Hiring teams often mimic other hiring teams’ job description language. The problem is that this creates a job post echo chamber.
Escape the Job Description
Language Echo Chamber
While hiring teams can certainly
learn from other hiring teams,
especially when it comes to job
descriptions, there's a major pitfall
with that approach. Namely, the job
description language echo chamber.
Many hiring teams "borrow" language
used in job descriptions published by
other companies for their own job posts.
Over time, this has created a dynamic
where certain language has become
ubiquitous. This is the job description
language echo chamber.
Let’s say you’re a recruiter looking to fill a
position that you’ve never filled before. You
may have a rough outline of what you need
from the hiring manager, but you don’t have a
sample job post to use as a template. And,
internally, there is no central job repository to
pull from.
You do what everyone does in this
moment. You start looking at other
companies’ job posts. If the other
companies are your direct competitors, so
much the better. You can match your job
post to your competitors’ so you’re
(theoretically) on a level playing field.
The problem with this approach is that,
without data backing up your language
choices, you really have no idea what
language works and what doesn’t. And
neither do your competitors’ hiring
teams, so copying them doesn’t really
help you.
Data, not intuition, is the key here.
Contrary to what many believe,
effective job description language isn’t
intuitive. It’s not something you can
determine through ‘gut feeling,’
‘experience,’ or ‘expertise.’
For one thing, we all have limited
exposure to the sheer number of job
posts published every year. There
are millions of them, but we only see
a small, anecdotal sample in what
we’ve read or written ourselves.
Also, we all read job descriptions differently.
People don’t have the same life experiences
and don’t interpret language in the same way.
It’s impossible for a job post writer to
understand how each and every job seeker out
there will react to certain language. You need a
large dataset for that.
In the end, common doesn’t equal
effective. Just because every job post
you read uses the word ‘analytical’ in it
or includes a line about ‘excellent
written and verbal communication
skills’ doesn’t mean yours should too.
The fact that everyone is adding language
like this doesn’t mean it’s working.
Actually, the only way to know what works
and what doesn’t is through language
analytics. Or, more precisely, analytics
that reveal effective language, not just
common language.
Contact Us At:
https://datapeople.io/
Language Echo Chamber
While hiring teams can certainly
learn from other hiring teams,
especially when it comes to job
descriptions, there's a major pitfall
with that approach. Namely, the job
description language echo chamber.
Many hiring teams "borrow" language
used in job descriptions published by
other companies for their own job posts.
Over time, this has created a dynamic
where certain language has become
ubiquitous. This is the job description
language echo chamber.
Let’s say you’re a recruiter looking to fill a
position that you’ve never filled before. You
may have a rough outline of what you need
from the hiring manager, but you don’t have a
sample job post to use as a template. And,
internally, there is no central job repository to
pull from.
You do what everyone does in this
moment. You start looking at other
companies’ job posts. If the other
companies are your direct competitors, so
much the better. You can match your job
post to your competitors’ so you’re
(theoretically) on a level playing field.
The problem with this approach is that,
without data backing up your language
choices, you really have no idea what
language works and what doesn’t. And
neither do your competitors’ hiring
teams, so copying them doesn’t really
help you.
Data, not intuition, is the key here.
Contrary to what many believe,
effective job description language isn’t
intuitive. It’s not something you can
determine through ‘gut feeling,’
‘experience,’ or ‘expertise.’
For one thing, we all have limited
exposure to the sheer number of job
posts published every year. There
are millions of them, but we only see
a small, anecdotal sample in what
we’ve read or written ourselves.
Also, we all read job descriptions differently.
People don’t have the same life experiences
and don’t interpret language in the same way.
It’s impossible for a job post writer to
understand how each and every job seeker out
there will react to certain language. You need a
large dataset for that.
In the end, common doesn’t equal
effective. Just because every job post
you read uses the word ‘analytical’ in it
or includes a line about ‘excellent
written and verbal communication
skills’ doesn’t mean yours should too.
The fact that everyone is adding language
like this doesn’t mean it’s working.
Actually, the only way to know what works
and what doesn’t is through language
analytics. Or, more precisely, analytics
that reveal effective language, not just
common language.
Contact Us At:
https://datapeople.io/