Home > Articles > The Auto-Apply Arms Race and the Mystery of Klaus Grant

The Auto-Apply Arms Race and the Mystery of Klaus Grant

The Auto-Apply Arms Race and the Mystery of Klaus Grant

We had an unusual moment during a recent System Admin Insights meeting.

Someone casually mentioned a strange pattern in their iCIMS ATS: one candidate had submitted 110 applications to their company. Same name, endless spammy email addresses from Gmail and SonaraMail, rinse and repeat.

The name? Klaus Grant.

Cue the collective wait a second moment. Two other members spoke up: “We have that guy too.”

Now, if Klaus Grant is a real person, I hope he’s okay. I even called the number one member had on file (straight to voicemail) and sent a text. We’d love to talk with him.

But regardless of whether Klaus is real or a phantom created by resume-blasting software, here’s what’s very real: the tension between software developers building tools for job seekers and software developers building defenses for recruiters is escalating. And the loser, again and again, is the job seeker.

Let me break it down:

  • Tools like LazyApply (aka Sonara—”Cast a wider net — 10x your job applications,” says the website) promise job seekers ease and efficiency. Upload your resume, plug in your preferences, and boom—hundreds of applications go out daily. It feels productive. You see activity. Maybe you even get a few interviews.

  • But what candidates don’t realize is that ATS systems see everything. Including that you applied for 110 roles at the same company, many of which make no sense together. The end result is that recruiters assume all of your applications are spam.

This is the AI arms race in talent acquisition. Tools to game the system vs. tools to protect the system. It’s developer vs. developer, while the candidate experience stays… bad.

If you’re a candidate: I get it. Looking for a job is exhausting, dehumanizing, and opaque. But these spammy AI tools are not helping you. They’re burning bridges before you even have a chance to walk across them.

A more strategic approach—fewer, more tailored applications—is still noticed. It’s increasingly rare now. It stands out. And yes, it’s more effort. But the effort is visible.

If Klaus is real, I’d love to invite him to SAI to share his side. I doubt he knows the impact these tools have on his job seeking efforts behind the scenes.

The candidates aren’t the enemy here. But they’re caught in a system that treats them like one.

Until we do better: candidates deserve honesty about what’s working—and what isn’t.

RELATED POSTS

iCIMS Ike comparing HCM bundled ATS options

iCIMS vs. HCM Suites: A Guide for Strategic Talent Leaders

Many companies are considering switching from iCIMS to a bundled HCM platform, but most underestimate what they’ll lose. If you once needed a point solution, you probably still do. This article explores when to switch, when to stay, and how to make the decision with clarity—not just marketing.

iCIMS Ike vs ADP's ATS solution

iCIMS vs. ADP Recruiting

This report compares iCIMS and ADP Recruiting, outlining the functionality that iCIMS customers may lose when transitioning to ADP. It covers key areas like sourcing and CRM, job distribution, interview scheduling, offer management, and compliance, with a focus on the healthcare industry. This comprehensive guide provides HR and IT decision-makers with questions to ask ADP to ensure no critical features are lost during the switch.

iCIMS Ike vs. Dayforce ATS

iCIMS vs. Ceridian Dayforce

Thinking about switching from iCIMS to Dayforce? This guide outlines the key feature gaps to watch for—especially in sourcing, CRM, and job distribution—and offers pointed questions to ask Ceridian before making a move. Use it as a conversation starter during demos, not a final verdict. Vendor evaluation starts with the right questions.

System Admin Insights
Subscribe to our newsletter
Get exclusive access to the full learning opportunity