Simplify this. A Recruitment AiDE, pt 5

Greg Wyatt • November 20, 2025

Making something simple without losing meaning is quite challenging.


It means you have to really know what you're talking about, so you can put forward an argument that has meaning for your intended audience.


These are rarely 8 year olds.


It's a key area in which most recruitment fails - adverts, job descriptions, careers sites, phone calls.


Especially when an omission can mean you may hire the wrong person entirely.


Ironically, it's overlong and could be simpler, without losing meaning. I didn't have much time to edit it.


-


Who here remembers Maths at school?


When we were given a challenging formula to simplify.


A taxing task for many, but the point, which is valid in any walk of life, was that a simplified formula is easier to read while having the same meaning.


If you got the simplification wrong, your answer would be different to the correct one, with a different meaning.


Even if the simplified answer has little meaning to you, it is inherently easier to copy. Because it has fewer numbers and letters.


It’s the same in language. No surprise, given maths is language.


Fun fact – my Doctor friend Rich reliably informs me that many medical terms are in Latin simply to make them sound more plausible.


The reason, he says, is to make patients think Doctors know what they are doing and make the guesswork of Doctory seem more scientific.


I’m sure there are also reasons of consistency and actual Science, but let’s believe Rich for once.


Often the English translation sounds silly or trivial.


The terrifying malady Borborygmus is a rumbling tummy. If you suffer from Singultus, well that’s just hiccups.


How would you rather them be described?


Sounding clever is a valid tactic in US politics, and the filibuster is used to prevent decisions from being made, or from allowing others to have their say. Talk, talk, talk - so that no one else can.


Can you imagine how a date would go down if the other half filibustered their way through dinner?


As well as being aggravating, you wouldn’t come away knowing anything about them except that they love the sound of their own voice.


The danger of sounding too clever is that it pushes your audience away from finding real meaning.


This makes it a troubling truth that the majority of recruitment messages are nothing but hot air, dressed up with words that are hoped to seem grander.


The psychology is much the same as in Medicine, using Verborrhea to make us seem smarter and more trustworthy. I’m sure you can guess what Verborrhea is - it’s on my word-of-the-day toilet paper.


But the opposite is often true. If you hide behind clever words, it can show you haven’t a clue what you’re talking about.


What would happen if you write in the language of your audience, simplifying words and concepts without losing meaning?


For a start, your message would be shorter and likely more precise.


Here’s a list of classic clever words, and their normal counterparts:


1/ Utilise/leverage – use

2/ Facilitate – help

3/ Ascertain – find out

4/ Expedite – speed up

5/ Mitigate – reduce

6/ Acquire – gain

7/ Implement – carry out

8/ Paradigm – example

9/ Out-of-the-box / blue sky – creative

10/ Thought leader – expert

11/ Core competencies – skills

12/ Interpersonal skills – people skills

13/ Deliverables – results

14/ Quantifiable – measurable

15/ Synergy – collaboration

16/ Value proposition – benefits

17/ ROI – return on investment

18/ TLA – three letter abbreviation (tla) – always better to write them out first

19/ Disruptive – innovative

20/ Innovative – how so?


What confuses matters is that, much like in Maths, you can only simplify to a point. Words have meaning, when used well. Simplify too far, and they lose meaning and gain ambiguity.


Utilise has seven letters. Leverage uses eight, ineffectively. Use utilises three. Use wins, right?


Utilise is defined as “to use effectively”, so can be utilised instead of “use effectively”, because it’s fewer words and letters.


Leverage means, in this context, “to use for maximum advantage”. It sounds great if you leverage the power of LinkedIn but, let’s be honest, most of us just use it and many don’t use it well at all.


If this seems pedantic, consider this:


I feel used vs I feel utilised.


Using the simplest words possible, without creating ambiguity, makes your content more accessible, trustworthy, approachable and widens your audience.


Replacing simple words with longer ones to sound cleverer can both have the opposite effect and be used incorrectly.


Myself has six letters. Me?


Which sounds better: pass me the butter, or pass myself the butter?


If it doesn’t sound good, it likely isn’t.


Simplicity doesn’t mean ease, and it can take a lot of effort to write a message that has maximum meaning in the fewest words and simplest way.


While simplicity is a skill to develop, there are steps we’ve already talked about that help: so what, why does it matter?

If it doesn’t need to be there, take it out. If there’s a simpler word, use that. If a term raises a question, change it so that the question needn’t be asked.


Why say leverage instead of use? If you can’t answer, ‘use’ is the word.


‘Clever words’ can be confused with words that have meaning.


For example, a “Sales, Inventory and Operations Planning Manager” (SIOP Manager) is an integrated specialism in Supply Chain Management.


However, a Supply Chain Manager may have the skills set required, without necessarily considering themselves a SIOP Manager.

Wouldn’t you rather have that discussion, than let them assume?


AI – Large language models (LLM). This is an example of a catch-all marketing term that doesn’t have an implicit meaning.


The LLM that is ChatGPT is the hot AI discussion point today, but it isn’t genuine AI. Here the seemingly more complicated Large Language Model is the better term, if say you were recruiting for a Natural Language specialist.


An AI specialist might invite applications from Data Scientists or Computer Vision engineers.


So while AI might seem simpler and cooler, it can also be the dead wrong term to use.


I’m sure it’s an easy fallback if you don’t know what you’re talking about, but can you see how that will work against you?


The point of simpler communication is to give better meaning to the readers that matter – the candidates you want to talk to.


The next newsletter continues this theme, by looking at specific parts of recruitment where words can help and hinder: job titles, job descriptions, key skills, and so on.


I’ll show myself out.


Regards,

Greg

Jump the shark. A Recruitment AiDE, pt 13

By Greg Wyatt • January 29, 2026
May 2023 You’ve heard the phrase, I take it – “jump the shark”? It’s the moment when one surprising or absurd experience can indicate a rapid descent into rubbishness and obscurity. When it’s time to get off the bus. Typically in media. Jumping the Shark comes from an episode of Happy Days in which the Fonz does a water ski jump over a shark. 👈 Aaaaay. 👉 A sign creators have run out of ideas, or can’t be bothered to come up with fresh ones. In movies, sequelitis is a good example of this – an unnecessary sequel done to make some cash, in the hope the audience doesn’t care about its quality. Sometimes they become dead horses to flog, such as the missteps that are any Terminator film after 2. It’s an issue that can lead to consumers abandoning what they were doing, with such a precipitous drop in engagement that the thing itself is then cancelled. Partly because of breaking trust in what was expected to happen next. And because it’s a sign that the disbelief that was temporarily suspended has come crashing down. If you don’t believe that your current poor experience will lead to further, better experiences, why would you bother? Once you’ve had your fingers burnt, how hard is it to find that trust in similar experiences? It doesn’t have to be a single vein of experience for all to be affected. Watch one dodgy superhero movie and how does it whet your appetite for the next? You didn’t see The Eternals? Lucky you. Or how about that time we had really bad service at Café Rouge, a sign of new management that didn’t care, and we never went again? Just me? Did they sauter par-dessus le requin? Here’s the rub – it matters less that these experiences have jumped the shark. It matters more what the experience means for expectation. So it is in candidate experience. It’s not just the experience you provide that tempers expectations – it’s the cumulated experience of other processes that creates an assumption of what might be expected of yours. If you’re starting from a low trust point, what will it take for your process to ‘jump the shark’ and lose, not just an engaged audience, but those brilliant candidates that might only have considered talking to you if their experience hadn’t been off-putting? Not fair, is it, that the experience provided by other poor recruitment processes might affect what people expect of yours? Their experiences aren’t in your control, the experience you provide is. Of my 700 or so calls with exec job seekers, since The Pandemic: Lockdown Pt 1, many described the candidate experience touchpoints that led to them deciding not to proceed with an application. These were calls that were purely about job search strategy, and not people I could place. However, one benefit for me is that they are the Gemba , and I get to hear their direct experiences outside of my recruitment processes. Experiences such as - ‘£Competitive salary’ in an advert or DM, which they know full well means a lowball offer every time, because it happened to them once or twice, or perhaps it was just a LinkedIn post they read. Maybe it isn’t your problem at all, maybe your £competitive is upper 1% - how does their experience inform their assumptions? Or when adverts lend ambiguity to generic words, what meaning do they find, no matter how far from the truth? How the arrogance of a one-sided interview process affects their interest. The apparent narcissism in many outreaches in recruitment (unamazing, isn’t it, that bad outreach can close doors, rather than open them). Those ATS ‘duplicate your CV’ data entry beasts? Fool me once… Instances that are the catalysts for them withdrawing. I’d find myself telling them to look past these experiences, because a poor process can hide a good job. It’s a common theme in my jobseeker posts, such as a recent one offering a counterpoint to the virality that is “COVER LETTERS DON’T M4TT£R agree?” Experiences that may not be meant by the employer, or even thought of as necessarily bad, yet are drivers for decisions and behaviour. I can only appeal to these job seekers through my posts and calls. What about those other jobseekers who I’m not aware of, who’ve only experienced nonsense advice? What about those people who aren’t jobseekers? What about those people who think they love their roles? What about all those great candidates who won’t put up with bad experiences? The more sceptical they are, and the further they are from the need for a new role, the less bullshit they’ll put up with. What happens when an otherwise acceptable process presents something unpalatable? Might this jumping the shark mean they go no further? Every time the experience you provide doesn’t put their needs front and centre or if it’s correlated to their bad experiences…. these can prevent otherwise willing candidates from progressing with your process, whether that’s an advert they don’t apply to, a job they don’t start, or everything in between. Decisions that may stem from false assumptions of what a bad experience will mean. Instead, look to these ‘bad experience’ touchpoints as opportunities to do better: instead of £competitive, either state a salary or a legitimate reason why you can’t disclose salary (e.g. “see below” if limited by a job board field and “we negotiate a fair salary based on the contribution of the successful candidate, and don’t want to limit compensation by a band”) instead of a 1-way interrogation… an interview instead of radio silence when there’s no news - an update to say there’s no update, and ‘How are things with you by the way?’ instead of Apply Now via our Applicant Torture Sadistificator, ‘drop me a line if you have any questions’ or ‘don’t worry if you don’t have an updated CV - we’ll sort that later’. Opportunity from adversity. And why you can look at bad experiences other processes provide as a chance to do better. With the benefit that, if you eliminate poor experience, you'll lose fewer candidates unnecessarily, including those ideal ones you never knew about. Bad experiences are the yin to good experience’s yang and both are key parts of the E that is Experience in the AIDE framework. The good is for next time. Thanks for reading.  Regards, Greg

How To Network For A Job - Jobseeker Basics XIV

By Greg Wyatt • January 26, 2026
The following is Chapter 42 in A Career Breakdown Kit (2026) . In a sense it's a microcosm of how any commercial activity can see a better return - which is to put the needs of the person you are appealing to above your own. It feels counterintuitive, especially when you have a burning need, but you can see the problem of NOT doing this simply by looking at 99% of job adverts: We are. We need. We want. What you'll do for us. What you might get in return. Capped off by the classic "don't call us, we'll call you." If you didn't need a job, how would you respond to that kind of advert? In the same vein, if you want networking to pay off, how will your contact's life improve by your contact? What's in it for them? 42 - How to network for a job Who are the two types of people you remember at networking events? For me two types stand out. One will be the instant pitch networker. This might work if you happen to be in need right now of what they have to offer or if mutual selling is your goal. There’s nothing inherently wrong with this but it’s a selling activity pretending to be networking. If you want to sell, go and overtly sell rather than disguise it with subterfuge. Lest we mark your face and avoid you where possible in future. The second is the one who gets to know you, shows interest and tries to add to your experience. You share ideas, and there’s no push to buy something. They believe that through building the relationship when you have a problem they can solve, you’ll think to go to them. It’s a relationship built on reciprocity. One where if you always build something together there is reason to keep in touch. And where the outcome is what you need if the right elements come together: right person, right time, right message, right place, right offering, right price. Job search networking is no different. The purpose of networking in a job search is to build a network where you are seen as a go-to solution should a suitable problem come up. In this case the problem you solve is a vacancy. Either because your active network is recruiting, or because they advocate for you when someone they know is recruiting. It is always a two-way conversation you both benefit from. Knowledge sharing, sounding board, see how you’re doing - because of what the relationship brings to you both. It is not contacting someone only to ask for a job or a recommendation. A one-way conversation that relies on lucky timing. That second approach can be effective as a type of direct sales rather than networking. If you get it wrong it may even work against you. How would you feel if someone asked to network with you, when it became clear they want you to do something for them? You might get lucky and network with someone who is recruiting now - more likely is that you nurture that relationship over time. If your goal is only to ask for help each networking opportunity will have a low chance of success. While if your goal is to nurture a relationship that may produce a lead, you’ll only have constructive outcomes. This makes it sensible to start by building a network with people that already know you: Former direct colleagues and company colleagues Industry leaders and peers Recruiters you have employed or applied through Don’t forget the friends you aren’t in regular touch with - there is no shame in being out of work and it would be a shame if they didn’t think of you when aware of a suitable opening. These people are a priority because they know you, your capability and your approach and trust has already been built. Whereas networking with people you don't know requires helping them come to know and trust you. Networking with people you know is the most overlooked tactic by the exec job seekers I talk to (followed by personal branding). These are the same people who see the hidden jobs market as where their next role is, yet overlook what’s in front of them. If you are looking for a new role on the quiet - networking is a go-to approach that invites proactive contact to you. Networking with people who know people you know, then people in a similar domain, then people outside of this domain - these are in decreasing order of priority. Let's not forget the other type of networking. Talking to fellow job seekers is a great way to share your pain, take a load off your shoulders, bounce ideas off each other, and hold each other accountable. LinkedIn is the perfect platform to find the right people if you haven't kept in touch directly. Whatever you think of LinkedIn, you shouldn’t overlook its nature as a conduit to conversation. It isn’t the conversation itself. Speaking in real life is where networking shines because while you might build a facsimile of a relationship in text, it's no replacement for a fluid conversation. Whether by phone and video calls, real life meetups, business events, seminars, conferences, expos, or in my case - on dog walks and waiting outside of the school gates. Both these last two have led to friends and business for me though the latter hasn’t been available since 2021. Networking isn’t 'What can I get out of it?' Instead, ‘What’s in it for them?’ The difference is the same as those ransom list job adverts compared to the rare one that speaks to you personally. How can you build on this relationship by keeping in touch? Networking is systematic, periodic and iterative: Map out your real life career network. Revisit anyone you’ve ever worked with and where Find them on LinkedIn Get in touch ‘I was thinking about our time at xxx. Perhaps we could reconnect - would be great to catch up’ If they don’t reply, because life can be busy, diarise a follow up What could be of interest to them? A LinkedIn post might be a reason to catch up When you look up your contact’s profile look at the companies they’ve worked at. They worked there for a reason, which may be because of a common capability to you Research these companies. Are there people in relevant roles worth introducing yourself to? Maybe the company looks a fit with your aspirations - worth getting in touch with someone who may be a hiring manager or relevant recruiter? Maybe they aren’t recruiting now. Someone to keep in touch with because of mutual interests. Click on Job on their company page, then "I'm interested" - this helps for many reasons, including flagging your interest as a potential employee Keep iterating your network and find new companies as you look at new contacts. This is one way we map the market in recruitment to headhunt candidates - you can mirror this with your networking The more proactive networking you build into your job search, the luckier you might get. While you might need to nurture a sizeable network and there are no guarantees, think about the other virtues of networking - how does that compare to endless unreplied applications? I often hear from job seekers who found their next role through networking. This includes those who got the job because of their network even though hundreds of applicants were vying for it. While this may be unfair on the applicants sometimes you can make unfair work for you. It can be effective at any level.