Landing a Job Is All About Who You Know (Again)
Kanebridge News
    HOUSE MEDIAN ASKING PRICES AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $1,682,703 (+0.16%)       Melbourne $1,032,974 (+0.32%)       Brisbane $1,149,503 (-0.48%)       Adelaide $1,044,873 (+0.57%)       Perth $1,087,323 (+0.79%)       Hobart $838,358 (-0.10%)       Darwin $820,666 (-0.12%)       Canberra $979,872 (-0.24%)       National Capitals $1,138,269 (+0.14%)                UNIT MEDIAN ASKING PRICES AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $797,157 (-0.14%)       Melbourne $549,523 (-0.11%)       Brisbane $755,150 (-0.64%)       Adelaide $578,247 (+0.68%)       Perth $644,099 (+3.57%)       Hobart $571,049 (+0.07%)       Darwin $463,594 (-5.35%)       Canberra $477,768 (-0.27%)       National Capitals $625,689 (+0.06%)                HOUSES FOR SALE AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 14,358 (+213)       Melbourne 15,978 (-7)       Brisbane 11,458 (+121)       Adelaide 3,654 (+71)       Perth 8,904 (+103)       Hobart 691 (+10)       Darwin 180 (+11)       Canberra 1,209 (+48)       National Capitals 56,432 (+570)                UNITS FOR SALE AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 9,553 (+66)       Melbourne 6,618 (-48)       Brisbane 2,337 (+34)       Adelaide 604 (-6)       Perth 1,701 (+90)       Hobart 150 (-5)       Darwin 217 (-4)       Canberra 1,213 (+23)       National Capitals 22,393 (+150)                HOUSE MEDIAN ASKING RENTS AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $870 ($0)       Melbourne $600 ($0)       Brisbane $700 ($0)       Adelaide $660 (+$3)       Perth $750 ($0)       Hobart $628 (-$13)       Darwin $850 ($0)       Canberra $710 (+$10)       National Capitals $733 (+$)                UNIT MEDIAN ASKING RENTS AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $820 (-$5)       Melbourne $620 ($0)       Brisbane $620 (-$3)       Adelaide $550 (+$10)       Perth $700 (-$20)       Hobart $500 (-$30)       Darwin $675 ($0)       Canberra $590 (+$5)       National Capitals $648 (-$5)                HOUSES FOR RENT AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 6,676 (+151)       Melbourne 6,952 (+89)       Brisbane 3,472 (+4)       Adelaide 1,309 (+41)       Perth 2,174 (+11)       Hobart 210 (-11)       Darwin 61 (+5)       Canberra 431 (+4)       National Capitals 21,285 (+294)                UNITS FOR RENT AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 10,090 (-12)       Melbourne 6,145 (+91)       Brisbane 3,338 (+49)       Adelaide 409 (+12)       Perth 701 (+21)       Hobart 75 (0)       Darwin 102 (+4)       Canberra 717 (+47)       National Capitals 21,577 (+212)                HOUSE ANNUAL GROSS YIELDS AND TREND         Sydney 2.69% (↓)       Melbourne 3.02% (↓)     Brisbane 3.17% (↑)        Adelaide 3.28% (↓)       Perth 3.59% (↓)       Hobart 3.89% (↓)     Darwin 5.39% (↑)      Canberra 3.77% (↑)        National Capitals 3.35% (↓)            UNIT ANNUAL GROSS YIELDS AND TREND         Sydney 5.35% (↓)     Melbourne 5.87% (↑)      Brisbane 4.27% (↑)      Adelaide 4.95% (↑)        Perth 5.65% (↓)       Hobart 4.55% (↓)     Darwin 7.57% (↑)      Canberra 6.42% (↑)        National Capitals 5.38% (↓)            HOUSE RENTAL VACANCY RATES AND TREND       Sydney 1.4% (↑)      Melbourne 1.5% (↑)      Brisbane 1.2% (↑)      Adelaide 1.2% (↑)      Perth 1.0% (↑)        Hobart 0.5% (↓)       Darwin 0.7% (↓)     Canberra 1.6% (↑)      National Capitals $1.1% (↑)             UNIT RENTAL VACANCY RATES AND TREND       Sydney 1.4% (↑)      Melbourne 2.4% (↑)      Brisbane 1.5% (↑)      Adelaide 0.8% (↑)      Perth 0.9% (↑)      Hobart 1.2% (↑)        Darwin 1.4% (↓)     Canberra 2.7% (↑)      National Capitals $1.5% (↑)             AVERAGE DAYS TO SELL HOUSES AND TREND         Sydney 34.7 (↓)       Melbourne 33.6 (↓)     Brisbane 39.0 (↑)      Adelaide 32.0 (↑)        Perth 42.6 (↓)       Hobart 30.0 (↓)       Darwin 21.9 (↓)       Canberra 33.2 (↓)       National Capitals 33.4 (↓)            AVERAGE DAYS TO SELL UNITS AND TREND         Sydney 33.6 (↓)       Melbourne 31.2 (↓)     Brisbane 40.9 (↑)      Adelaide 32.6 (↑)        Perth 41.8 (↓)     Hobart 31.3 (↑)        Darwin 43.1 (↓)     Canberra 40.5 (↑)        National Capitals 36.9 (↓)           
Share Button

Landing a Job Is All About Who You Know (Again)

Networking is making a comeback as employers drown in computer-generated job applications

By CALLUM BORCHERS, LINDSAY ELLIS
Fri, May 31, 2024 9:02amGrey Clock 6 min

Nine-hundred eighty-three people applied online for a job posted recently by tech recruiter Rob Tansey. The candidate who got the offer wasn’t one of them.

Tansey, who scouts potential hires for aviation-software maker Veryon, received a half dozen referrals from a woman he knew from past job searches. One of those six quickly became the front-runner. That’s often how Tansey operates: He estimates that just 40% of successful applicants come in cold through his company’s job portal.

“There’s an idealist in me that wants to look at all the résumés,” he says. “The reality is you just can’t.”

Who-you-know networking is back. As the number of job applicants has swelled in recent years, the key to landing a new position often turns on a personal connection that can pluck your résumé out of online obscurity and ensure it’s seen by a real person.

Behind the resurgence: frustration with the digital slog that bogs down U.S. hiring. Many hiring managers and applicants agree that the ease with which job hunters can respond to help-wanted postings has broken the online-application process by creating high volumes of candidates that hiring managers can’t hope to parse through. Meanwhile, applicants say automatic screening tools are shutting them out of opportunities.

Reverting to referrals threatens to undermine corporate diversity efforts, which were supposed to be aided by online applications. Software promised to democratise hiring by reducing human biases, but wider talent pipelines have overwhelmed some employers to the point where they’re reaching for what’s worked in the past.

To promote the use of connections, some employers, like software giant Dassault Systemes , have increased cash rewards for employees whose recommendations lead to hires. Others, including the University of Miami and its health system with 20,000 total employees, have launched new referral-bonus programs. Corporate hiring software can allow companies to identify referred candidates first, boosting those applicants over the competition.

Whether recommendations come from in-house or outside the company, the advantages are significant, according to data compiled by the hiring-software company Greenhouse. For roles that were posted on Greenhouse job boards and filled in the first quarter of this year, applicants with referrals had a 50% chance of advancing past an initial résumé review, compared with 12% odds for other external candidates.

Thirty percent of eventual hires had referrals, even though people with referrals represented just 5% of the applicant pool.

“Candidates are so desperate to get noticed, and they’re asking, ‘What’s the cheat code? What’s the way to get through the filters?’” says Jon Stross, Greenhouse’s co-founder. “Get referred. It really increases your chances of getting through the first filter.”

AI arms race leads to frustration

The renewed reliance on networking comes as applicants and hiring managers are struggling to navigate the software that now dominates recruiting.

Companies are swamped by applicants in part because many job seekers are newly relying on ChatGPT and automated bots to fire off large volumes of résumés, or using other shortcuts like LinkedIn’s “easy apply” button.

Some human-resources professionals lament that cover letters sound eerily similar, as if written by the same nonhuman.

Candidates fume when they click “submit” and don’t hear back—and sometimes even when they do. Amanda Palasciano, in Red Bank, N.J., scored an interview for a senior copy-manager position as she sought a job in advertising. The catch was that her interviewer was an avatar, not a person.

The video call was awkward. Palasciano, 42, had a short window to record her response to each question. She didn’t know where to look. Soon after, she was rejected.

“It put a bad taste in my mouth about the company,” she says. “If that’s how much reliance you put on brand-new tools over people, this isn’t the right place for me.”

She decided to stop applying online and started asking former colleagues about short-term openings , aiming to convert one to a full-time job.

“This front door is locked,” Palasciano says. “We’re going through the back door, or we’re not working.”

Fewer applicants, higher quality

Lindsay Broveleit, a Minneapolis-area vice president at the marketing agency Matato, didn’t bother posting a job listing online when she needed to fill a midlevel role this spring.

She feared that listing the position on LinkedIn or the company’s website would bring throngs of low-quality applications—and she was anxious about how truthful AI-enhanced applications might be.

“A couple of years ago, I would have absolutely pursued more digital channels that are more public-facing,” she says. Not now. “We don’t want that many applicants. We want good ones.”

She thought to tap her and her colleagues’ networks to fill the role, but she soon reconsidered—even those personal channels have become oversaturated with first- and second-degree connections looking for work.

Employees are “inundated with people asking for their help to navigate into open positions,” she says.

She contracted a staffing agency instead.

Whether using agencies or their own employees, more companies are turning to people to vet prospects.

Laserfiche, a maker of content-management software, has a longstanding employee-referral program and a renewed commitment to contact everyone who is recommended by an employee.

The guaranteed outreach does not ensure an offer, says Vice President of People Jenny Bode, but it is a chance for candidates with unconventional backgrounds to make a case for themselves. With about 400 applicants for a typical opening, that’s an opportunity not afforded to everyone.

Bode values referrals partly because one helped bring her to Laserfiche in 2022. She wasn’t even looking for a job when she heard from a former co-worker she’d kept in touch with.

“She reached out to me and said, ‘I have this position. Do you want to interview for it?’” Bode recalls.

Alison Mincey introduced referral bonuses of up to $2,500 when she became chief human resources officer at the University of Miami in 2022. She estimates one in 10 hires now starts with an employee referral. The program, she says, also helps with retention: Employees are more engaged when their input is valued, and newcomers are more likely to stay and thrive when they already know a co-worker.

A flawed but indispensable system

On Greenhouse’s platform, when employees submit referrals, the software prompts them to “consider referring people from underrepresented backgrounds.”

That can be a challenge. People tend to know—and therefore recommend—people like themselves, says Ruth Thomas, chief of research and insights at PayScale, a compensation-management firm. (PayScale itself has lately doubled its usual share of new hires found through referrals, to 30%.)

Referral networks tend to reinforce demographic imbalances . A PayScale survey of 53,000 workers found that white men land more jobs and bigger raises through referrals than others because they are more likely to be connected to corporate decision makers.

Hiring managers might say, “They were in my club at Princeton, and therefore, they’re a good person,” says John Horton, an associate professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Sloan School of Management and co-author of a recent paper on artificial intelligence in hiring. “If people start to retreat away from an open market, and it happens much through who you know and references, that would be bad.”

Cisco Systems is leaning more heavily on referrals for hiring than it has in the past. But the network-equipment company knows the approach can run counter to diversity efforts, so it also launched an effort to hire more people of colour and workers without four-year degrees, says Macy Andrews, vice president of employer branding for people and purpose. That hiring initiative looks to identify candidates with transferable skills rather than mandating college. Cisco so far has made over 100 hires through the initiative.

The company is looking to cut through the online-application morass in other ways as well. Cisco recruiters now visit college campuses with preprinted offer letters, so they can snap up students who make strong impressions.

“There is a bigger point here, which is that the process of sending in résumés and having thousands—sometimes millions—to go through isn’t the wave of the future,” she says.

No connection, no luck

Samuel Joynson, of Venice, Fla., launched a thoroughly modern job hunt after he lost his job when his company went through a reorganisation. He enlisted ChatGPT to edit his résumé and draft emails and cover letters.

The language didn’t sound like him—so he changed his approach.

Joynson, 28 years old, switched to writing his own letters and emails, investing about two hours into each application. He also pushed himself to contact everyone he knew at major tech companies including Apple, Google and Microsoft , where he talked to a friend from college. On calls, he asked them about their experiences at the companies, the office environment and remote-work policies.

“I took the approach of making it as human-based as possible,” he says.

Joynson’s old-fashioned strategy paid off. Many conversations led to introductions to other employees within his target companies. He landed a role and started as a senior technical program manager at Microsoft in April.

Francisco Denis recently discovered that connections—or lack thereof—can make all the difference. He says he was a finalist for a project-manager role at Disney but was told by a recruiter that the company decided to hire someone who had worked there in the past and could plug in immediately.

Denis, 40, has applied online for more than 100 jobs this year after moving on from an unsuccessful startup. His efforts have yielded only a handful of interviews, a jarring turn from a couple of years ago, when he was routinely headhunted. He’s pouring energy into networking for the first time in his career, reconnecting with former co-workers at companies he’d like to join. He often shares his résumé and describes his arduous job search to show that he’s not looking for a handout.

Still, even a system that relies on human connections can be gamed. On Fishbowl, an app for workplace venting and career advice, users have started a forum dubbed “Job Referrals!” It has drawn hundreds of thousands of members seeking endorsements from people they don’t know.

“Anyone willing to provide a referral to Amazon ?” one user posted.

In lieu of a handshake or business card, another offered an emoji: “Looking for a referral for Spotify, thanks in advance :).”

Bogus referrals could be win-wins for the people who give and receive them. The applicants gain an edge and, if they’re hired, their sponsors might be entitled to referral bonuses.

The companies that extended the offer? They’re left with one more hiring strategy that can’t be trusted.



MOST POPULAR

For Central Element, the start of work at Pearl represents another step in the company’s growing eastern suburbs pipeline.

All three vehicles will form part of a broader charitable initiative benefiting Big Brothers Big Sisters of America, the American Red Cross and Starlight Children’s Foundation

Related Stories
Money
ASX Reporting Season 2026: 5 Biggest Winners and Losers So Far
By Ruba Jaajaa 10/09/2026
Money
The Stock Market’s Breezy Summer Is Over. Investors Beware.
By Hannah Erin Lang 08/09/2026
Prestige
Girard-Perregaux Gives The 39mm Laureato Fifty A Tourbillon
By Ruba Jaajaa 07/09/2026
ASX Reporting Season 2026: 5 Biggest Winners and Losers So Far

Overall, the season showed that share prices react less to whether profits rose or fell than to the gap between results and expectations

By Ruba Jaajaa
Thu, Sep 10, 2026 5 min

Reporting season has once again reminded investors that a strong profit does not guarantee a rising share price, and a large loss does not always trigger a sell-off. What matters most is how each result compares with expectations and, increasingly, what management says about the year ahead. During the August 2026 season, companies offering credible turnarounds or unexpectedly strong guidance were rewarded handsomely, while those flagging weaker margins, slowing demand or greater uncertainty were punished.

The following ranking draws on Morningstar’s review of 164 ASX-listed companies and measures each company’s share-price movement on the day it reported. This captures the market’s immediate response to the earnings announcement, before subsequent economic developments, dividends and company-specific news cloud the picture. Here are the five biggest winners, and the five hardest-hit losers, of the season so far.

The five winners

1. Bapcor (ASX:BAP): +41.0%

Bapcor delivered reporting season’s largest relief rally after presenting early evidence that its troubled automotive-parts business was stabilising. Although underlying revenue fell 1.8% to $1.92 billion and underlying NPAT collapsed 85% to $10.8 million, underlying EBITDA of $152.5 million exceeded guidance.

More importantly, working-capital initiatives released $68.5 million in the second half, lifting cash conversion to 109.4% and reducing net debt by 63% to $135 million. The statutory loss was $431.6 million, largely because of non-cash impairments. Investors focused on improving operational momentum, stronger liquidity and management’s expectation of modest FY27 revenue growth.

2. Zip Co (ASX:ZIP): +18.2%

Zip comfortably surpassed its FY26 targets, sending the buy-now-pay-later provider’s shares sharply higher. Transaction volume rose 23% to $16.7 billion, while cash earnings before tax, depreciation and amortisation jumped 58% to a record $268.9 million. Statutory profit climbed 46% to $116.4 million, and the cash operating margin expanded by 4.2 percentage points to 20%.

The strongest signal was guidance for FY27 cash earnings of $340 million—around 26% growth and above analysts’ forecasts. US transaction volume increased 42.5% and now represents three-quarters of group volume, offsetting weaker customer activity in Australia.

3. CSL (ASX:CSL): +17.3%

CSL’s result was hardly spectacular in isolation, but it cleared a market bar that had fallen dramatically following earlier downgrades and restructuring announcements. Underlying NPATA was US$3.1 billion, down 2% in constant-currency terms, while operating cash flow reached US$3.51 billion.

CSL maintained its full-year dividend at US$2.92 per share and completed a A$1 billion buyback. The real catalyst was FY27 guidance for approximately 5% underlying profit growth, compared with market expectations closer to 2%. After an extended period of earnings disappointments, investors interpreted the outlook as evidence that CSL’s core plasma business was approaching a sustainable recovery.

4. Judo Capital (ASX:JDO): +16.9%

Judo Capital demonstrated strong operating leverage as its specialist business-lending franchise expanded. Full-year profit before tax rose 34% to $168.1 million, while pre-provision profit increased 42%. Gross loans and advances grew 18% to $14.7 billion, reaching the top of the bank’s guidance range and comfortably exceeding broader system growth.

Deposits increased 24% to $12.2 billion, return on equity improved by 1.1 percentage points to 6.4%, and earnings per share rose 29% to 9.9 cents. Reaffirmation of the FY27 outlook gave investors confidence that loan growth could continue without sacrificing margins or credit quality.

5. Super Retail Group (ASX:SUL): +15.8%

The owner of Supercheap Auto, rebel, BCF and Macpac reported record sales of $4.2 billion, up 3.2%, despite cautious discretionary spending. Profitability went backwards: normalised profit before tax fell 7% to $306 million and normalised NPAT declined 2.8% to $226 million as transformation spending weighed on margins. Nevertheless, the result exceeded subdued expectations, online sales grew 5.3% and membership across the group’s loyalty programs reached 13.1 million. Investors were also encouraged by positive early FY27 trading, stable gross margins and continued market-share gains. A fully franked 33-cent final dividend added to the appeal.

The five losers

1. Hansen Technologies (ASX:HSN): –21.2%

Hansen’s historic result met expectations, but investors recoiled from its outlook. The utility and communications software provider achieved an underlying EBITDA margin of 31%, exceeding its 30% target, while generating strong cash flow. However, management designated FY27 an “investment and transition year”, signalling a roughly five-percentage-point margin contraction as spending on products, sales capabilities and organisational changes increased.

Revenue had already been broadly flat, leaving investors concerned that the investment program would depress earnings before new growth appeared. Leadership changes, including the chief executive’s departure, added uncertainty. Management expects revenue growth and margins above 30% to return in FY28, but the market was unwilling to wait.

2. Life360 (ASX:360): –19.4%

Life360’s headline growth was impressive: quarterly revenue rose 38% to US$159 million, subscription revenue increased 31%, and adjusted EBITDA climbed 53% to US$31.1 million. Monthly active users reached 102.4 million and paying circles grew 27% to 3.2 million. The sell-off reflected expectations rather than a collapsing business.

Net income fell 18%, the net margin contracted from 6% to 3%, hardware shipments dropped 18%, and full-year EBITDA guidance was merely maintained. After a strong valuation run, investors wanted a larger upgrade and clearer evidence that heavy investment in advertising, international expansion and artificial intelligence would generate additional earnings.

3. PEXA Group (ASX:PXA): –17.0%

PEXA reported a 7% increase in continuing-operations revenue and 12% EBITDA growth to $152 million, accompanied by a two-percentage-point margin expansion. Free cash flow increased 39%, suggesting the core Australian electronic-conveyancing platform remained highly profitable. Investors instead concentrated on management’s warning that property-transfer volumes could decline, alongside regulatory uncertainty surrounding the fees PEXA can charge.

The company is also continuing to invest heavily in its loss-making international expansion. Morningstar considered the market reaction excessive, arguing that structural transfer-volume assumptions had not materially changed, but the combination of softer near-term activity and regulatory risk overwhelmed the respectable headline numbers.

4. SEEK (ASX:SEK): –14.3%

SEEK produced solid FY26 figures, including 10% revenue growth to $1.20 billion, a 15% rise in EBITDA and 28% growth in adjusted earnings per share. It also lifted its fully franked annual dividend by 13% to a record 52 cents. Those achievements were overshadowed by falling paid job-ad volumes and cautious FY27 assumptions.

The statutory accounts included a $201 million loss from the SEEK Growth Fund and $377 million of significant items, making the headline result considerably less attractive. Investors were particularly concerned that economic weakness could limit volumes while the company continued investing in platform integration and artificial-intelligence products.

5. JB Hi-Fi (ASX:JBH): –12.3%

JB Hi-Fi’s full-year result was broadly respectable, with group sales rising 5% to $11.1 billion and underlying earnings per share increasing 6% to $4.48. The damage came from its current-trading update. Australian sales were almost flat during the June quarter and deteriorated further in July, while earnings in the core Australian electronics business fell 3.6%.

Housing-related categories were particularly weak as higher living costs and interest rates constrained household budgets. With JB Hi-Fi entering the season on a demanding valuation, an in-line historic result was not sufficient: the loss of sales momentum prompted investors to rapidly reduce their expectations for FY27.

Overall, the season showed that share prices react less to whether profits rose or fell than to the gap between results and expectations. Bapcor was rewarded for being less troubled than feared, while several fundamentally profitable companies were punished because their outlooks failed to justify elevated valuations.

MOST POPULAR

The pandemic-fuelled love affair with casual footwear is fading, with Bank of America warning the downturn shows no sign of easing.

Porsche has revealed a one-off 911 GT2 RS that brings the extraordinary silhouette of its 935/78 “Moby Dick” racing car onto the road. Created by Porsche Sonderwunsch with Manthey, the commission began with a near-new GT2 RS. The owner requested greater performance, a Slantnose profile and a rear wing influenced by the limited 911 GT3 …

Related Stories
Property
Jamie Durie’s amazing waterfront home for sale with a $33m price tag
By Kirsten Craze 10/10/2025
Lifestyle
Point Piper Trophy Home Market Fires Up With Second $85 Million-Plus Listing
By Ruba Jaajaa 20/08/2026
Property
Sprawling Lifestyle Estate In Southern Highlands For Sale
By Kirsten Craze 15/01/2026
0
Your Cart
Your cart is emptyReturn to Shop