Limiting number of applications to a JOB POST

[iammuqarrab]

Hello,
I have been on Upwork since 2011. 
Recently it has been hard to land a job for me. The number of freelancers have grown tremendously over the past few years, who are also pretty capable.

My quetion is, can we limit the number of applications for a job post to 30 or 40?
I think clients would find it easier if they can see a few qualified applicants for the respective project.

Can someone discuss this issue how can we make it possible, so once in a while at least everyone can land a job now and then.

Thanks so much. 🙂

[wescowley]

No. That would make speed of replying to a post, which (in most cases) is irrelevant, one of the most critical aspects in candidate selection.

[moonraker]

Clients should be able to choose from the best candidates available. They should not be limited to choosing from those who just happened to be online at the right time to apply.

It's a no from me. 

[iammuqarrab]

Shouldn't the person online at the right moment get a better chance of landing the job rather than who is offline or not working? I just wish everyone landing a job often, not someone who is landing jobs 7 out of 10 proposals. 
I'm sure clients will find someone out of 30 candidates who can do the job at a good price.

[moonraker]

---

Md. Muqarrab H wrote:

Shouldn't the person online at the right moment get a better chance of landing the job rather than who is offline or not working? 

---

Why?

What difference would it make to their ability to do the job?

[a_lipsey]

---

Md. Muqarrab H wrote:

Shouldn't the person online at the right moment get a better chance of landing the job rather than who is offline or not working? 

---

They already do when the client is interested in hiring quickly versus taking their time to hire. Believe it or not, many of us work with clients who took more than a day to hire someone, sometimes as often as weeks. I have one potential client who I've been in discussion with for over a month as we discuss feasibility and scope. I think my clients are more interested in hiring the best person to ensure their project's success, not the person who can't land any gigs and so is surfing Upwork late at night waiting for a new job to be posted. Sorry to be blunt, but sometimes blunt is required. 

[wescowley]

---

Md. Muqarrab H wrote:

Shouldn't the person online at the right moment get a better chance of landing the job rather than who is offline or not working? 

---

No, because time is not more important than quality. In those cases where time is the deciding factor for the client, they can self limit the selection of proposals. 

[AleksandarD]

Hi Md. Muqarrab,

I'm sorry to hear about the difficulties in getting projects on Upwork. I already shared your feedback with our team for consideration.

Thank you.

[sourceprouk]

But what if it is your proposal, for a job that you are really good at, which Upwork eliminates? Upwork's 'talent specialists' consistently show that they do not really know who are the best people for a job.

The 'talent specialists' often send me invitations to bid on jobs that have got nothing to do with my skills (and they likely do not invite me to bid for jobs in which I am a real expert).

[sourceprouk]

WHAT is the matter with the Upwork bots, now, scrutinising all the bids, messages and communications in the message boards? They are pestering the likes of me, and my clients, often now. On the message above, which I have just posted, the bot tells me there was HTML when there was NONE!

[iammuqarrab]

Right, today I got an inviation for Software development which is far away from my expertise(Research and data gathering).

[lysis10]

Be careful what you wish for, sweaties.

[florydev]

---

Md. Muqarrab H wrote:

Hello,
I have been on Upwork since 2011. 
Recently it has been hard to land a job for me. The number of freelancers have grown tremendously over the past few years, who are also pretty capable.

My quetion is, can we limit the number of applications for a job post to 30 or 40?
I think clients would find it easier if they can see a few qualified applicants for the respective project.

Can someone discuss this issue how can we make it possible, so once in a while at least everyone can land a job now and then.

Thanks so much. 🙂

---

I don't like your idea, but how about we make connects cost $1.00.

Actually let's make it $10.00 then people will be far less likely to post on a job if they think they can't get it.

[petra_r]

Md. Muqarrab H wrote:

Shouldn't the person online at the right moment get a better chance of landing the job

---

No.

The most qualified and suitable person should.

[sourceprouk]

That does not work with me. I am ready to invest on getting to the good jobs and clients and it means bidding on several jobs to find out who are the good and the bad clients and jobs.

[resultsassoc]

A client who wants few applicants can make the job "invitation only." Most freelancers have upper limits on existing responses; for me it's ten to twelve. Implicit in all work is "Good, Quick, Cheap: Pick Two."  I rarely hire for Quick, so please don't limit my choices.

No to your question.

[wlyonsatl]

Md. Muqarrab H,

Upwork said it implemented the "no more free connects" policy a few months ago in order to reduce the overwhelming number of proposals some clients were getting for their new projects, which was apparently offputting for clients. 

Whether that has had the desired effect for a large number of clients is known only to Upwork.

I don't know whether Upwork gives clients the ability to review only the first X number of proposals they receive, but I am not opposed to that if the client could then choose to subsequently review the next Y number of proposals if the first X number didn't include the "right" freelancer for the project. The early bird gets the worm in many areas of life.

If all clients knew what they should expect to pay for the work they need done, Upwork could also allow clients to set a hard range for proposals they are willing to accept, which would also reduce the number of proposals submitted. (As a freelancer I'd like this feature when searching for hourly clients, but some freelancers will oppose more client control over the bids they can receive because these freelancers expect they can convince clients to pay them far more than the clients originally budgeted. It likely does happen from time to time, but no one outside Upwork know whether it's common across all freelancer proposals. And Upwork's protocols should be what does the most good for the most clients and freelancers, not try to keep the outliers happy at the expense of everyone else's Upwork experience.) 

I would also like Upwork to default to not allowing additional new freelancer proposals (wasting connects and the money freelancers pay for them) once a client makes one hire, rather than allowing freelancers to continue to submit proposals on a project where the cilent has no intention of hiring more than one freelancer. (Yes, the client should first be asked to confirm whether they want to hire more than one freelancer after the first freelancer has been hired. I have worked on nearly 300 Upwork projects and don't know a single one where the client hired more than on freelancer.)

Upwork can make some clients and freelancers happy all the time (you know who you are) or make all of them happy some of the time, but Upwork cannot make every user happy all of the time.

[petra_r]

---

Will L wrote:

I am not opposed to that if the client could then choose to subsequently review the next Y number of proposals if the first X number didn't include the "right" freelancer for the project. The early bird gets the worm in many areas of life.

---

As Upwork, by default, does not present the applicants in the order they were received, the earliest bird may still be at the very bottom of the list, because Upwork's best match algorithm does not like that particular bird for that particular job.....

[wlyonsatl]

That doesn't really matter, Petra.

I don't have a lot of faith in Upwork's many algorithms - sometimes letting computers make decisions simplistically that even smart humans would have great difficulty making - but if Upwork already sorts proposals, as you say, then there should be no problem adding another sort criteria that allows the client to see the first X number of proposals that pass muster with Upwork and letting the client then decide whether they want to see more Upwork-vetted proposals.

Of course, this current sorting of proposals puts some freelancers' proposals at a great disadvantage. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing for all freelancers on all new projects.

And if Upwork has such great confidence in its algorithmic ability to weed out clearly irrelevant or inappropriate proposals, those proposals should be rejected (never shown to the clients) and the freelancers who submitted them notified by Upwork that their proposal was rejected and their connects returned.

The problem of too many irrelevant proposals being submitted would be at least partly addressed if freelancers were notified when their proposals are irrelevant in Upwork's opinion. When freelancers now get no response or feedback at all to their proposals then they have no idea why. As a result, at least some, maybe most, will continue to make irrelevant and inappropriate proposals, clogging clients' in-boxes and wasting the freelancers' time and money for connects.

[iammuqarrab]

Yes, not everyone will be happy while applying.

Most of the time we see 10-15 proposals on certain jobs, that means a client has specified or has additional requirements (most freelancers don't meet this requirement and they don't apply).

I wish when a client wants a quick job done, possible hiring in the next few hours or has a deadline, a client can limit proposals to a certain extent, it saves connects for the freelancer as well, if they see that the quota has already been filled.

I have no problem if a client wants to review as many freelancers for as long as they want before hiring, they must have an option to choose/do that.