Everyone's heard that applicant tracking systems are the gatekeepers of the modern job market. What fewer people know is that most of the advice about beating them is based on a misunderstanding of what these systems actually do. Here's what's genuinely happening when you submit a CV online.
Step One: Parsing
When you apply through an online portal, the ATS reads your CV and converts it into structured data pulling out your name, contact details, job titles, employers, dates, and skills. This is pattern recognition, not intelligent reading. The system is looking for predictable markers: standard section headers, date formats, consistent bullet structures.
This is where formatting causes problems. Systems like Workday struggle with multi-column layouts and embedded tables, and contact information placed in headers or footers is frequently missed entirely. A CV that looks visually impressive to a human can be partially unreadable to the system processing it.
Step Two: Scoring and Ranking
The ATS acts as a search engine rather than a rejection machine, ranking candidates based on keywords and qualifications rather than automatically discarding them. Once parsed, your CV is assigned a match score based on how well it aligns with the job requirements. The system assigns scores based on keyword frequency and placement, with different sections weighted differently.
Here's the part most advice gets wrong. Much of the keyword optimisation advice you read online is actually about sourcing; how recruiters find candidates by searching databases, rather than screening incoming applications. This matters more for your LinkedIn profile than for your CV submission.
Step Three: Human Review
A recruiter then searches the database using filters for keywords, skills, and experience, and higher-scoring CVs appear first in results. A human still decides. What the ATS does is determine whether your CV is in the top pile they bother to look at.
If your score puts you in the lower half of the applicant pool, your CV is functionally invisible even if you're highly qualified. That's not the system rejecting you. It's the system deprioritising you before a human has the chance to disagree.
What This Actually Means for Your CV
The practical implications are more specific than "include keywords":
Use a clean, single-column layout. Analysis of rejected CVs found that single-column formatting achieves 93% parsing accuracy versus 86% for two-column layouts, a gap that can make the difference in a competitive field.
-Mirror the language of the job description precisely. ATS systems don't always recognise synonyms or alternative phrasing. If the job description says "stakeholder management" and your CV says "client relationships," the system may not make that connection.
-Put keywords where they count most. Keywords in your summary and skills sections carry more weight than the same words buried in an older role. Front-load the most relevant terms.
-Keep your contact details in the body of the document, never in a header or footer.
The Honest Bottom Line
An ATS won't reject your CV unfairly. What it will do is rank it against everyone else who applied. If your CV isn't structured clearly, doesn't use the right language, and doesn't lead with the most relevant content, you'll consistently appear further down the pile, regardless of your actual suitability for the role.
The fix isn't gaming the system. It's making sure your CV communicates your relevance clearly, in the language the system and the recruiter are both looking for.
Want to know how your CV scores? Karro analyses your CV for ATS compatibility, keyword matching, and language clarity — and tells you specifically what to improve. Try it free.