Streamlining Job Roles for Recruitment Success

We’re facing a massive job creation problem we keep avoiding. 𝗧𝗼𝗼 𝗺𝗮𝗻𝘆 𝗿𝗼𝗹𝗲𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗯𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗹𝗲𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗮𝘀𝗸𝘀, 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗲𝗻𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗲𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝘃𝗮𝗹𝘂𝗲. If that sounds obvious, here’s where it fails in real teams, and how to fix it👇🏼 If we design jobs around outcomes (not task lists), people stop feeling busy-and-empty, and the business starts compounding results. 𝗪𝗲 𝗱𝗼𝗻’𝘁 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝗮 𝗵𝗶𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗯𝗹𝗲𝗺. 𝗪𝗲 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝗮 𝗷𝗼𝗯 𝗱𝗲𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗻 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗯𝗹𝗲𝗺. Most JDs are a laundry list: a little admin, some coordination, some fancy strategy words, and a few tools. It keeps people occupied, but it rarely moves the P&L, the product, or the customer. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗳𝗶𝘅 𝗶𝘀 𝗱𝗲𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗿𝗼𝗹𝗲𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗰𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗹𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗲. What better job design looks like: 𝟭. 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘁 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗼𝘂𝘁𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗲. Name the 12-month result the role owns (revenue increased, time saved, risk reduced, feature shipped, etc). If you can’t name it, you’re not ready to hire. 𝟮. 𝗗𝗲𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹 𝗼𝘄𝗻𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗽. One person = one core outcome. Fewer handoffs, fewer status meetings, more responsibility. 𝟯. 𝗔𝘂𝘁𝗼𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗻𝗼𝗶𝘀𝗲. Anything repetitive becomes a workflow or tool. Hire for judgment, synthesis, and decisions. 𝟰. 𝗗𝗲𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝟯–𝟱 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗲𝘀, 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝟮𝟬 𝘀𝗸𝗶𝗹𝗹𝘀. Focus on what actually drives the outcome. 𝟱. 𝗦𝗲𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗰𝗼𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗮𝗿𝗱. 3-4 metrics the hire will move, reviewed periodically. Not some sort of mystery success. This is where the recruiter’s role evolves. Less of a process owner, more like a job designer, partnering with leaders to shape roles before they hit the market and protecting teams from task soup. 𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸𝘀? 𝗖𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗿 𝗿𝗼𝗹𝗲𝘀 → faster ramp and better performance. 𝗟𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝗶𝘀𝗲 → better headcount needed for the same output. 𝗢𝘄𝗻𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗽 → higher engagement and retention (without a forced retention program). So, if you lead a team, try this before opening your next req: 1. Write the 𝟭𝟮-𝗺𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗵 𝗼𝘂𝘁𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗲 in one clear statement. 2. List every task tied to it. 𝗔𝘂𝘁𝗼𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗲 anything that doesn’t move outcomes. 3. Keep 𝟯–𝟱 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗲𝘀. Kill the rest. 4. Define the 𝘀𝗰𝗼𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗮𝗿𝗱 (3-4 metrics). 5. Only then write the JD, around 𝗼𝘂𝘁𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗲𝘀, 𝗼𝘄𝗻𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗽, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗱𝗲𝗰𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀. If the work is clear, valuable, and necessary, great people will want it, and they’ll win faster. If it isn’t, no amount of hires will save it. That’s the kind of recruiting I want to get behind in the next months: designing roles that are worth someone’s time, and worth the business' investment. 

📣Lowering the barrier to apply = widening your talent pool. 📣 A camp counselor. The oldest sibling. The neighborhood babysitter…I’ve seen all of them go on to become fantastic field organizers. They didn’t have “2+ years of organizing experience,” but they had the skills. Leadership. Conflict resolution. The ability to keep a group of tired humans motivated and moving forward. The same goes for senior roles. I’ve seen first-time EDs thrive because they had the relationship-building, management, and strategy chops to lead an org and raise money. And yet, many of these candidates wouldn’t have even applied if the job postings had all the usual hurdles: a 3-page JD, a laundry list of “must-haves,” and the dreaded cover letter. We all want great candidates, but sometimes our process filters them out before they even get a chance. If you want to widen your talent pool, lower the barrier to apply. Here’s how: SHORTEN THE JOB DESCRIPTION  ⚠️ Keep it simple. You want to summarize the job, the organization, and why a candidate wants to work with you. You don’t need every tiny qualification or preferred skill listed. Stick to the key competencies.  ⚠️ Separate “must-haves” from “nice-to-haves” so you don’t unintentionally exclude great people.  ⚠️ Avoid insider lingo. For example, if you’re hiring an Executive Assistant, and open to a diverse range of candidate backgrounds, keep it simple. Don’t talk about ‘c3s and c4s’, but talk about different partners and teams.  ⚠️ Highlight transferable skills. What makes a great fundraiser? Hustle, passion, communication, relationship-building, and collaboration. These can be your key qualifications! STREAMLINE THE APPLICATION   ⚠️ Ditch the cover letter.   ⚠️ Ask 2–3 targeted application questions that get at what you want to hear from candidates. Keep forms short. FOCUS ON POTENTIAL, NOT JUST EXPERIENCE   ⚠️ Challenge years-of-experience and education requirements, like the classic “7+ years required” default. Ask your hiring manager if they need to have done it, or if they can learn it.  ⚠️ If you can, invest in training and make that clear in the posting. And on a culture note, always highlight how the role supports growth and learning. Professional development is important. COMMUNICATE CLEARLY  ⚠️ Set a clear process and timeline, and outline this to candidates from the beginning (I like to do this in an auto email for everyone that applies, more on this here http://bit.ly/4mHOTt9).  ⚠️ Be up front about how much time a candidate might spend in the interview process.  ⚠️ Send confirmation and regret emails so applicants know whether they’re in the process. Lowering the barrier isn’t lowering your standards. It’s making sure the right people actually get the chance to show you what they can do. What’s one thing you’ve done to make it easier for great candidates to apply?

#HiringManagers Let's address the elephant in the room: The gap between job requirements, your expectations, and current market reality is bigger than ever. Here's what we need to address... The Problem We're Seeing: ➡ Requirements lists longer than a CVS receipt ➡ Requirement lists shorter than 4 bullet points ➡ Budget expectations from 2019 ➡"Entry level" roles requiring 5 years of experience ➡Technology stacks wanting everything under the sun The Reality Check We Provide... ➡ Market Intelligence ➡ Real salary ranges for actual placements ➡ Current time-to-fill metrics by role ➡ Available talent pool size for specific skill combinations ➡ What your competitors are actually offering The Solution for you... Instead of a 6-month search for the perfect candidate, we can: ➡ Split one "unicorn" role into two realistic positions (We find part-time candidates that specialize in certain areas) ➡ Identify which skills are trainable vs. must-have ➡ Show you available candidates who can grow into the role ➡ Map out upskilling plans for promising candidates The 80/20 Approach... ➡ Focus on the 20% of requirements that drive 80% of success ➡ Build vs. Buy talent strategies ➡ Create talent pipelines instead of point-in-time hires ➡ Develop internal mobility paths We're not just identifying and flagging problems - we're bringing solutions: A #staffing partner like us will help with... ➡ Market mapping reports ➡ Compensation benchmarking ➡ Skills availability analysis ➡ Training program recommendations ➡ Alternative talent pool suggestions The Bottom Line... Good staffing partners don't just fill reqs - we help reshape roles to match market reality. We are here to partner up and help you streamline your hiring process!

Your job description has 19 requirements. Most candidates stop reading long before the end. Every extra requirement is a psychological barrier, especially for women and underrepresented candidates. Harvard Business Review has highlighted a consistent pattern in application behavior: • Women tend to apply only when they meet a majority of listed qualifications • Men are more likely to apply when they meet fewer So long requirement lists don’t raise the bar. They shrink the pool. Common patterns in low-response job postings: • Inflated years of experience • Rigid degree requirements • Too many tools, frameworks, and platforms • “Fast-paced environment” and vague soft skills • Leadership and heavy execution in one role • Nice-to-haves disguised as must-haves The result: strong candidates self-select out before they ever apply. A better approach is ruthless prioritization. The 5–7 Requirement Framework Non-negotiables (2–3) The true deal-breakers. Skills you would not compromise on. High-impact skills (2–3) What actually drives success in the role. Growth signal (1) Evidence the person can learn and adapt quickly. Delete the rest. If you wouldn’t reject a strong candidate for missing it, it doesn’t belong as a requirement. The uncomfortable truth: ·     Overstuffed job descriptions don’t signal rigor. ·     They signal confusion about what really matters. ·     Top candidates have options. ·     They don’t decode laundry lists. They move on. Try this: ·     Open your longest job description. ·     Circle only the requirements you’d truly reject someone for lacking. ·     You’ll likely end up with 5–7. Rewrite the role using only those. Post it. Watch what changes. If this was useful, like it so others see it. Repost to help teams hire better. Follow for practical recruiting and leadership insights. What’s the most unnecessary requirement you’ve seen listed as “must-have”? #Recruiting #JobDescriptions #TalentAcquisition #Hiring

Hiring managers, stop blaming the talent pool - maybe your job descriptions are the real problem. How often do we hear companies struggle to find the right talent?  What if the issue isn’t a lack of skilled professionals, but a lack of clarity in job descriptions? Take the Project Manager role, for example. Too often, job descriptions are filled with vague phrases like “strong communicator,” “problem solver,” or “ability to multitask,” which don’t explain what’s truly needed day-to-day. A clear job description goes beyond just listing soft skills. It should be specific about the actual tasks and responsibilities the role will involve, such as: 1. Managing 3-5 projects simultaneously, leading cross-functional teams (design, engineering, marketing) to deliver on-time with 95%+ completion rate. Creating and managing project timelines, ensuring 90% of milestones are met on schedule, with delays not exceeding 5% of the total timeline. 2. Coordinating with 5+ stakeholders and clients, managing scope changes, and achieving a 90% satisfaction rate in client feedback surveys. 3. Tracking and managing project budgets, maintaining expenses within 3-5% of the original budget, and identifying cost-saving opportunities worth 10% of the total budget. When you take the time to clearly define these tasks, you’ll attract candidates who are confident they can succeed in the role, rather than those who are simply guessing what the job entails. Clarity in job descriptions doesn’t just help you find better candidates, it saves everyone time and frustration. The more precise you are about what you need, the easier it is for both candidates and hiring managers to align. How do you ensure your job descriptions reflect what your team actually needs? Let’s discuss!

Your best recruiter is working 15 jobs. Your weakest? Also, 15 jobs. If that doesn't immediately strike you as wrong, you're missing what really drives recruitment performance. But that’s what I got wrong when I first stepped into my first management role: I thought capacity was about the number of jobs. It's not. It comes down to the quality of the jobs. To help with this, I first built a simple Kanban board system, which made a significant difference (see the screenshot below). Each team member got a colour. Each card represented a live role. Interview stages ran across the top. This one simple change resulted in: • Halving the time-to-shortlist  • Increase pass-through-rates from CV submitted to 1st interview by 23% • Zero team burnout But the board was only half the solution. We paired it with a job prioritisation matrix, scoring each role on: • Exclusivity - Were we the only agency working on it? • Salary - Competitive with market rates? • Client responsiveness - Feedback within 48 hours? • Interview process - 3 stages or a gargantuan 7+? We’d tally up the scores, then assign each job A, B, or C in order of priority. This revealed which recruiters were spending too much time on C-grade jobs that generated only a small % of revenue. We could then cut those jobs loose. Focus them on the A-grade jobs. This led to greater recruiter fulfilment and billings, while working fewer jobs. Here's my challenge to you: audit your team's current jobs. How many are truly A-grade? I'm betting it's less than 30%. And that's exactly where your opportunity lies.

I have a lot of friends in the job market and many of them are saying the same thing......companies need to do better with their job postings—and it’s costing them top talent. Far too often, organizations post roles with unrealistic expectations: asking for 10+ years of experience for an entry-level role, requiring proficiency in a dozen niche tools that may not even be critical, or offering salaries far below market value. Candidates quickly spot this, and qualified talent moves on to employers who respect their time and expertise. For example: Asking for “10+ years in cloud security” for a mid-level analyst position turns away eager, capable candidates who have 5–7 years of solid experience. Listing multiple programming languages, advanced certifications, and leadership experience for a junior developer role creates a “wish list” rather than a realistic hiring target. A hiring process that drags for 3–4 months, with multiple interviews and no timely feedback, often leads candidates to accept faster, more organized offers elsewhere. To attract and retain the right talent, companies should: ✅ Align experience requirements with the role – focus on capabilities, not arbitrary years. ✅ Offer competitive, transparent compensation – back it with market research to avoid surprises. ✅ Streamline the hiring process – communicate timelines, consolidate interviews, and respect candidates’ time. Hiring is more than filling a role—it’s about building a team that drives growth, innovation, and operational success. Companies that take these steps create trust, improve candidate experience, and gain a strategic advantage in the talent market. Bottom line: If your job postings don’t match reality, your best candidates won’t wait around. #TalentAcquisition #Hiring #Recruitment #CandidateExperience #Leadership #HRStrategy #EmployerBrand #WorkplaceCulture

I recently had an interesting discussion about how private equity firms successfully hire the right executives for their portfolio companies only 50% of the time, despite using executive search firms to conduct these searches. Is the problem that search firms aren't presenting the right talent, or are private equity firms and their portfolio companies not good at evaluating talent, or both? To analyze this question effectively, you must break down the recruiting process into distinct stages. First, define the role clearly and comprehensively. What responsibilities will the candidate have? What are the key activities they will perform, and within what context? What specific results are you expecting them to achieve? It's crucial to articulate these elements not only internally but also to external audiences, such as candidates. Engage key stakeholders and decision-makers to ensure alignment. This process is just as critical as formulating your corporate strategy—it sets the foundation for everything else and should not be delegated. Misalignment at this stage can lead to confusion or poor hiring decisions. Second, identify the specific skills and qualifications essential for the role, as well as the traits of someone who will excel in your company's unique culture and context. Success at another organization doesn't guarantee success at yours, as differences in culture, leadership style, and the specific challenges of the role can significantly impact performance. It's crucial to assess a candidate's track record, how well they align with your company's culture, and the nuances of the role. Third, develop a targeted sourcing strategy that identifies potential candidates and a compelling go-to-market strategy that clearly communicates why they should be excited about the role. This strategy should differentiate your company from competitors by emphasizing what makes this opportunity unique. Fourth, you must establish a clear framework for evaluating candidates and making decisions. This includes structured interviews and psychometric assessments that pinpoint the situations in which a person thrives. Additionally, it's important to ensure that everyone involved understands the time commitment required to maintain an efficient and timely recruitment timeline. Fifth, you should design a well-structured hiring meeting where interviewers review and discuss their insights from interviews and assessments, providing essential input to the hiring manager. Ensuring a collaborative and organized discussion will help surface key insights and ensure alignment in the decision-making process. Finally, the hiring manager must conduct thorough reference checks, following a structured and consistent process. This should include both formal reference checks and backdoor references, which can be initiated earlier to gain deeper insights into the candidate’s background and performance. This is a solid step toward improving success beyond the current 50%.

🦄 What if your "perfect candidate profile" is actively screening out your next superstar? I’ll never forget the pushback. I was hiring for a critical business development role, and my ideal candidate didn't fit the mold – at all. The average recruiter's point of view of what the target persona was for that role was completely different, and I had to defend my novel idea. Sound familiar? You're probably tired of endless searches for "perfect fits" that don't exist, leading to slow hires and sometimes, the wrong hires. It’s a costly cycle that drains momentum and trust. But I stuck to my guns. Why? I broke down the role into its actual, individual skill sets. Forget the traditional resume fluff or professional background "norms." I focused on competencies. And guess what? This candidate had every single one, just not packaged in the way anyone expected. I hired her. She did great. I was vindicated. This wasn't luck. It's the New Science of Hiring in action. Too often, we rely on intuition-based hiring or "gut feelings" which have been disproven strategies that decrease predictive power and increase biases. Research consistently shows that traditional filters like years of education, age, or gender/race are poor predictors of job success. Instead, successful recruiting is empirical and structured. It means focusing on what really matters: • Job-related knowledge and skills: Assessing specific technical expertise directly relevant to the role. • Past Actions Predict Success: We collect facts about their past behavior. • Focus on Proof: We care more about skills they have shown than just their conventional history. By shifting away from vague criteria and towards data-backed, structured evaluations, you move from a "post and pray" approach to achieving systematic and repeatable success in hiring. This allows you to find better talent faster and ultimately outpace attrition. Want more contrarian, data-backed insights to transform your hiring? ⚡️ Follow me for weekly posts on the "New Science of Hiring" and how to hire better talent, faster.

💡How long has the role been open? This simple question often reveals a lot. The longer a role remains unfilled, the higher the likelihood that something is amiss. It’s usually one (or more) of the following: 🚩The role itself: Is it clearly defined? 🚩Expectations: Are they realistic? 🚩The company: Is it attractive to candidates? 🚩The process: Is it efficient and candidate-friendly? Engaging yet another recruitment company won’t fix these issues. Instead, it’s critical to think deeply about why the role isn’t being filled. Start with these questions: 1. Is the role clearly articulated? 👉 Can someone easily understand what the job entails and why it’s important? If not, revisit the job description and overall positioning. 2. Why would someone want this role? 👉Think beyond a small salary bump. Top talent isn’t leaving their current job for a mere $5K increase. Instead, focus on creating a role that represents a genuine step forward for the right candidate. Look for individuals for whom this position is a clear progression—someone ready to grow into the role, not just replicate what they’re already doing. 3. What’s the feedback from your recruitment partners? 👉Ask them why the role isn’t landing with candidates. Push for honest, constructive feedback so you can adjust. If you’re not addressing the root cause, no amount of external help will solve the problem. 4. Does your employer brand align with your hiring goals? 👉 If your brand isn’t widely recognized, it’s unlikely you’ll attract talent from the most coveted companies. Be realistic. A lack of “halo brand” experience doesn’t mean a candidate isn’t exceptional. Often, untapped talent exists outside the obvious names. 5. Is your interview process the issue? 👉 Many hiring challenges stem from poorly designed processes. Who created your interview structure? If it was designed without consideration for the candidate experience, it may be time for a revamp. Quick, efficient, and intentional processes win top talent. This doesn’t mean sacrificing thoroughness—it means eliminating unnecessary delays and confusion. ➡️ Hiring isn’t just about finding the right person; it’s about creating the right conditions to attract them. Be critical of your role, your expectations, your brand, and your process. If these aren’t aligned, no recruitment company will save you!