An Applicant Tracking System does not read your CV the way a recruiter does. It parses your document into structured data fields, scores those fields against what the employer configured, and either passes you forward or drops you — often before any human has seen your name. Understanding how this works is not optional if you are applying to UK companies of any size. It is the difference between your CV being read and it disappearing.
Three ATS platforms dominate UK hiring: Greenhouse, Workday, and SAP SuccessFactors. A fourth, Lever, is growing in the UK tech sector. They do not all behave the same way. Here is what each one actually does to your CV.
Greenhouse
How it parses
Greenhouse uses a structured parser that extracts named fields — job titles, companies, dates, education — and maps them to a candidate profile. It handles PDF and DOCX reliably as long as you use single-column formatting. Multi-column layouts frequently scramble the field mapping.
How it scores
Scoring in Greenhouse is largely recruiter-configured. Employers set up scorecards with weighted attributes. Keyword matching happens at the search stage, not at submission — so your CV is not auto-rejected by a score, but it will never surface in searches if your keywords are absent.
For Greenhouse: use clean single-column PDF. Ensure your job titles match standard UK industry titles exactly — Greenhouse's parser keys on these. A "Product Lead" may not surface when a recruiter searches "Product Manager".
Workday
How it parses
Workday is the most aggressive parser of the three. It attempts to extract every field — including skills, certifications, and even sentence-level content — into its own candidate database fields. Tables, headers in text boxes, and graphics are dropped entirely. Workday also normalises job titles against its own taxonomy, which can downgrade unusual titles.
How it scores
Workday includes an optional Machine Learning scoring layer called Workday Skills Cloud. When enabled by the employer, it scores candidates against a skills ontology — meaning implied skills matter, not just exact keywords. However, most UK employers using Workday have not fully configured this layer and rely on keyword search.
For Workday: avoid DOCX with tracked changes, headers, footers, or text boxes — these confuse the parser badly. Plain DOCX or PDF only. Use the exact job title from the posting in your profile summary where it is truthful to do so.
SAP SuccessFactors
How it parses
SuccessFactors parsing is less sophisticated than Greenhouse or Workday. It extracts text sequentially and is more tolerant of formatting variations — but this also means it is less precise at field-level extraction. Skills and keywords buried in dense paragraphs may be missed entirely.
How it scores
SuccessFactors scoring is almost entirely keyword-based. Employers configure required and preferred keywords at the job posting level. Exact match is weighted significantly higher than semantic match. This makes it the most literal of the three — paraphrasing keywords here is the most costly mistake you can make.
For SuccessFactors: copy required skills and keywords verbatim from the job posting. Do not rephrase. "Data Governance" and "governance of data" are not the same thing to this system.
Lever (bonus)
How it parses
Lever has the most modern parser of the four. It handles both PDF and DOCX well, copes with minor formatting variations, and is generally more forgiving about layout. It also indexes the full text of your CV, not just extracted fields.
How it scores
Lever is recruiter-search-led rather than auto-scored. Recruiters search the candidate database using skills and keywords. Because full-text is indexed, keywords anywhere in your CV count — not just in the skills section.
For Lever: keyword placement is less critical than for SuccessFactors, but completeness matters. Make sure every relevant skill appears somewhere in the document, not just once.
The 7 rules that apply to every ATS
System-specific tactics help at the margin. These rules apply everywhere and matter more.
1
Single column, alwaysMulti-column layouts break parsing across every ATS platform without exception. The system reads left to right across the full width, which turns two columns into garbled interleaved text.
2
No headers, footers, or text boxesContent placed in Word's header/footer region or in text boxes is invisible to most ATS parsers. Your name and contact details in a header may never be extracted.
3
Standard section namesUse WORK EXPERIENCE, EDUCATION, SKILLS, PROFESSIONAL PROFILE. Creative alternatives like "Where I've Been" or "My Toolkit" are not recognised by structured parsers.
4
Exact keyword matchingIdentify the 8-12 most important keywords in the job description. Use them verbatim in your skills section and woven naturally into your experience bullets. Do not paraphrase.
5
Consistent date formattingParsers extract employment dates to calculate tenure. Mixed formats (Jan 2022, January 2022, 01/2022 all in the same document) can cause miscalculation or extraction failure.
6
No tables for skills or experienceTables are the most common cause of ATS parsing failure. Content inside table cells is either dropped or merged into a single unstructured block of text.
7
File format mattersPDF is generally safest for formatting preservation. DOCX is better if the ATS is Workday (it handles DOCX natively). Never submit a scanned image PDF — it is not machine-readable.
Three ATS myths that are costing people interviews
✕ Myth
"I need to stuff my CV with keywords to beat the ATS"
Keyword stuffing — placing dozens of terms in white text, repeating the same phrase ten times, or dumping a keyword block at the bottom — was gamed out of most modern ATS platforms years ago. Greenhouse and Workday both flag abnormal keyword density. More importantly, once a human reads the CV, a keyword-stuffed document fails immediately. Keyword relevance beats keyword volume every time.
✕ Myth
"If I format my CV beautifully it will stand out to the ATS"
ATS systems do not see your formatting. They see extracted text. A beautifully designed two-column CV with a photo, progress bars for skills, and a colour-coded timeline may look impressive as a PDF but parse into near-unreadable structured data. Design for the human who reads after the ATS, not for the ATS itself — and that means clean, parseable structure first.
✕ Myth
"ATS auto-rejects most applications before humans see them"
This is overstated. Most UK ATS deployments use the system to organise and search candidates, not to hard-reject them. The more accurate picture is: a poor CV does not get rejected — it simply never surfaces when a recruiter searches. The practical effect is the same, but the mechanism matters: you are not being filtered out by a bot making a decision, you are being made invisible by a search that cannot find you.
See how your CV performs against UK ATS systems.
CVApplied scores your CV across 14 dimensions including ATS compatibility, keyword coverage, and formatting — calibrated against Greenhouse, Workday, and SAP SuccessFactors.
✦ Analyse My CV Free →