A job advert has two jobs that pull against each other. It has to be found by the right people, and it has to make them want to apply. Most adverts are written as if only the first one exists.
What actually changes how many people apply
| What | Effect |
|---|---|
| The job title | Biggest single factor. It decides whether you show up in searches at all |
| Showing the salary | Big increase, and you get better-matched people |
| The first 100 words | Where most people decide. Usually wasted on company boilerplate |
| How many requirements you list | Long lists reduce applications, and unevenly |
| How long the form is | Every extra field loses you people |
| Total length | Past about 700 words, fewer people finish reading |
Four of those six are about taking things away.
Being found
People search for the job title they have or want, not the one on your org chart. If your internal title is "Growth Marketing Ninja II", the advert says "Senior Growth Marketing Manager" and the internal title goes in the body text.
- Use the normal title. One conventional title. No internal jargon, no level codes.
- Name tools the way candidates name them. Both the full name and the common short form, in ordinary sentences rather than a keyword list.
- Be clear about location. "Remote (UK)" can be searched for. "Flexible working" cannot.
- Put the important things first. Job sites, search engines and humans all weight the opening.
Asking for too much
The obvious version is asking for more years of a technology than the technology has existed. The common version is subtler: fifteen requirements where six are real, because someone copied the last advert and added whatever the team wished the previous hire had been better at.
Here is the thing people get wrong. A long list does not filter anyone. Your screening does that. What the list changes is who applies.
Someone who reads fifteen requirements and matches twelve will often not apply. Someone who matches six frequently will. The effect is uneven across different groups of people, and it is well documented. So a long list quietly selects for confidence rather than ability.
Use the test from Lesson 1: must they arrive with it, or can they learn it here? Only the first group belongs under "requirements". Everything else goes in a shorter "helpful" section, or nowhere.
Wording that widens the pool without lowering the bar
- Describe outcomes, not years. "You will own our reporting end to end" tells someone more than "5+ years experience", and it is harder to bluff.
- Cut the superlatives. "World-class", "rockstar", "ninja" narrow your pool and say nothing.
- Be honest about the team and the constraints. People sort themselves accurately when you give them accurate information. That is the cheapest screening you will ever do.
- Say what the first three months look like. This comes straight from intake question 2, and it is the single most useful paragraph you can add.
Three shapes of advert
| Type of job | Open with | Focus on |
|---|---|---|
| Technical | The system and how big it is | Tools, ownership, how decisions get made |
| Sales or commercial | The target and the territory | Targets, deal size, what support exists |
| Operational | The process being run or fixed | Scope, volume, tools, who depends on the output |
All three use the same skeleton: what the job is, the first three months, what must arrive intact, what is helpful, salary, process and timeline. Only the opening paragraph changes.
Technical template · all three templates
Try this on your current advert
Delete every requirement someone could learn in the job. If more than a third survives, you have not been strict enough. Go back to intake question 6.