Intention intervention

Greg Wyatt • January 27, 2024

You may think this newsletter is about disability and diversity - it isn’t.

I don’t know the lyrics to many songs.

Even some of those I really like.

Indeed, sometimes it’s because I really like those songs that I don’t process the lyrics.

You see, one curiosity about my minor hearing challenges is that I can either listen to a song, or I can listen to the words - I can’t do both.

One time, at company camp, my old MD thought I was really drunk when I didn’t take part in a group singalong on the final day.

That was a strange getaway for many reasons, not least of which was the goal of reducing our services, because of the notion posh restaurants offer fewer options on their menu. But the outcome was we came away with a doner kebab shop style offering.

Anyway I wasn’t that drunk, it’s just that I can either enjoy the singalong by listening to it, or I can take part in it and try to get my voice to coincide with words I’m lagging a couple of seconds behind.

Of course, any protestation that I wasn’t actually sozzled just made it seem like I was swimming in the murk of booze.

I find it interesting thinking back on that moment - his experience of me was different to what I said, and my experience of that time was defined by circumstances unique to me.

In some way he is a very compassionate man - he has a photo of his brother, who is disabled, on his desk, which drives a lot of his passion - while in others he is blind to how others’ experiences may differ.

I’m a dichotomy too, no doubt, with bags of compassion yet sometimes lacking in empathy.

In larger groups, I can come across as introverted, because I lag behind a conversation, while in smaller groups I take energy from others, and often the lead in what we do.

Equally, I prefer phone calls to video - it’s a question of lag.

There are many terms that we now commonly use that show our understanding of the different requirements people may have just to get one with life.

Reasonable adjustments.

Individual accommodations.

Typically they are from demographics that otherwise can suffer from isms.

But then if we can level the playing field for them, shouldn’t that be a consideration for others? How can we help everyone achieve their potential, sustainably?

The irony is that in many situations where a reasonable adjustment is provided, that individual has to declare why it’s needed. Yet many of those same individuals might fear a declaration because it might preclude them.

Many situations wouldn’t be perceived to allow a reasonable adjustment because they are not openly discussed enough.

Mental health.

Menopause.

Grief.

Or how about the many people who suffer a world built for the typical, without realising they fit a different definition?

I often wonder how many candidates I speak to are ND, for example, who don’t realise it, and just feel they are a little bit broken. How might I help?

But this isn’t a post about disability or diversity - it’s about candidate experience and engagement.

The catalyst for much of my philosophy on recruitment is when I’ve challenged or been challenged on habitual practice.

The first time I can remember being held up for being a recruitment twonk, was when I had an anonymous call about a job advert.

“May I ask why you have used ‘red brick university’?”

She was right of course, and I hadn’t done so consciously, more that I knew the employer required people with top degrees.

Some years later that same company changed their requirement to ‘good A levels’ because they realised life sometimes prevents, and it was intellectual clout they wanted, not bits of paper.

I didn’t think to challenge them at the time - might I have made a difference?

Why even is a degree needed? thought 2006 Greg, without following through on that question.

Everything we do and say is how we actively engage the market.

Yet how often do we consider how those individual touchpoints are experienced?

Or the individual circumstances of someone who isn’t yet a candidate might inform their thoughts and actions when they intersect with our engagement?

Candidate resentment is on the rise, and it’s because as an industry we have trained the candidate population what to expect.

Have you had many conversations with candidates who were sceptical of your offering because you are a recruiter?

Not because of you necessarily, or even your message, but because you’re Another Bloody Recruiter (tm)?

Makes you wonder about the people who don’t reply, and what they think.

What about the ones who don’t apply, and you never even knew existed?

We’re making our jobs harder, because of how the majority works.

But of course, everyone has unique circumstances, needs and aspirations.

And those same are being trained on what to expect from the industry.

How, then, should we engage to improve the odds of getting what we need?

I think the first step is to identify what we actually need, which is typically to gain commitment, whether that’s an updated CV, an application or a yes to a job offer.

That’s what we want, yet my belief is what we need is for that candidate to make the right decision. Which might even be a ‘no’ - because if it is objectively the right decision to decline, it’s rarely going to work out.

While the second step is to make everything about the candidate, and not about us.

What might be their problems? What might be their hopes and dreams?

How can we communicate to accommodate them individually, to help them reach their potential?

This is what I mean when I say outside in, not inside out. It’s not just pithy spitballing Ross, it’s fundamental to how recruitment might work.

Put candidates and individual experiences first, and recruitment will see better outcomes.

I do this on an individual basis for key hires, and it’s not so hard to change direction in this way.

Challenge habits with intention, and we can always improve.

At scale though, that will take a systemised shift that is contrary to the whole industry.

Right now, the development of AI solutions would be the right time to make this kind of intervention.

Yet if its development is led by people, it will only drive forward what we think effective recruitment is - employer first.

And that will make those adopters think it really is the candidates that are the problem.

Which will be the biggest of missed opportunities.

Thanks for reading.

Greg

My new book - A Recruitment AiDE

By Greg Wyatt • April 30, 2026
I'm thrilled to announce the publication of A Recruitment AiDE. A guide, philosophy and discipline for effective key hire recruitment. The timing’s perfect, given the deluge of AI content that floods our feeds. Imagine how these similarly produced generic adverts land with people you want to talk to. "We're thrilled to announce we want, we need, here’s our shopping list, why aren’t you responding and oh what’s this flood of AI CVs?" It doesn’t have to be this way. This has taken twenty-five years of hard graft - talking to job seekers, researching the market and recruitment practice, learning about candidate resentment, problem awareness, marketing, copywriting, and the psychology of what moves people. With the evidence that backs this up. The result is something that may make you rethink your approach to recruitment. That will improve the number of qualified candidates, while reducing the total number of applications. It's too early to prove, but my expectation is this will reduce the number of AI CVs too, given there is less for AI to grab when you speak to professional identity. You’ll have to be bold, go against the grain, do something that feels counterintuitive, especially if someone has their hand on your shoulder saying "This isn't the company style!" But then, what does it take to stand out from the crowd? And if you really want to attract the best people, shouldn’t your first step be focused on them, and not you? Kindle version out now. Here's the link: https://amzn.eu/d/03idlAVM.  Paperback in two weeks. If you don’t like Evilcorp, let me know and we can work something out.

Content strategy and philosophy

By Greg Wyatt • April 27, 2026
What follows is Chapter 40 of A Career Breakdown Kit , and part two of a three part series on Personal Branding. Except it isn't. There are various definitions I revolt against, with good reason, in a job search. Personal branding, hidden jobs markets, ATS compliance, and all the others. Terms that seem to hide secret wins, not replicable steps, especially when hidden behind a paywall. I call it the title that's expected because of the questions job seekers ask me. You may recall my article on the Hidden Jobs Market breaks it apart and rebuilds it into a cohesive multichannel marketing strategy that allows you to access the whole of your jobs market. And so it is with my personal branding series. This isn't about your brand. Or even about your reputation. It's about pushing content that starts conversations with relevant people - such as peers, former colleagues, recruiters with a vested interest in these content areas, and even people that can put you closer to a job. Not forgetting fellow job seekers you can share experiences with - as long as you don't dwell on the negative. And it's also about writing in a way that is both true to you and your profession - because conversation has to follow in the same voice as you write, and should support your work, when in work. It's a strategy and philosophy that mirrors earlier chapters on networking, doorknocking, getting found and converting interest. It isn't about writing credible statements in a content savvy way that shares unprovable anecdotes, hacks that lack substance, and where a funnel means more than a lesson. That way is the way of social media marketing - this is about conversations that matter. 40 - Content strategy and philosophy While a personal brand might be the goal, your content strategy should be the priority. It can be applied even if you don’t like the idea of branding. Much is made about LinkedIn’s algorithm and how you need to do this that and the other to get engagement. You can look at it differently, ignoring the algorithm on the whole, and still achieve much the same. These are the outcomes I aim for and see when writing content: Start conversations Help others Sharpen and spark ideas Raise awareness and trust Have a laugh and a chat I’ve gained friends I’ve never spoken to and friendly acquaintances I only know through ‘comments.’ As well as paying clients who have benefitted from my service. Just as importantly, I have more credibility with candidates who place weight on LinkedIn content. Content makes it easier for me to start conversations. It’s important for me that I either enjoy the content and its consequences or find it fulfilling. I don’t talk openly about my personal life, family or challenges. Something I agreed with my wife when I started publishing content. Instead, I show all of myself in my words - quirks and all. So that if we ever speak in real life, there isn’t much of a disconnect. Start with other people’s content Find content writers who inspire you and use them as a catalyst for your own words. There are two ways to do this. Firstly, if you’re thinking about writing on LinkedIn, you are presumably already reading content. What inspires you? What do you enjoy reading? Which authors resonate with your career, your values, your goals and the problems you solve? When you read their content, do you engage and comment? Do you connect with them? Do you ask them who they recommend as writers in your field? Secondly, look within. What do you want to be known for in your career? Maybe it’s procurement or your CIPD membership. React or agile. 5 Whys or Gemba. If these are areas that interest you, use the LinkedIn search bar to find posts on these topics. Now filter the results by ‘Posts’ and ‘Sort by’ latest. Read through the results both for posts that interest you and those that have high engagement (less likely on a niche topic). When you’ve found inspiring content, what next ? One first step in content creation is to respond to these posts with your own ideas. Less ‘Agree’ and more how you might respond in a real-life conversation on this topic. Commenting on other people’s posts is a good way to find your voice, particularly if the conversation continues. Like any skill, writing takes practice, and comments are a low-friction way of developing your tone. If a comment sparks interest from other readers, it can be a concept to build on as a post in its own right. The other benefit of this kind of niche content is that those who engage are likely to have similar interests to you. Make sure to read other comments and see if there are more conversations to be had. The comments you build with them can be the start of a mutually beneficial relationship. Check out their profiles - do their interests and values reflect yours? These are people to connect with, then DM to continue the conversation. Check out their posting history, which will be available on their profile - there may well be a lot of interesting content to absorb. With conversation comes content. Ideas and discussion that grow are an effective way to share your voice. Here’s a suggestion for how you can do this in practice: Look for 5 posts daily that interest you professionally - manually, using a search, or checking what your valuable connections are up to Engage and comment on each Check out new relevant profiles - connect and follow their content On each post, look at who is engaging and respond naturally Try to connect with 5 new relevant people from these interactions Perhaps follow up with a message Take note of the most interesting conversations and at the end of the week pick at least one to inspire your own posts You don’t need to publish them if you aren’t comfortable - save for later if not I’d avoid the viral content that combines relevance + relatability + entitlement + readability. These writers are more interested in engagement numbers than your specific interest. You can see the truth of their words in how they respond in the comments sections. From a marketing perspective, different types of content have different places in your lead generation: Awareness Interest Consideration Evaluation Purchase Each post, comment, DM and real-life conversation can relate to these steps and support your goals, even if you aren’t treating these as a marketing activity. Time and time again There’s a lot of investigation into optimal times to post. It’s more important that you are available to reply attentively in the first hour. The course of a post is often dictated by the performance during this time. I actively reply to comments for around an hour a day with LinkedIn on in the background of other work. How much time can you set aside per week and per day for content? Even if you only write a couple of posts a week, this will probably take a couple of hours. You can expect low performance initially, with some exceptions, as it takes time to build inertia. Set aside a sustainable amount of time each week and commit to it over a period - try for 10-12 weeks and track how things have developed. You may find it becomes an enjoyable task. Try not to get distracted by engagement for its own sake and keep your goals in mind. Types of content to try Engagement on LinkedIn is built primarily on relevance and relatability. Even ragebait, given it drives strong feeling. You can write a 100% relatable post that everyone takes relevance from and see massive engagement. Though that engagement may not serve your goals. Or you can write a post that is 100% relevant to the problems you solve in your career, and the people who will find it relevant are from a small niche facing the same problems. This is why a photo of you with your dog will fly, while a carefully thought out post about the optimisation of widgets in a byzantine setting will appear to be shouting into a void. Or you can blend the two through storytelling, pivoting observations into business content, and copywriting formulae like AIDA (attention interest desire action) and PAS (problem agitation solution). Everyone will have different forms of content that will be effective for them. What do you want your ideal readers to experience? What would ‘you five years ago’ would find helpful? Do you want readers to see you as a credible expert? Someone who is authentically vulnerable? Your warts and all personality? Someone who stands out in a sea of competition? Someone who is thought-provoking, helpful, or altruistic? The answers are much the same if you posed these questions of interviewing. This is no coincidence, given your message should be consistently delivered no matter where it is received. With that in mind, here are some content ideas you can try: How you might solve a problem specific to your industry Stories from your everyday life The challenges in your job search Observations on a news story and how it relates to your work A flair post highlighting your availability Asking for thoughts on an idea you are interested in Sharing insight you find fascinating, whether that’s films, video games, science or sport Stories from your career where you can show growth (everyone loves a hero’s journey) Business frameworks, processes and techniques you find useful - Pomodoro Technique, scientific method, STAR, what do you use? Equipment you use for work Developments in your workplace and culture Thoughts on content you find inspiring Memes, humour, satire Google content ideas for LinkedIn or ask ChatGPT, Claude and others. I wouldn’t use AI to write articles. I do use them for ideation and to sense check. ‘Write me a post for LinkedIn that shows the link between Tesla cars and how to develop an HR strategy.’ The vulnerability of writing You can be a content creator without ever publishing a post if you continue conversations through comments, connections, DMs and real-life. This avoids sticking your head above the parapets and is low risk, but misses the gain of publishing your own content. I know that some people are held back for fear of failure. I can tell you that clicking ‘send’ is always a high point of anxiety for me in sending newsletters. Imagine how I felt when I clicked Publish for this book. What’s the worst that can happen with a carefully thought-out post? Tumbleweed? If no one reads it, you can always post it again another time. Disagreement? Loads of people disagree on my posts - you’ll see from my comments that I am always constructive in my dialogue and typically this supports the intent of my post. Everyone has an opinion and they are welcome to theirs - as long as it’s constructive, there is always a learning opportunity. Trolls? These people exist and will at some point rear their ugly heads. I imagine them naked on the Underground, which takes the sting out of their vitriol. I’m sure it’s their unhappiness that drives their behaviour. Marriage requests? Unfortunately, dubious and toxic behaviour isn’t uncommon. Don’t be afraid to block and report if you receive harmful messages. As long as you are constructive in what you write and you work to build a conversation, it’s unlikely anything bad will happen. You will open yourself up to the opportunity of new relevant people starting conversations with you: hiring managers, recruiters, peers, fellow job seekers, and friendly strangers. Weight and depth of opinion A couple of years ago, I had a message from an out-of-work Sales Director asking for some feedback. He’d shot a video for LinkedIn where he talked about why he should be snapped up and received a lot of praise for the post. However, he was confused because a CEO he trusts told him it was poor and made him look boring. He knew I’d give him unvarnished feedback, which was what he needed to find some clarity on what had happened. Truthfully, the CEO was correct. What had happened? All of the positive engagement was from fellow job seekers and people who wanted to support him. That he’d done it was praiseworthy in itself and was rightly celebrated, rather than the quality of what he had produced. None of them had hiring authority or were in a career similar to someone who would be his line manager. The video didn’t show him how he comes across in person either. While the positive feedback was fantastic for validation, his video worked against him. What might happen if a hiring process thought his video was boring when the role being recruited for has persuasion as a key requirement? I’m pleased to say his redo was excellent, showing off his charisma while delivering the same message. Who can you rely on to be this CEO for you in your career? Why you should start now, even if you don’t see any benefit for months. Starting cold on LinkedIn can take time to get traction. When your first post bombs you might never think to do a second. Going in with the expectation of little impact for the first three to six months is healthy in making a sustainable habit. If you’re out of work though, three to six months may seem too far off to be worthwhile when there are many activities that offer a quick turnaround, such as applying for jobs. I’ve spoken to many job seekers who’ve been out of work for more than six months and had decided not to write content at the outset of their search. If they had, they might now be seeing the benefit of their work.