One attraction campaign can serve two different hiring needs

VCO Group data from Young Talent Programmes in Vietnam shows that roughly 1 in 4 applicants already has work experience. Today this group runs through the same funnel as fresh graduates and is mostly filtered out at the test round - even though the company has already paid to attract them, and other teams in the same business are hiring exactly that profile.

The budget being left on the table

A Young Talent Program campaign spends money in three main places: media and advertising, on-campus activity, and recruiting team time. All three exist to bring candidates to the application page. Once a candidate has applied, the most expensive part of the campaign is already done.

In VCO Group's dataset, roughly a quarter of applicants to these programmes already have work experience. They apply because of the employer brand, because of the development path described in the posting, or simply because this is the only visible door into that company.

The current process routes them through the same funnel as fresh graduates, gives them the same test, and judges them against the same threshold. Most stop at the test round. The company paid to bring them in, then let them go - while other departments in the same business are advertising for exactly that profile and paying attraction costs a second time.

Why experienced candidates score lower on the general test

Before discussing the fix, one misreading of the data needs clearing up. Older candidates with work experience score lower on the general aptitude test than fresh graduates. That does not mean they are weaker.

The aptitude test used for a Young Talent Program is designed to measure learning potential and reasoning in people without an established professional base. It measures the right thing for new graduates. For someone three years into a career, what determines job performance is specific professional capability, which the general test does not touch.

In other words, a low score here reflects using the wrong instrument on a different population, not the candidate's ability. This is why lowering the general threshold to retain this group is a mistake: it would drag unsuitable candidates into the Young Talent track while still failing to measure what matters on the other track.

A two-track structure sharing one campaign

The answer is not to run two campaigns. It is to keep everything expensive shared and split only where splitting is cheap.

What is shared and what is separated between the two tracks

What the two tracks share is precisely the most expensive part of a recruitment campaign. What differs is only the scoring weights and the assessment.

The incremental cost of running this structure is two form fields. One asks how long the candidate has been working; the other lets them select a role of interest from the company's current openings. No extra ad budget, no extra events, no extra landing page.

The thing to prepare in advance is that the list of open roles must be ready when the campaign launches. In practice this is a bigger obstacle than the technical work, because it requires the programme recruiting team and the operational recruiting team to align their plans at least a month ahead.

The two tracks must be reported separately

One small detail determines whether this structure survives beyond its first season: how the results are reported.

If hires made for other vacancies are folded into the Young Talent Program report, the programme's target looks diluted. If they are excluded entirely, the programme loses its single largest contribution to cost efficiency.

The answer is to report the two tracks separately against one budget line. The Young Talent track reports against programme targets. The open-vacancy track reports roles filled and cost per hire. Added together, cost per hire across the whole campaign falls markedly, because the denominator grows while the budget stays flat.

This is also the easiest framing to get next season's budget approved, because it shifts the conversation from the cost of a development programme to the efficiency of a talent attraction investment.

Market context supports this approach

Regional hiring conditions in 2026 make a two-track structure more worth considering than it was a few years ago.

VietnamWorks' Q2 2026 recruitment market report records national hiring indices up year on year, with Hanoi overtaking Ho Chi Minh City on both scale and growth rate, and the gap between hiring demand and candidate supply continuing to widen across many sectors. In that environment, every quality application already in your system is worth keeping.

Regionally, Institute of Student Employers research shows large employers rebalancing their entry-level intake rather than simply cutting it, with the mix between graduate and apprentice hiring shifting steadily year on year. Using one attraction budget to serve several hiring needs fits that direction of travel.

One compliance point should be handled at the form design stage. Using candidate data for a purpose other than the one stated at collection requires a valid processing basis under the personal data protection rules in force from the start of 2026. The role-of-interest field therefore needs accompanying consent wording, not just a selection box.

Three things to do

1. Add two fields to the application form - time in work, and role of interest - with consent wording covering this use.
2. Lock the list of open roles from other departments at least a month before the campaign launches, since this is a bigger operational obstacle than the technical work.
3. Report the two tracks separately against a single budget line, so that campaign-level cost per hire properly reflects the second track's contribution.

Frequently asked questions

What share of Young Talent Program applicants already have work experience?

According to VCO Group data from Young Talent Programmes in Vietnam, roughly 1 in 4 applicants already has work experience. Most of this group is currently filtered out at the test round because they are measured with a test designed for new graduates.

Should the test threshold be lowered to retain experienced applicants?

No. Lowering the general threshold would pull unsuitable candidates into the Young Talent track while still failing to measure the specific professional capability of experienced applicants. The better fix is to change the assessment for that track and leave the general threshold alone.

What does it cost to split a recruitment campaign into two tracks?

The incremental cost is two fields on the application form. Everything expensive - media, campus activity and the application page - is shared. The separation applies only to CV scoring weights and to the assessment used after the CV round.

About VCO Group

VCO Group operates the assessment infrastructure behind Young Talent Programmes and Management Trainee schemes in Vietnam, covering application intake, aptitude testing, automated interviewing and Assessment Centres. VCO Group serves young talent and candidates with under three years of experience, working with large enterprises and multinationals in Vietnam. Its assessment and candidate management platform is called Testalents. Head office in Ho Chi Minh City.

If you would like to benchmark your own selection data against the market, or discuss the Young Talent Program Insight Report, contact Mr. Dung on 0334 889 068 or visit vcogroup.com.vn.