Short answer

Start with evidence, not a score.

You are plausibly qualified when you meet the true eligibility requirements and can show credible evidence for much of the role’s central work—even if your path, title or tools are not identical. Treat licences, legal eligibility and explicit minimums differently from preferences. Do not rely on a universal percentage rule.

Ask four questions in order

  1. Am I eligible? Check work authorization, location, schedule, licence and other explicit constraints.
  2. Can I do the central work? Translate the posting into outcomes and recurring responsibilities.
  3. Can I demonstrate that? Find examples in employment, projects, education, research, volunteering or other relevant experience.
  4. What is missing? Separate learnable gaps, presentational gaps and true blockers.

Eligibility and qualification are not always the same. In some hiring systems—especially regulated or government roles—failing an eligibility condition can end review before the strength of your broader experience is considered.

Separate hard constraints from flexible signals

Usually hard
  • Required professional licence
  • Legal work eligibility
  • Mandatory security clearance already held
  • Essential language or location condition
Often needs judgment
  • Exact years of experience
  • A preferred degree
  • A closely related software tool
  • An unfamiliar but transferable industry

The wording and occupation matter. “Preferred” is not “required.” But do not assume every stated minimum is optional merely because another employer might be flexible.

A realistic scenario

A community-program coordinator role asks for event planning, partner communication, budget tracking and three years in a nonprofit. You have two years coordinating university events, managed small budgets and worked with local partners, but have not worked for a nonprofit.

You have direct evidence for the core work, a modest experience gap and a domain gap—not zero qualification. A reasonable application would make the coordination, budgets and partners easy to see while leaving the nonprofit gap honest. A claim that your university role “was nonprofit management” would not be reasonable.

Apply, investigate or move on?

ApplyCore work is supported

You meet hard requirements and can demonstrate central responsibilities.

InvestigateWording is ambiguous

Look for an official careers page, contact the recruiter where appropriate, or use the application to explain adjacent evidence.

Move onA true blocker remains

You lack an explicit licence, eligibility condition or central capability and cannot credibly bridge it.

Avoid both extremes

Put the method into practice

See what your resume demonstrates

Use evidence beside each requirement to make your own application decision.

See what your resume demonstrates