How helpful are corporate Web sites in assisting job seekers with exploring employment opportunities at their companies? Not very, according to a new study of the job-search pages of the nation's largest companies. And when it comes to helping executive-level prospects, companies do even worse.

The study rated the recruiting pages of the Web sites of the companies in the Fortune 500 on a scale of zero ("offers no value") to five ("world class") using criteria important to job hunters, such as how easy it is to find and apply for current job openings and how much feedback applicants receive. None received the top rating, and only 40 received a three-plus or better, says Gerry Crispin, a principal of MMC Group, a staffing consulting firm in Kendall Park, N.J., which conducted the study.

The majority (360) only satisfy job seekers' most rudimentary information needs, such as listing the current openings or available benefits. A sizable number (105) can't meet visitors' "simplest expectations" about finding and applying for jobs. The worst sites in this latter category include no employment information, while the better ones provide only static material that resembles corporate marketing brochures, says Mr. Crispin.

Still, job hunters likely will be interested in the study's list of the top 25 corporate staffing sites, which, given their more user-friendly approaches, could be worth a visit. Likewise, prospects might find it helpful to note those most in need of improvement, if only to be forewarned should they be interested in pursuing opportunities at these employers.

A common problem the study cited is the lack of response to job seekers. Typical is the frustration that Brent Tisdale has experienced in his search for a position in e-commerce sales. The 44-year-old Cleveland sales executive has kept detailed records on the companies he's applied to electronically. Of the 100 or so, only two have replied personally, he says.

"They have pulled the humanity out of the process," says Mr. Tisdale. "It's pure numbers, and, if you don't fit, you're out in the cold."

Another shortcoming is the length of time it takes to input an applicant's information. Jerry Richerson, a former contract-management executive for a competitive local-exchange carrier (CLEC) in Dallas, says he sometimes quits in frustration. "I get half-way through and shut it down," says Mr. Richerson, 52. "If I have to do this just to get someone to look at me, what would it be like to work there?"

The lack of standardization among sites is another source of aggravation for Mr. Richerson. Some ask applicants to e-mail a resume in a certain format; others want them to cut and paste or type information directly into an online application. This means maintaining different document formats for each version of his resume.

"Everyone tells you that you need a multitude of resumes," says Mr. Richerson. "If I have five or six target resumes that I am continually grooming, I have to continually maintain my database of .txt and .htm files in case I run across a site where I need to use that format to paste them in." He says he often asks, "If I have to do this [much work] just to get someone to look at me, what would it be like to work there?"

The study also found that the information on corporate Web sites about jobs is often outdated. This is Paul Wigsten's biggest beef. The information-technology executive in Trumbull, Conn., was the technology adviser for the Web site of his former employer, a New York City-area hospital, and is seeking a position at another health-care provider. He says company Web sites are almost useless if the employers lack effective internal databases and applicant search tools to sort through candidates' information. "The effectiveness for the job seekers and the company is marginal at best," he says.

Mr. Wigsten expects to eventually find a job through networking and says he'll probably use corporate Web sites mainly for research.

It's probably a good idea. Even the best of the sites studied have little to offer executive-level job hunters looking for job listings. "Their Web sites are limited for executive job hunters," says Mr. Crispin. "Only 2% to 10% of them will likely get hired directly from a company's Web site."

Seattle-based Costco Wholesale Corp. is among the companies with the worst-rated sites. Its site provides only generic information about jobs. After clicking on the "employment opportunities" link at the bottom of the home page, visitors find out that they need to apply to specific stores or warehouses if they want jobs at those locations. Those who want regional, corporate or information-systems jobs are told to send their resumes to specific e-mail addresses.

Don Burdick, Costco's senior vice president of information systems, says the site has been used mostly to attract information-technology professionals and is intentionally bare-boned. "We try to match the site with the company -- bare concrete floors and high rack steel," he says. "It isn't our goal to be highly interactive or state-of-the-art."

The company is hiring at store locations aggressively as it expands, but is shrinking at the corporate office, he says. If specific openings need to be filled, it prefers to use a job-board, where it can post blind ads and doesn't need to respond to job seekers. "Not getting a good site rating is fine with me," says Mr. Burdick. "We get 10 applicants for every one job and several hundred when we post something on Monster.com."