準度提升而有所改善,而更精準的求職信帶來了更多面試機會。但凱斯勒表示,隨著該工具的普及,“雇主開始不再依賴求職信來做招聘決策。求職信變得更好了,但整體上反而變得沒那么有用了。”
他表示:“過去只有少數求職信出類拔萃,這是識別最匹配候選人的方式。而現在,幾乎所有求職信都達到了某種標準門檻,它們不再是加分項,而只是入門條件。”
當每份申請看起來都足夠精致時,便意味著沒有哪一份能脫穎而出。理性的雇主要么把篩選工作交給AI,要么干脆不再閱讀求職信。凱斯勒表示:“這時候,你就會把這件事交給AI來處理。”
凱斯勒在自己的招聘過程中也親眼見證了這一趨勢。他笑著說道,盡管過去15年來,他一直在沃頓商學院挑選研究助理,“但質量最高的求職信都集中出現在過去12個月里”,而且這些求職信突然都開始提到他的研究論文。
凱斯勒表示:“我曾經會根據哪些人引用我的論文來判斷誰真正有興趣,但如今每個人都會這么做。我猜并非所有人都真的讀過那些論文,而是大家都發現AI能精準總結我的研究內容,并把它自然地融入自薦敘述中。這就意味著,我無法再通過求職信,來準確識別誰是真正渴望與我共事的人。”
相比之下,凱斯勒如今更看重其他“隱性市場信號”:“他們有沒有選修我的課程?有沒有來參加答疑?有沒有嘗試當面見我?這些才是我更依賴的信號,因為求職信已經不夠用了。”
回歸“咖啡社交”
凱斯勒表示,求職信已走向終結,隨之而來的是求職信號重新回歸傳統方式:主動聯系與經典的人脈拓展。
他表示:“求職者如果想主動發出‘我真的很想加入這家公司’這類信號,未來需要更多依賴在那些無法被AI復制的行為。”
他補充道:“比如與公司管理層成員進行線下交流,請在公司工作的人喝咖啡,參加公司組織的咖啡社交活動等。這些都是真正有成本的信號,因為它們無法被AI替代。當我選擇花時間去和某家公司的人交流時,我就無法把這些時間用在其他公司身上。”
凱斯勒指出,咖啡社交并非新鮮事,但如今重新強調面對面交流與其他信號,意味著求職信的終結幾乎不可避免。
凱斯勒表示:“我常說,求職信的時代已經過去了,是AI殺死了求職信。”(財富中文網)
譯者:劉進龍
審校:汪皓
Sending your resume into the void has never felt more useless.
Employers cut 92,000 jobs in February alone. Unemployment among entry-level employees peaked last July at 13.3%, the worst entry-level market in 37 years. Two-thirds of companies have put hiring on pause while they wait to see where AI can fill the gaps, and in the meantime, 1.17 million jobs have been cut since last year.
So you do what everyone does: You turn to AI to write a cover letter that slightly exaggerates the role you held in your junior year of college. That’s totally fine, since three-quarters of resumes never reach a human’s eyes anyway. This means you’re using AI to write something that gets read by AI, fulfilling some twisted ouroboros that Socrates and the lot would have had a doozy explaining to their students.
For Wharton Business Economics Professor Judd Kessler, there’s a simple alternative: Toss the fake enthusiasm and pick up the phone. The University of Pennsylvania professor and author of Lucky by Design: The Hidden Economics You Need to Get More of What You Want instead thinks the cover letter’s days are numbered.
“I expect that in the not too distant future, cover letters are gone,” Kessler told Fortune. “Either cover letters will be required and everybody will have AI write good ones and they’ll be ignored, or employers will stop asking for them because they realize they’re not looking at them and they’re not adding value.”
Kessler says job hunting is starting to look a lot like the good ol’ days: It’s all about who you know. At the heart of his argument is the concept of a hidden market: any system that has to allocate something valuable without simply letting the highest bidder win. Think of Taylor Swift pricing concert tickets at $99 when millions of fans would pay 10 times that, or a university with 50,000 applicants for 2,000 freshman seats. Price alone can’t decide who gets what, so other rules take over—rules like knowing a roadie who can get you behind the stage, or having an alumni vouch for you. These are all signals in a hidden market.
And the labor market is one of the biggest hidden markets of all.
“We want to allocate scarce resources, and we don’t want to let price do the job on its own,” Kessler said. “We find it more efficient to have a search process where we identify the best person for the role.”
In this dynamic, signals like the cover letter used to matter, because it meant candidates were spending the time and making the effort to show their enthusiasm.
“It was a costly signal that a job candidate could send that they were really interested in a particular role,” Kessler said. “And it was costly because writing a good one was hard and took time, and you couldn’t do it for every firm.” The signal was hard to ignore: This candidate was serious; after all, they wrote a cover letter.
The AI ouroboros
That all changed when AI made it a quick snap to fake enthusiasm in three frivolous paragraphs.
“Generative AI comes, and something that used to take a few hours to do well now takes a few seconds, or maybe a few minutes,” Kessler said. “And all of a sudden that signal that used to be costly is now very cheap. Economists would call it cheap talk: You can make it look like you are really motivated to join that firm, that the job was designed for you, but you can create that signal very cheaply.”
The research backs him up. Kessler pointed to a study by economists Jingyi Cui, Gabriel Dias, and Justin Ye that tracked what happened when a major job platform introduced an AI cover-letter writing assistant. Letter quality improved because they were better targeted, and well-targeted letters led to more interviews. But as the tool spread, “employers stopped relying on cover letters in their hiring decisions,” Kessler said. “The cover letters got better, and they became a less useful tool overall.”
“In the old days, there used to be a few good cover letters, and that was how you could identify the best-fit candidates,” he said. “Now, all the cover letters pass some threshold. They become a prerequisite rather than a differentiator.”
Once every application looks polished, none stand out—and the rational employer either outsources the reading to AI or stops reading altogether. “That’s when you would hand it off to AI to be responsible,” Kessler said.
Kessler has watched it happen in his own hiring. Despite selecting research assistants at Wharton for the last 15 years, “all of the best cover letters have come in the last 12 months,” he said with a laugh, all of which suddenly reference his research papers.
“That used to be a way that I could tell who was actually motivated,” he said. “But now everybody does that, and my guess is it’s not because everybody has read that research. Everybody has figured out that AI can write a good summary of what I work on and weave that into a narrative. And that means I can’t use the cover letter as a good indication that somebody’s motivated to work with me.”
Instead of relying on an AI-written CliffNotes summary of his own research, Kessler now points to other hidden market signals: “Do they take my course? Do they come to office hours? Do they try to meet with me in person? Those are the signals I start to rely on more, because the cover letter is insufficient.”
A return to the coffee chat
The cover letter is dead, Kessler says and as a result, the signals are going old school: reaching out and classic networking.
“For the specific signal of ‘I really want to work at this firm,’ which is a signal that the applicant themselves can send, it’s going to be more things that cannot be replicated with AI,” he said.
“It’s going to be doing in-person networking with members of the leadership team at the firm, taking people that work at the firm out to coffee, going to the coffee chat that the firm has. And those are real costly signals, because they can’t be replicated with AI,” he added. “When I choose to go talk to people at a firm, I’m using hours that I can’t spend talking to people at another firm.”
While the coffee chat isn’t new, Kessler said the return to meeting people and showing other signals spells the cover letter’s inevitable end.
“I often describe this as the age of the cover letter being over,” Kessler said. “AI killed the cover letter.”