Blanket Statement (redux)

Greg Wyatt • September 20, 2024

In between my bouts of delirium caused by manCovid this week, I’ve been thinking a bit about Goodheart’s Law -

“When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure"

It came to mind looking at a large wealth management firm with a wonderful diversity statement, and an about us section full of photos of well-presented white men.

This in turn reminded me of an article shared earlier in the year which caused the most amount of unsubscriptions yet.


Diversity is an important notion of course.

But isn’t it better used as a measure of your approach, rather than the goal?

How then could our work have a consequence of wider diversity, with all its benefits?


Here’s the article again, now I have around 150 new subscribers.

Before you unsubscribe, I’d ask you to sit with yourself for a moment and consider why your emotions have led to such a decision.

Unless you’re just bored silly by my words, which is fine.

I’ll report back on subscriber trimming at a later date.


I propose the removal of generic diversity statements from job adverts and recruitment marketing collateral.

You know the ones I mean -

“Here at YMMV we do not discriminate on the grounds of race, sex, gender, age, religion, political affiliation, disability, contingency recruitment, or favourite TV programmes except for Only Fools and Horses. We seek to foster an inclusive society where everyone can perform loudly on world awareness day”

I’m sure I’ve missed something.

There are simple reasons to move away from this rote paragraph.


One is performativity.

Have you ever spoken to anyone from a marginalised group fed up with performative showings in whatever public domain, that have no substance behind them?


Another is diversity washing.

How many companies that use diversity statements discriminate against people on the same list?

In which case, how might readers of these statements become sceptical?


A third is word blindness.

When was the last time you applied for a job, when you took a moment to read that statement and thought “Wow, this is the one for me?”


What about hypocrisy in action?

When diversity statements are attached to content that excludes without reason while providing barriers to entry.

Such as 12 points of essential requirements that only the boldest will take a punt on.


So if you accept that diversity statements are a flawed notion, and you are passionate about the need for and benefit of diversity, what can you do?


Rather than talk about it, be it at every opportunity.

Through a holistically accessible and inclusive approach.


Given how most candidates first experience our recruitment digitally, a good start is to follow the accessibility guidelines set out by W3C:

W3C says there are 4 pillars to build on - perceivable, operable, understandable and robust. POUR.

While much of this relates to the technical aspects of websites, such as job boards and the ATS (applicant tracking system), the onus is on how it’s used and experienced.

In written content, this boils down to using simple, clear, concise non-ambiguous language, transparently and accurately explained, and which is easy to navigate.

What are the needs of your readers?

How might people from different backgrounds struggle with transadapting what you’ve put forward?

How can you include people who may have individual needs they don’t want to express?

How can the same points help everyone?


A lot of my work in recruitment focuses on accessibility and inclusiveness.

My rationale is two-fold.

1/ because good candidates can be anywhere, and so I should gain the widest access and make my work as accessible as possible

2/ because it’s the right thing to do

Consulting on, ironing out the issues with and finding the commercial messaging for vacancies and candidate journeys leads to

  • challenging biases, assumptions and cultural competence

  • a job description that accurately reflects the operational requirement and context, without ambiguity

  • a minimum viable set of requirements in what good looks like in candidates

  • adverts that contain as little twaddle as possible

  • as simple language as the vacancy allows

  • showing suitable candidates why they might be interested, which includes elements that demonstrate diversity

  • making it straightforward to apply, pose questions or ask for help

  • appropriate transparency in key details such as salary, working arrangements, interview process and format, and timelines

  • commitment to feedback

  • championing the individual for their strengths

When looking at the wider recruitment process, from the employer perspective, this also includes

  • understanding and optimising ATS applications for candidates

  • looking at pay structures that are equitable and fair

  • recognising candidate challenges and accommodating them into the interview process

  • keeping in touch to proactively address concerns

At every touch point, put the needs of the candidate first. Yet in a way that serves your recruitment too - these steps are one reason I am an effective partner in both filling key vacancies and improving recruitment.


One of the placements that fulfilled me most last year was a guy with cerebral palsy in an early careers IT role. He was an excellent candidate, with great skills and achievements anyone would be pleased with.

He got the job because he was the best candidate and for no other reason.

I asked him what support he’d need at work, and the one thing he can’t do is stand on tables to change lightbulbs, in his words. I’m not sure that would be great lightbulb-changing practice for anyone, but there you go, that was his request for a reasonable adjustment.

That I was able to introduce him to a role he has gone on to excel in, with a hiring manager who saw his capability, when no other employer would touch him, was pretty fantastic.

Not one other employer in 10 years of applying for jobs.

It’s their loss.

I’m sure the employers I partner with can tell you about the diversity of candidates I present for their roles, and those I place. But it’s not the goal, it’s a consequence of my approach.


Accessibility and inclusiveness should benefit everyone.

If, for example, you are willing to provide interview questions in advance to ND candidates (something currently recommended as good practice in the UK), you could do the same for everyone.

Don’t forget that many people who fear discrimination may not be willing to ask for assistance that highlights the same.

Some may not be aware they would benefit from an accommodation. Such as the many people who will go on to gain a formal diagnosis of neurodiversity in future.

Wouldn’t they benefit from your support now, before they have an answer for the issues they find challenging in a world built for the typical?

If you interview fairly and robustly, this simply allows honest candidates to portray their candidacy more accurately.

Which helps you make better decisions.

So wouldn’t you allow the same opportunity for everyone?


If you have flexible working arrangements, a creche, or celebrate Diwali as well as Hanukkah - these are the things that show your diversity more than a statement does.

Moreso than tacking a generic statement at the end of an advert.

Instead, if you still want to make a statement, show why it is so important to your business individually.

How does it align with your vision to be something genuine to aspire to?

I’d be surprised if, when presenting such a true statement, it wouldn’t appeal to your ideal candidates, whoever they might be.

Thanks for reading.

Regards,

Greg

By Greg Wyatt March 23, 2026
This might seem a weird chapter. Surely you look at a job advert, maybe even read it, then decide to apply or not? Yet a job advert is more than just what's presented on a job board. It's a microcosm of everything in recruitment, including everything wrong, and you can learn a lot about what to expect in your job search by the least intentional of words. And when you do read a job advert, in its entirety, there are only two questions you should ask of it: Am I qualified? Should I be interested? It's somewhat odd that 99% of job adverts don't actually try and help you answer that. But maybe that's why employers say job adverts don't work. And why you don't think they do either. While you're here, why not check out A Career Breakdown Kit in its entirety? This series of always free chapters is an advert, after all. But it was never supposed to be an easy book to read, just accessible and comprehensive. I expect most readers are over 50, ND, or other marginalised demographics, considering these will likely be the longest out of work in our 'diverse and inclusive' world. If you're 'in demand' though, you'll probably click apply and wonder what the fuss was about. 44 - How to experience a job advert This chapter is about job adverts, what they are and aren’t, how you might experience them, how they might inform your decisions and your responses. I say experience rather than read because not all adverts are written or read. What’s a job advert? A job advert is the first step in a multichannel commercial approach to filling a vacancy. It’s the inverse of your job search taking a multichannel, through-the-line approach - we go where the candidates are. It’s the first step because it’s the first thing you experience of that vacancy irrespective of whether it’s a: Listing on a job board A post on social media A DM from a recruiter A phone call from a hiring process A referral Or any other means by which you become aware of a vacancy Each of these is a marketing or sales channel that may result in a candidate's application. It’s regrettable employers don’t necessarily see it this way because of the transactional nature of much recruitment process. They think it’s sticking a job posting up on LinkedIn. Employers forget that when you experience such an advert you first make the choice to entertain that advert rather than a yes or no to ‘Should I apply?’ Indeed much advertising neglects the psychology of a job move, which principally relates to problem awareness. How you experience an advert, what may encourage you to progress an enquiry and what you are prepared to put up with in the process relate to your situation and the problems you currently face. Are you out of work, needing any job to pay the bills? Are you in work, desperate to escape a toxic culture? Are you gainfully employed yet wouldn’t mind a bit more flexibility to pick the children up from school? Are you apparently smashing it, with that missing something you don’t even know about, and the right vacancy might improve your lot? And everything in between. The answer to these questions informs your experience of any advert. Because many employers don’t consider what informs an experience and think people would be lucky to work there, it’s rare that more than the minimum acceptable skill will be applied to an advert. As discussed in Better use of job boards, the emphasis is on more rather than better. It’s often thought that ‘if we can reach more candidates, we might fill the job.’ Rather than appeal to the right people for the right reasons. And so we are in a market where an advert attracts hundreds if not thousands of applications, most of whom are wholly unsuitable. What isn’t a job advert? A job advert isn’t a fake job, although many of these are listed. They aren’t Job Descriptions either - the next chapter explains why this distinction is important. While you may spend much time perusing job boards and talking with fellow job seekers, reading their posts on LinkedIn - I’d expect most employers have little awareness outside of their own sphere of what happens in the job seeker community. They’ll advertise how they advertise, instruct agencies how they instruct agencies and run their process how they run their process. I wonder how many great employers use Workday as an ATS, fill their jobs suitably, and have no knowledge of how Workday is viewed by job seekers who have dozens of Workday accounts, one per application? It’s true terrible employers might do the same. In one of my job advert consultations I had a detailed conversation with a Talent Acquisition Manager of a local technology consultancy. I can say that they are a jewel in the crown of technology development in the UK, have top 1% compensation, offer career development, and are a fantastic place to work. I know this because I have spoken to many people who have worked there. All speak highly of them. Yet the advert we reviewed had a number of red flags: £Competitive salary Generic company first text Confusion around job titles If you were an ideal candidate who decided not to apply because of these red flags you’d have missed out. There are two considerations in how an advert might be put together. The first is whether it is a product of a transactional process or whether the hiring team recognises potential candidates are driven by selfish reasons and seek to understand ‘what’s in it for them.’ (I’ve mentioned WIIFM (What’s in it for me) a few times now - answering that is key to good marketing) The second is the direction of travel - are you reading a job board advert or have you been contacted proactively about the vacancy? A transactional process is defined by information transactions with a focus on speed and volume. It places less emphasis on qualitative measures such as accuracy, specificity, relationships, and empathy. Instead you can define the process by a series of information transactions and exchanges: Job description Advert Suitable number of relevant applications Suitable number of interviews Offer Starter The goal is to fill a vacancy. A non-transactional process recognises the importance of relationships and that to build trust the right information needs to be put forward. Though the steps are much the same, at each stage the question is asked: ‘Does this give the candidate the right information to make an informed decision?’ Here a candidate is everyone who interacts with the vacancy outside of the hiring end - even a reader who chooses not to apply. The goal is to create a process that draws the right person forward while leaving everyone with a good experience. It’s not just about decency - it’s about long-term commercial outcomes. If you want the right person to thrive over the long term the process has to reflect this goal. While all the ‘nos’ might be commercial opportunity in future - future candidates, future customers - who knows? These are the archetypes. In reality, recruitment falls somewhere along this spectrum, often changing at different stages in the process. Intent matters even if the execution is flawed. Why does it matter ? Because a healthy rule of thumb is to reciprocate the level of care you experience. If you come across a transactional process - treat it transactionally. This isn’t inherently bad - it’s just the way of the process. The employers may still be good to work for. When and whether to apply Irrespective of how a role is recruited, there will be non-negotiable essential criteria that inform whether or not you are suitable. If you can establish these criteria you can confirm whether to apply. The problem is these criteria aren’t always stated. Sometimes they are implicit to the context - if the role is employed by a rapidly growing scale-up, it’s likely they’ll need someone with that experience. Hopefully this context is alluded to in the advert. It will need critical thinking to parse. Sometimes these aren’t defined at the outset and become mandatory when there are too many candidates in view. Sometimes these are hidden by Goldilocks or illegal discrimination - not too experienced, not too inexperienced, not too old. Sometimes the employer can’t divulge essential criteria. The other problem is that some essential criteria aren’t essential, such as when a company writes unrealistic shopping lists. Yes, it’s a FUBAR situation given it’s pretty hard to tell whether you’re a suitable candidate or whether you should even apply. Nonetheless - if you choose to apply your application must show how you can meet any essential criteria you can identify. If that’s the only thing your application does - it must do this. In my experience, transactional processes are the hardest to unpick, with adverts going something like: Here at genericorp we are proud to be recruiting for a in our market leading innovative environment. You’ll be doing You’ll need In return you can expect a £competitive salary. Apply with a full cover letter and updated CV. Only successful candidates will be contacted. Familiar? Whereas the rare non-transactional adverts give more of a narrative about why the right person might think to apply or give you avenues for finding more information. A note on inbound enquiries. With automation allowing volume outreach the effort to produce transactional DMs, emails and messages is pretty low. You might think when you receive such a message that you are already in the running - in many situations you are a transactional prospect. I’ve even heard some recruiters InMail #OpenToWork profiles only to improve their response rates. While not all messages are this way these are potential reasons you might not hear back when you reply to a recruiter. It’s not quite the case with phone calls which have yet to be executed through automation (some platforms promise AI call automation already). Again, you can separate transactional from non-transactional straightforwardly. Transactional leads with selling the job. Non-transactional seeks to explore if you are the right candidate. If the vacancy isn’t right it’s best to find that out as early as possible and save everyone time. Inbound enquiries are still adverts, in a different medium. Try not to treat your job search transactionally by default. Your goal isn’t to apply for hundreds of jobs. Your goal is to start conversations that count. By prioritising adverts in the right way you’ll improve your odds with high stakes applications. You’ll gain time and energy for other activities, including taking time away from your job search to recharge. 
By Greg Wyatt February 26, 2026
So here were are, the start of a new series. This series may be around 10 editions, looking at the things other industries do that we can implement into recruitment. These were written 3 years ago, right at the start of the AI zazzle, and in some ways have dated quite a bit. In others, the way in which they haven't dated at all, because the principles of how we live our business lives can be universal. So, I'm not sure yet, how much editing I'll do, whether there will be any inclusions, or whether I'll leave articles intact, as a moment in time. I've learnt all of these notions from candidates and clients, as I came to understand the function of their vacancies. Hearing about the daily practice from people doing jobs, I couldn't help but notice the same relevance in recruitment. So while these articles are hardly comprehensive, perhaps they'll make you look at your candidates differently, in what we can learn from them, and how that might improve our recruitment. Why five? December 2022 Ask anyone involved in active recruitment what their key problems are, and they’ll likely talk about skills shortages and candidate behaviour. On the face of it, problems which are out of our control, worthy of complaint with little opportunity to find improvement. But what if these were issues that weren’t entirely out of our control? What if we could apply a replicable process to understand what’s really going on, and how we can make a difference? Fortunately, we needn’t invent the wheel, as other industries have already done this for us. One such is 5Y, or Five Whys, a problem-solving technique that was developed by Toyota in the 1930s. It's part of the Toyota Management System that has inspired much of my work. Five is the general number of “Why?”s needed to get to the root of a problem. Often you can get to the heart of the issue sooner, sometimes later. Often there are multiple root causes. More than just solving problems, it’s about establishing practical countermeasures to prevent these problems from coming up in future. 5Y is an example of Toyota’s philosophy of “go and see”: working on the shop floor to find out how things work in practice to find ways for iterative improvement. This isn’t a theoretical idea to try out on a whim – it’s based on grounded reality and almost always works. There are two costs – time and accountability. Here’s a practical example, then a recruitment one. (Names have been removed to protect my identity) Problem 1 : The children were late for school. Why? Traffic held us up. Why? We left the house late. Why? The children weren’t ready on time. Why? Their school uniforms weren’t prepared. Why? We hadn’t set them out the night before. Here the countermeasure is to get everything ready the night before, rather than blame traffic for being late. Perhaps we might have gotten to school on time without heavy traffic, but that is an element out of our control. Of course, here there is another root cause – very naughty children – but better to focus on the simple changes. And sometimes traffic is the root cause after all, once you’ve ruled out other elements in your control. (2026 note: my eldest now often drives my youngest to school. A time laden solution I hadn't considered three years ago. Now I don't care if they're late 😆) Problem 2: Candidates keep ghosting us. Why? They weren’t committed to responding. Why? They didn’t accept my requirement for a response. Why? They saw no value in my requirement. Why? I didn’t create an environment where this requirement has value ( root cause 1 ). Or because they are very naughty candidates, with a bad attitude. Why have we allowed someone with a bad attitude in our recruitment process? Because we didn’t prequalify them well enough ( root cause 2 ) The first root cause is something we can work on by giving candidates what they need, building trust, and working to mutual obligations. There are many ways to do this – I’ve already talked about examples in previous newsletters. It comes down to good candidate experience and reciprocity. The second root cause requires us to work harder at understanding candidate needs, aspirations, behaviours and attitudes at the outset of a recruitment process. There’s a reason for their behaviour. We can be accountable for finding it. That’s no mean skill to develop, yet an essential one for anyone whose core responsibility is recruitment. And it’s hard to do in a transactional volume process, so the question then becomes, does your process help more than it hinders? You can apply 5Y to any issue you come across, as long as you are prepared to be accountable. At worst you may find that the things that were out of your control are at fault. In this case, you are at least armed with good information to report to your stakeholders, by ruling out other possibilities. What’s the point of doing all this? For me it’s continually improving how I recruit, with the consequence, in the example above, that I am rarely ghosted at all. And you can 5Y any issue you come across. Are poor agency CV submissions their fault, or in part down to your briefing and process? Are skills genuinely scarce, or is your requirement unrealistic? Is it true that your agency hasn’t listened to you, or do you engage the right partners in the right way? 5Y has the answers. Regards, Greg