Walk A Mile. A Recruitment AiDE, pt 14

Greg Wyatt • February 5, 2026

Walk a mile


May 2023


“It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen.”


That’s how 1984 starts, the classic dystopian novel by George Orwell.


What does it make you think of?


I don’t know about you, but thirteen to me is both an unlucky number and an improbable one for a clock to strike, evoking curiosity and trepidation.


It makes me want to read on.


George could have instead written an opening like “it was a dark and stormy night”, to evoke a sense of darkness at night, during a storm.


I gather that cracker is often derided as the worst opening line of all time, not just for the words, but for how it’s a representative experience of the entire book.


Some people love it.


For me, it’s up there with


“My favourite client is an innovative market leader”


“To apply, send an up-to-date CV, and cover letter, stating your current salary to greg.wyatt@darkandstormyknight.com


“If you haven’t heard from us within the thirteenth strike of the hour, please assume you were unsuccessful”


Or even “We don’t discriminate on the grounds of….”


What do you think a dream candidate experiences when they come across them?


Especially one that is selfish and feels like they’ve no reason to consider a new role yet happens across yours by happenstance.


The irony is that if you dig into the websites of agencies and employers that write these words, they’ll often extoll disruptively good candidate experience, values alignment and culture fit.


But what do their words and behaviour show, and how is that experienced?


Flipping it around, the questions might be “What can we do to create the best experience for the high-performing person we want to employ at this step in our recruitment process? What can they benefit from? How can we make their journey more palatable? What are we missing?”


As smoothly as these questions roll off the tongue, it’s not just the steps taken, but the ones before, in-between and after.


While it doesn’t just benefit your next employee, it benefits everyone - your other candidates, you and your stakeholders.


Of course, there’s no need to gaze so navelly if you hire people well enough.


But, if your adverts aren’t working or if your process doesn’t fill vacancies, you can either work on things in your control or accept those that aren’t.


What you shouldn’t do is blame candidates, agencies or the market if your own affairs aren’t in order.


Having a recruitment process whose consequence is both good candidate experience and serves to better fill your vacancies – that’s something in your control.


It starts with putting yourself in the shoes of your candidates and giving them what they can benefit from.


Do this through your words, show it through your actions.


You could consider Attention, Ikigai, and Definition for your messaging.


What else?


How about considering the situation of the “successful candidate”?


What if they are likely to be happily employed, sceptical of a move and have no interest (yet) in updating their CV or writing a cover letter?


If you require an updated CV, and they don’t have the time, what are the chances of this candidate (who you’d love to employ) not applying, and how would you ever know?


What if you offered an informal call or to answer any questions before an application?


(Research shows that offering multiple means of getting in touch improves response rates)


What experience might they benefit from in the opening salvo of what might be an advert, message or website?


What reasons can you give them to build trust, commit to your process and see it through?


Do they want to be told something is a brilliant opportunity, or shown why it may interest them?


What if they’ve wasted many lifetimes going through never-ending interview processes, and might just benefit from knowing what your process is?


Why couldn’t you highlight your interview process in your advert?


What if they needed an accommodation?


Perhaps they’re ND, have a disability, struggle to find childcare at short notice. Who knows what’s going on in their lives where minor amendments can find suitable gains?


Rather than say “we don’t discriminate on the grounds of” (discrimination is illegal for protected characteristics in the UK - what are the reasons it needs to be said in an advert?), why not instead show how you are inclusive and accessible… which IMO, is what the points above contribute towards.


That’s just for advertising.


What if your job descriptions were clear & concise, suitable & sufficient and true & fair?


What if you provided interview questions in advance of interviews?


This is currently advised as good practice in the UK for autistic candidates. Does it give an unfair advantage to people that don’t need this accommodation? If not, why not allow everyone the same access?


My answer is it doesn’t give an unfair advantage. It allows everyone to fairly evidence their capability on a more even playing field.


How might that affect the experiences of you and your candidates?


What if you clearly managed expectations?


What if you highlighted bottlenecks and delays, rather than not saying anything?


“There won’t be any news this week as Gary is unexpectedly away from the office. Can I come back to you on Monday? How are things with you by the way?”


What if you answered questions before they were asked?


The list is endless, and it starts with establishing what your successful candidates could experience.


For an example of how it might come together, here is the basic structure of my job board adverts:


Attention – the hook that will appeal to a carefully established ‘right candidate’


Ikigai – why they might be interested in further investigation, what they can expect from an employer they might benefit from working for


Definition – a line or two on what makes the company the company; two to three lines on what the role is and its context; no more than three minimum viable requirements the successful candidate should have.


An invitation to talk to or email me, with any questions or accommodations that may help. No need for a CV if it isn’t to hand.


“All applications will receive a reply within three days.”


The boring bits: what you can expect from me; what the interview process is, with any notable points; time frames.


This is a loose structure and will vary in length, detail and style depending on who it’s for.


While some people confuse me as a dedicated Headhunter (I’m an appropriate-multichannel recruiter that does headhunting), I make half of my placements from advertising. Yet many of these adverts produce hires that weren’t actively looking.


<edit: given we are nearly 3 years on, it's interesting how my advert outcomes remain the same, especially given the wide report of mass irrelevant AI customised applications. Indeed, I find that I get fewer applications overall compared to more generic adverts. So: a better candidate base, with less distraction and more capacity to assess them fairly>


Two more editions to come: Trust Me, and Negative Space. Then we move on to a new series: Innovation from Iteration.


Regards,

Greg

p.s. the last line in 1984 is “he loved Big Brother”.

And that’s the end of the story.

And then there were none.

And that was that.

And so it goes.

All was well.

Bonus points if you can name any of these books from their final lines.

P.p.s. While you are here, if you like the idea of improving how you recruit, and you're a UK employer, why not drop me a line and explore whether we can improve everyone's experience together



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