Episode 13: The “Spec” Society and Job Competition in Korea — Living in an Age of Constant Proof
The Everyday Reality of Building a “Spec Portfolio”
In contemporary Korea, preparing for employment almost always means building a portfolio of “specs.” The word “spec” here refers to measurable qualifications: academic background, GPA, English test scores, professional certificates, internships, extracurricular activities, volunteer work, and even awards from competitions. Collectively, these credentials are often summarized as the “eight essential specs” for job seekers.
For many students, university life no longer revolves solely around lectures and exams. Summer and winter breaks are filled with language tests or certificate courses. During semesters, students juggle project-based extracurriculars, competitions, and internships. Rather than being optional, these activities are widely viewed as the minimum level of proof needed to survive in the job market.
The normalization of specs stems from two intertwined realities: the scarcity of secure jobs and the uncertainty of selection. In a market where hundreds—or even thousands—compete for a single position, applicants feel compelled to stack as many signals as possible onto their résumés. On the other side, companies facing an overwhelming volume of applications rely on quantifiable indicators to filter candidates efficiently. Specs therefore serve a dual role: a survival strategy for applicants and a sorting mechanism for employers.
This logic operates even though Korea’s labor market looks strong on paper. According to the OECD Employment Outlook 2024, the employment rate for those aged 15–64 reached 69.4% by May 2024, with unemployment as low as 2.8%. Yet the same report highlighted persistent mismatches between job seekers and employer demands. At the same time, U.S. Federal Reserve statistics show Korea’s youth unemployment rate (ages 15–24) rose to 5.9% in 2024. These figures illustrate a paradox: while overall employment appears stable, the entry point for young people remains difficult. In this environment, accumulating more proof—more specs—feels essential, even if it delays entry into the workforce.
Competition for “Good Jobs” and Metropolitan Concentration
Not all jobs are valued equally. In Korea, there is a shared understanding of what constitutes a “good job.” These are positions in large corporations, financial institutions, professional sectors, and the public sector—roles associated with stability, good pay, and benefits. Yet such jobs make up only a small fraction of the total labor market. The smaller the pie, the fiercer the competition, and the greater the emphasis on specs as differentiating factors.
Geography further intensifies the challenge. Most high-value internships, networking opportunities, and career-related programs are concentrated in the Seoul metropolitan area. As a result, students often migrate to the capital during their studies, hoping to secure both educational advantages and career-related experiences. This creates what many young people call an “invisible spec”—the simple fact of being born, raised, or studying in Seoul.
This spatial imbalance also affects real estate markets. Districts known for elite schools, tutoring centers, or corporate headquarters see housing prices climb, as families seek to place their children closer to opportunities. Meanwhile, regional universities struggle to fill seats, creating a reinforcing cycle of decline outside the capital. In this way, Korea’s spec society reflects not just educational culture, but also broader patterns of urban concentration and inequality.
Shifts in Recruitment Practices: Job-Centered, AI-Driven, and Skill-Based
Ironically, the landscape of spec competition is being reshaped by changes in recruitment methods.
One shift is the spread of blind recruitment. Public institutions, and increasingly private companies, have removed fields such as university name, family background, or physical characteristics from résumés. The intention is to emphasize job-relevant capabilities rather than background signals. While promising on paper, many observers note that in practice, academic pedigree and specs remain influential in subtle ways.
Another development is the rise of AI-based hiring. Major corporations and tech platforms are adopting systems that automate résumé screening, conduct online video interviews, and use gamified assessments to measure problem-solving and personality traits. Companies praise these tools for efficiency and consistency, but job seekers often express unease about algorithmic bias and transparency. By 2025, surveys indicated that over 40% of Korea’s top 500 companies were already using or actively considering AI recruitment tools.
A third trend is the global shift toward skills-based hiring. Coding tests, case interviews, portfolio reviews, and work simulations are now common components of selection. International surveys show that by 2025, 85% of employers worldwide were incorporating skills-based methods, with 76% using formal skill assessments. In Korea, this has translated into more task-oriented recruitment, where candidates must demonstrate capability directly. However, rather than reducing the role of specs, this often creates new forms of specs. Preparing for these assessments—taking mock tests, building online portfolios, or attending training camps—becomes yet another line item in the résumé.
As recruitment seasons shift from mass hiring to rolling, job-specific intakes, applicants are forced into a state of constant readiness. Online tests and AI interviews can be scheduled at short notice, making the ability to adapt quickly and present oneself on camera into new competencies in their own right. In this way, the list of specs grows longer each year.
Fairness Debates and the Youth Perspective
The issue of fairness looms large in Korea’s job market. Blind recruitment and AI interviews are often presented as reforms that enhance equality, yet in practice they may introduce new inequalities. Algorithms raise concerns about explainability and potential bias, while skill assessments require additional preparation that may privilege those with better resources.
For young people, the gap between statistics and lived experience is particularly stark. While national employment rates appear healthy, many job seekers feel that the threshold for entry is only getting higher. Community forums and interviews are filled with comments such as “there are no companies to apply to” or “everything is for experienced hires.” Even when jobs exist, the sense that one must constantly prove oneself through endless preparation creates frustration and fatigue.
This cycle also takes a toll on mental health. Each additional certificate or internship adds weight to a résumé, but also reminds applicants of the time spent not yet employed. Repeated rejections amplify feelings of inadequacy. For many, the process of building specs is no longer simply self-improvement, but a psychological burden.
Generational attitudes reflect this tension. On the one hand, there is a growing discourse of “skills over credentials,” with young people demanding recognition based on what they can actually do rather than where they studied. On the other hand, they cannot ignore that pedigree and specs remain deeply embedded in employer expectations. The dissonance between these two realities drives much of the frustration visible in youth culture today.
Conclusion: Documenting a Society of Constant Proof
Korea’s spec society is not simply the story of ambitious young people working hard. It is the product of structural realities: the scarcity of desirable jobs, the concentration of opportunities in metropolitan areas, and the rapid evolution of hiring practices. Within this system, individuals respond by stacking proof—proof of language skills, proof of technical ability, proof of persistence.
Specs, however, are never a finished list. Each new policy, technology, or trend introduces additional requirements. What was once optional soon becomes expected, and applicants find themselves updating their portfolios year after year. The result is a culture defined by endless cycles of preparation and evaluation.
Young people ask, “What else must I show to be considered?” Employers ask, “How can we select fairly and efficiently?” Between these questions lies the lived reality of Korea’s spec-driven job competition.