Job Searching: Some Methods Yield Better Results than Others

Thursday, March 20, 2014

While the unemployed broaden their search methods during times of recession, some methods have been found to be more effective than others, according to new research from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.

In a recent issue of The Regional Economist, St. Louis Fed Economist David Wiczer and Research Analyst James Eubanks examined responses to the Current Population Survey going back to 1976 to determine if the method of searching for a job impacted the likelihood of landing a job.

Wiczer and Eubanks found that the most popular method was to directly contact potential employers, which was also one of the most successful methods.  Perhaps surprisingly, those who use their network connections actually found jobs at a slower rate than the average job seeker.  They also found that those using private employment agencies fared relatively poorly, as this method had the second-lowest job-finding rates in the first month of unemployment.  Only using a public employment agency was a method with a lower rate.

Prior research has shown that the longer an individual is unemployed, the less likely he or she is to find a job.  Wiczer and Eubanks examined the effectiveness of various methods on job searches by the long-term employed.  In the first month of unemployment, the job-finding rates ranged from 46 percent for those contacting an employer directly to 32 percent for those using passive methods such as attending a job training program or updating a resume.  That gap narrowed to 5 percentage points for those unemployed for more than a year and narrowed even further to 2 percentage points if excluding passive methods.

Additional Resources

Posted In Labor  |  Tagged david wiczerjames eubanksjob searchjob searchingrecessionunemployment
Commenting Policy: We encourage comments and discussions on our posts, even those that disagree with conclusions, if they are done in a respectful and courteous manner. All comments posted to our blog go through a moderator, so they won't appear immediately after being submitted. We reserve the right to remove or not publish inappropriate comments. This includes, but is not limited to, comments that are:
  • Vulgar, obscene, profane or otherwise disrespectful or discourteous
  • For commercial use, including spam
  • Threatening, harassing or constituting personal attacks
  • Violating copyright or otherwise infringing on third-party rights
  • Off-topic or significantly political
The St. Louis Fed will only respond to comments if we are clarifying a point. Comments are limited to 1,500 characters, so please edit your thinking before posting. While you will retain all of your ownership rights in any comment you submit, posting comments means you grant the St. Louis Fed the royalty-free right, in perpetuity, to use, reproduce, distribute, alter and/or display them, and the St. Louis Fed will be free to use any ideas, concepts, artwork, inventions, developments, suggestions or techniques embodied in your comments for any purpose whatsoever, with or without attribution, and without compensation to you. You will also waive all moral rights you may have in any comment you submit.
comments powered by Disqus

The St. Louis Fed uses Disqus software for the comment functionality on this blog. You can read the Disqus privacy policy. Disqus uses cookies and third party cookies. To learn more about these cookies and how to disable them, please see this article.

Subscribe to
On the Economy

Get notified when new content is available on our On the Economy blog.

Email Alerts  |  RSS

About the Blog

The St. Louis Fed On the Economy blog features relevant commentary, analysis, research and data from our economists and other St. Louis Fed experts.

Views expressed are not necessarily those of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis or of the Federal Reserve System.

Contact Us

For media-related questions, email For all other blog-related questions or comments, email