An application log sounds like bureaucracy and is in fact the most practical tool of a job search. Yes, it answers the agency's question. More importantly it answers your own: where have I already applied, where should I follow up, who never replied at all.
This article shows which columns it needs, what an entry looks like that raises no questions, and when a tool starts to pay off. The legal framing is in the guide to proving your job search.
Legal status: August 2026. Orientation, not legal advice. The exact form your agency asks for can differ.
Why the log saves you
Two situations make the difference.
The first is the appointment. Being asked what you did last quarter and putting a sheet on the table ends the conversation in two minutes. Telling it from memory takes ten and still leaves an uncertain impression. How many applications are expected depends on your agreement rather than any general figure, which is covered in the article on how many applications the agency expects.
The second is your own head. After four weeks nobody remembers whether the application to that logistics firm in Kassel went out or is still sitting in drafts. Applying twice to the same employer is embarrassing, forgetting to follow up costs chances, and both happen reliably without a log.
The columns that count
Five columns are enough, and each has a reason.
Date. The day you applied, not the date of the advertisement. This is what a period gets checked against.
Employer. Full name plus location. There are a hundred firms called "Meyer GmbH" and one "Meyer Logistik GmbH, Kassel".
Role. The job title from the advertisement, with the reference number if there is one. That number is the best evidence that the posting existed.
Channel. Portal, email, post, phone, in person. It determines what evidence you hold.
Outcome. Open, invited, rejected, no reply, with the date. The column most often left empty and the one worth the most.
Two more are optional and useful: contact person (saves searching when you follow up) and follow up on (turns the log into a plan). More columns than that and the log stops being maintained.
The template
Take this structure straight into a spreadsheet, a document, or onto squared paper:
| Date | Employer, location | Role (ref.) | Channel | Outcome | Follow up |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 14.09.2026 | Meyer Logistik GmbH, Kassel | Dispatcher (2026-441) | Portal | Rejected 02.10. | - |
| 16.09.2026 | Stadtwerke Fulda | Purchasing administrator | No reply | 30.09. | |
| 18.09.2026 | Auto Krueger, Bad Hersfeld | Speculative, warehouse | Phone (Mr Krueger) | Callback promised | 25.09. |
| 22.09.2026 | Job fair Nordhessen, Kassel | 3 conversations, contacts | In person | Documents handed over | 06.10. |
Two things there are deliberate. First, the job fair sits in the same list as the classic applications, because it counts the same. Second, the last column is not proof for the agency but for you, and it is the reason you keep the log voluntarily.
If your agency handed out its own template, use it. It asks for the same details, and a form somebody recognises gets signed off faster.
Paper, spreadsheet or tool
Paper works and has one real advantage: it lies on the table, so it gets filled in. Downsides: not searchable, not copyable, and gone if lost. For ten to fifteen applications it is entirely sufficient.
A spreadsheet is the usual compromise. Sortable, filterable, printable, free. The catch is discipline: a file you open only to add rows gets forgotten. If you go this route, save it where you already work daily and fix a weekly slot.
A tool pays off once applications run into the hundreds or several variants are in play: different CVs, different fields, parallel processes with dates. At that point the log stops being bookkeeping and becomes steering.
The application tracker is built for exactly that: every application is recorded with date, employer, role and status, open items resurface for follow-up, and any period exports as a PDF.
From notes to a system
The switch pays off for three functions a spreadsheet does not have.
Proof on one button. Pick a period, generate the PDF, done. No formatting, no gathering.
Resurfacing. Applications nobody has answered for two weeks come back on their own. Following up returns measurably more than one extra application, and without a reminder it never happens.
A link to the documents. When the application knows which CV was sent, you can check what the caller is referring to while you are still on the phone.
The routine: ten minutes a week
The plan is unspectacular and it works.
- Log immediately, right after sending. Forty seconds.
- One fixed weekly slot, say Friday morning: add outcomes, do the follow-ups, plan next week.
- File the evidence in a single folder in your inbox. Confirmations, rejections, appointment emails.
- Check monthly whether the agreed number is met, at the start of the month rather than on the 28th.
After three weeks that is a habit, and it costs less time than searching for the answer to "did I actually apply there?".
Two closing notes. First, the entries that came to nothing belong in the log too. A rejection is not a blemish, it is the best evidence that the application arrived. Keeping only the open items throws away half your proof by the end of the month.
Second, the log holds personal data, yours and your contacts'. It does not belong in a public document or a shared folder. For the agency you print the period in question, not the whole file.
Frequently asked questions
Is a spreadsheet enough for the agency?
Usually yes. What is required is the proof, not a particular form. If your agency handed out its own template, use that; otherwise your own list with the same details is fine.
Which details does the agency ask for?
Almost always the same four: the date of the effort, the employer with location, the role, and the channel you used. A fifth column for the outcome is worth adding, because it shows you followed the matter up.
How long do I have to keep the evidence?
No retention period binds you. In practice, keep the list and the evidence until your benefit period ends, ideally a year beyond, because periods are sometimes reviewed retrospectively.
Can I write the list afterwards?
Technically yes, sensibly no. Reconstructed lists contain errors, and one wrong company name or a reference number that never existed damages the credibility of every entry.