A passive opportunity
What follows is an updated Chapter 32 of A Career Breakdown Kit (2026). It examines the nonsense argument that passive candidates are better than active candidates.
It also examines why that perception happens, and what you can learn from it to present yourself as a more compelling candidate.
Because, after all, recruitment is psychology. And the hardest psychology to master is your own.
32 - A passive opportunity
Speak to headhunters and many will say that passive candidates are inherently better than active candidates.
Active means you are actively looking for another job.
Passive means you aren’t yet may be open to conversation.
The argument goes further stating that something like 80% of the candidate marketplace is passive, while only 20% actively apply for adverts.
Therefore, if you recruit only through advertising, you will miss out on a huge chunk of viable candidates.
This isn’t a terminology I like - I use ‘problem awareness’ as a differentiator instead.
It doesn’t help that, in the market we are currently in, adverts can receive 100s of applications, few of which are viable candidates.
If an employer doesn’t think adverts are effective, and that candidates are likely to be passive, they may not even advertise, instead relying on activities like headhunting.
If all you do is rely on active channels such as adverts, you limit your opportunity.
There are two elements to the active / passive argument that are worth talking about.
The first is how you come across the vacancy.
The second is how you are assessed for the vacancy.
How recruiters look for passive candidates
Recruiters take an inbound and outbound approach to filling vacancies.
Using the argument above, only Active candidates are inbound, whereas Passive candidates are found through outbound work such as headhunting.
Outbound work is more controllable because the recruiter only contacts candidates who meet their specific criteria, typically through
LinkedIn, CV databases (job boards and agency), networking, referrals and headhunting. I differentiate headhunting from LinkedIn, because anyone can headhunt on LinkedIn using recruiter licence, but proper headhunting should work across multiple channels and involve more rigour throughout.
I know because I trained in a headhunting firm that enjoyed a strong reputation well before LinkedIn was invented. And those additional channels are just as effective today - if not more so because of how democratised LinkedIn has become.
To be found like a Passive candidate you have to take advantage of the channels used by recruiters.
I take a whole of market approach across all inbound and outbound channels where appropriate.
Early last year, I had a Talent Acquisition vacancy that went live, although we hadn’t finalised the job description.
We agreed that I would only speak to out of work TA folk in London (of which there are many), because the ambiguity of the brief would be less problematic.
I didn’t advertise for the same reason.
I took the same approach I would to target passive candidates, only concentrating on out-of-work active candidates instead.
We had a shortlist of 6 qualified candidates, and another 6 on the backburner. No one else would know this vacancy existed due to its lack of visibility.
I recruited it by ordinary means, without advertising.
Of course, that vacancy was cancelled, such had been the way of 2025.
How to get found like a passive candidate
This is simpler than you might think and comes down to understanding how we look for candidates, then optimising your visibility in kind. I call this principle inversion.
I’ve written advice on each in part three (edit for this newsletter: you'll see many of these chapters published for free in previous editions).
Each of these reflects how I might look for candidates without advertising: optimising for LinkedIn Recruiter licence, CV databases and other data repositories; asking for referrals in thin markets; networking; direct research into incubator companies; industry events and so on.
Not all of these are replicable, and the balance of what is effective relies on your specific market conditions.
Why passive candidates can be more appealing at interview
Passive candidates are already in a suitable job that is at least adequate. To move would have to be for good reason.
Which means they may only interview for roles they are closely aligned to and have the freedom to walk away from.
This combination of detachment and alignment makes a compelling proposition.
Passive candidates are typically in fewer recruitment processes than active candidates, often only one, which allows employers better odds of them accepting an offer.
How many recruitment processes are you in? If you had the nice problem of having two or more offers to choose between, how many could you accept?
This is a real and quantifiable risk for employers - is there an argument to reduce this risk by only offering candidates who are only in one process?
This risk links to the emerging situation of automated AI optimised applications. When employers have a high volume of homogenous applications designed to 'beat the ATS', the entire application base loses credibility. A candidate found through headhunting immediately has the semblance of being more real, even if all they did was optimise their LinkedIn profile.
Yet another reason why the myth of 'ATS compliance' will work against you, given passive candidates haven't even read those articles and get hired with CVs that look similar to the ones you used to use.
There is a more cynical side to the passive argument, which is that ‘only headhunters can access them.’ These uniquely skilled professionals sometimes rely on an obfuscated process. It’s a boon that employers don’t understand how they work. It can be advantageous not to represent active candidates at all.
I choose to lay my process bare and it’s only one way in which I look for candidates.
The passive candidate features that improve your odds
Detachment.
If you are out of work, typically you need a job, which can involve a number of compromises, rather than solely being interested in that one job for what it is.
Detaching yourself from the outcome of an application makes you a better candidate, because that freedom to walk is a strong negotiating position and informs the rest of your approach.
This same detachment can make knockback less damaging. Read up on detachment and Stoicism for more - some of which is covered in A resilient job search.
It's a classic quality of a successful salesperson.
Alignment.
It's completely understandable that you'll go for jobs that aren't strong fits if you need to get back into employment.
For every compromise you make, there will be candidates for whom that compromise is an attraction point.
Compromises which typically move you away from a core fit to being a candidate with transferable skills. Like for like, a less suitable candidate than those above.
Yes, employers could have the imagination to see how out of box candidates with transferable skills can be brilliant. Something that's out of your control.
If a role is of strong interest to you, articulate how your skills and aspirations apply to make you a core fit. If you can't, your odds will be lower.
This informs how you communicate throughout the process.
Accountability
It's easy to compromise on your requirements and expectations in a job search. Such as widening your salary band, and the jobs you'll apply for.
Unless you are in a skill short industry or have a connection that can refer you to a role, your odds drop the further away you move from ideal fit roles.
Stick to your guns. Don’t use up time and energy on unhelpful activity.
Intermediary representation
That's what we are as recruiters.
An effective recruiter does work behind the scenes to manage expectations, concerns and objections. Something that can improve your odds as a job seeker.
If you are in the fortunate position to be working with a recruiter that has your back, trust in the process.
The interview
How you execute your interviews is key. Read the interview chapters in Part Three.
Note: I've made a rare inclusion for the newsletter in this chapter, given others published are verbatim from the Summer update coming out soon. But I'm conscious some of these chapters rely on, lead into and are interconnected with other chapters in the book. It's why if you find these chapters helpful, you'll find the book more-so, as a reference kit for your career.
