A proactive listener

Greg Wyatt • March 27, 2024

In ‘Always Split the Difference Unless it Relates to Cake’, or summat, Chris Voss describes active listening as a key principle in any negotiation.

Active listening relates to working to understand the meaning and intention of words you hear in conversation, rather than listening to respond.


I talk about this in my meandering epic ‘Train of Thought’, where our typical passive listening cycle resembles:

  • Greg starts speaking

  • Voss anticipates how Greg’s sentence is going to continue

  • Voss starts formulating his response based on his extrapolation

  • Voss responds at the appropriate moment

  • The cycle repeats

But if you’re always listening to respond, you’ll always miss out on at least part of the message. Especially when the other person may not have articulated meaningfully if caught by the passage of their thoughts.


Voss talks about two principles of active listening:

  • Mirroring reciprocates the language used to show we’re paying attention, and confirm understanding, often in the same language - to show you’re singing from the same hymn sheet

  • Labelling identifies and acknowledges the feelings of the other party so that they feel heard

Through this, we can build empathy and understand how to tackle our negotiations.


There’s only one issue with this, which may, in fairness, only be a Greg problem.

It feels slimy when it’s done to you.

I’ve come across mirroring many times in my career, simply out of the sheer volume of candidate conversations, some of whom are NLP (neurolinguistic programming) practitioners. You can read about their version here: NLP Mirroring.

It’s a technique grounded in relationships - have you ever noticed you sometimes copy the body language of those you are closest to? I always step in sync with those I am with, unconsciously.

Knowing that someone actively mirrors my style makes me immediately think they have an agenda. Of course, they do, given they have applied a negotiation technique for a reason.

The more popular a technique is, the more likely the other party is to know of the technique. Can it therefore backfire?

Nonetheless, my qualms aside, what would you say most long-term jobseekers (those who have felt the most pain from the recruitment system) want most, outside of a job?


From my experience of talking to a few hundred long-term job seekers, they hope for decency, to feel they are heard, for their concerns to be addressed, and for a resolution. This is backed up by all the discussion we see on socials.

Given job seekers have been trained to bear the pain of poor process, they are likely more forgiving than a sceptical passive candidate, who may vote with their feet without us ever knowing.

However if we treat the illness we can see, it has the byproduct of benefitting the least patient too.

So it would seem there is an opportunity to apply the principles of active listening systemically, by listening to Candidate Resentment and providing an experience that does the opposite.

If you accept that a systemic approach to active listening can be effective in dealing with problems, can we do the same in how we appeal to the specific people we want to employ?


At the start of any robust hiring process, two things need to happen:

1/ Confirm that the job description to be hired against is suitably and sufficiently accurate to the needs of the vacancy, team, business and context

2/ Clearly establish what good looks like in our candidates

That second doesn’t just relate to suitability criteria, but also aspirations and psychological fulfilment.

After all, if they don’t want to do the job, it doesn’t matter how good they are, does it?

By doing these two steps we can establish the voice of our candidates.

And if we have proactively and robustly identified what their voice is, we can proactively listen to determine how we attract them.

Through mirroring their situation, context, and minimum viable good.

Through labelling their problems and desires.


That’s called speaking in the language of your audience.

Irrespective of whether it’s in a job advert, an email, a DM or a phone call.

Or whether it’s in an interview confirmation, the interview itself, or any feedback.

Whether it’s offer stage, resignation, preboarding, onboarding or induction.

Everything is negotiation, even when built on empathy.

Proactive listening holds the key to attracting the right people, and ensuring they are retained. By building empathy they may respond advantageously.

And it’s why putting your candidates’ needs above your own, is one of the best ways to achieve the outcomes you want, the crux of an outside in approach to recruitment.


Oh and if you want to negotiate a job offer, you’d do well to actively listen to your desired employee, so that you can give them what they think they want to get you what you need.

Might even help in briefing, consulting, qualifying and interviewing.

Thanks for listening.

Regards,

Greg

p.s. I’m still open to your buying my stuff, but a bit less open than last week, so don’t dither if you need anything

p.p.s. This newsletter is a day early, due to the Easter Break. Have a good one!

By Greg Wyatt August 18, 2026
The body content of your post goes here. To edit this text, click on it and delete this default text and start typing your own or paste your own from a different source.
By Greg Wyatt August 11, 2026
What follows is Chapter 49 in A Career Breakdown Kit (Summer 2026) . It's like many other chapters in that I've tried to make it stand alone, yet it's deeply connected to the rest of the book. For example, if you accept your job search is equivalent to launching a product to market - where you are the product and your next employer the buyer - then a sensible strategy is also equivalent. You execute an appropriate multichannel sales and marketing plan, where you focus on the steps in your control, with considered action and follow up. An interview process is an ongoing negotiation, with each interview equivalent to a consultative sales meeting. And like any good sales professional, you know that the steps preceding, the steps in-between, and the steps after all have a part to play. In my last three offers these have all been contributing factors: The relationship nurtured by the hiring manager led to their new employee hitting the ground running The private information withheld by the candidate that led to an offer rescinded because she could never have fulfilled the role in the first place The enthusiasm shown by a candidate in post interview communications tipped a decision in their favour Recruitment is risk, filled with bias - that doesn't mean you can't make that work for you. 49 - After the interview In a tough job search, getting to an interview can feel a real achievement. If you’ve been accountable in your applications, only going for roles where you are a strong fit, these are tangible opportunities to secure employment. The interview itself isn’t the be-all and end-all. It’s better to see them as the start of a conversation, one that’s only complete when you either have an acceptable employment contract in your hand, or if it’s an unequivocal no. Continuing this conversation in the right way, and in ways other candidates may not think to, can bring hoped for and unexpected gains. A few weeks back I filled a vacancy which had a strong shortlist. The final three were all employable, and the company would have taken all three had they been able to. The second choice candidate was disappointed and took it well, responding professionally. I worked hard to give all three a good experience with regular updates and constructive feedback. I too was genuinely disappointed for the ‘unsuccessful’ candidates. Two weeks after accepting the offer and returning the signed contract, the first-choice candidate withdrew. She’d received a significantly improved offer having been headhunted. Within two hours of passing the news on to the hiring team, the 2nd choice candidate was offered the role and accepted. How she had responded to her initial disappointment was a key element in this offer being put forward. The same was true of her experience with us in her decision to accept the offer. In many ways an interview is like a sales meeting. One party pitches their offering which might be customised against the questions asked. The other party makes a decision on whether and how to proceed. In an interview both the candidate and employer act as both seller and buyer. As a job seeker you get the final say on whether you say yes, no or something in between. Your decision is influenced by factors you may not divulge to the employer, such as an unexpected intervention (illness, accident, family), personal circumstances or other offers that may come up. It’s the same for the employer. They may have a hierarchy of decision-making, changes in the business and changes outside of the business - many things that can influence an interview decision or time frame, different from what was initially agreed. In sales we know that a deal isn’t agreed upon until the invoice is paid. Even if there is an initial ‘yes’ in a meeting we follow up suitably. Follow-up email to confirm details of the conversation and next steps. Thank you for your time Follow up at the appropriate time to check progress If it’s ‘no right now’, follow up over time to build a relationship until they are ready to buy If it’s ‘no answer’, find appropriate reasons to follow up, ending in a breakup email What this actually looks relates to what their sales (hiring) process is, playing to their rules and breaking those same rules in an appropriate way. In the UK, 61% of private sector employers are SMEs, whereas the vast majority of money is in the corporate space. The differentiator in recruitment is that the more corporate you get, the more transactional and matrix-led recruitment often becomes. Some of the rules of the game will be different. This illustrates how and why things are different depending on the context. Public sector, charities, geography, bias, habit, strategy - these all affect the rules of what appear similar processes from the outside. It’s important not to be cynical or come across as coercive. Respect the process and any rules you learn about. Thank you notes Most of the employers I partner with are interested in candidate feedback and interest post-interview - to help them reach their decision for the right reason. Were you applying directly, their interest in your view would be the same. A naturally written thank you note sent appropriately should not work against you. It might work for you and it’s a situation where someone’s bias can be a benefit. ‘Dear Greg, I wanted to thank you for your time today and the opportunity to interview at ABC Corp. It was a pleasure to meet you and Gary and helpful to understand more about your role and environment. I remain keen and would be delighted to return for the next stage. You mentioned you’ll make a decision by the end of next week and I look forward to hearing from you. Do let me know if I can help with anything - my number is …. Kind regards,’ It’s an opportunity to build on or mitigate inconclusive points in an interview if there’s an example you neglected to share or if you didn’t convey information in the right way. Maybe they let slip they’d be concerned if the role would keep your interest in the long term - why not own this? ‘During the interview you asked if I could see myself in this role long-term. It’s a role I’d enjoy - taking on a hands-on role I can get stuck into is an exciting challenge, while my experience in xxx would be beneficial for yyy.’ Keep it more succinct than my email though. Write it in your own words in a similar tone to how you came across in the interview. Will it make a difference? Only marginally, in some situations. Is it worth doing as a natural way to continue the conversation? I think so. Don’t be disheartened if you don’t get a reply - they may have a policy to follow. And to that coercive point above don’t say ‘I’m the best candidate. You’d be a fool to miss out,’ or something more subtle that might suggest the same. Additional interviews In an ideal world you’d get a full view of the interview process before the interview. Unfortunately some employers enjoy playing a game of interview chicken, revealing more and more interview stages as you go through them. Most are somewhere in between. Try to establish the full process as early as possible in case there is anything that is non-negotiable for you. For example, I know some people categorically do not want to do technical tests or ‘business plan’ style presentations, having had their fingers burnt in the past. It’s your choice what might be a non-negotiable - for any reasonable employer these are typically used as a means for fair assessment. Treat any interview in the same way as the first interview: prepare as fully as possible and assume nothing. Unless you know their hierarchy of decision-making, that new person you meet at fourth stage for an informal chat might well be the person with the final say. Even a social get-together after an offer is put forward might be seen as an assessment. Appropriate follow-ups It’s a careful balance. You want to show you are interested, not desperate. You need an answer, not to be inappropriately intrusive - even if that’s not your intent perception holds weight. Following up in the right way is a good tactic. If you can gain an understanding of their time frames or process work to that. Anything and everything can happen behind the scenes, including unexpected absences. Things can slip in a way employers may not see as notable. A few work days after you were expecting to hear, drop them a polite line. ‘Hi Greg, I wondered if you had any news on how you want to proceed with this role. Is there any update you can share? Kind regards,’ You can play a bit of keeping up with the Joneses if it’s true - ‘I remain interested - I do have two interviews this week with other employers. Would you like me to keep you updated?’ Sometimes no news is no news and you might need to be patient. Eventually you may come to a point where you need a decision from them - such as if your 2nd choice company gives you a job offer. A breakup email can be a good thing. Even if this doesn’t prompt an update or decision from them, you give yourself agency to walk away with no ‘what ifs?’ And if they do come back later, you can make a separate decision on whether to revisit them. One such email might be: ‘Hi Greg, I enjoyed our interview on May 21st. You mentioned you’d reach a decision the following week. Can I assume you have moved forward with another candidate? I’ll draw a line through my application for now and will be happy to pick up our conversations at a later date, if appropriate. Kind regards,’ Written appropriately, there are three outcomes: You get a reply confirming they have appointed You get no reply and can move on You get a reply with more information That last point may be ‘no news’ or something actionable. Sometimes it might even prompt good news. Whatever the outcome, you can move forward. Keeping in touch long-term Sometimes a no might be a ‘no for now’, especially when you are later on in the process, such as being pipped to the post at final interview. If yours is a business as usual role where there are a number of employees fulfilling similar duties in the same company, you may well be suitable for other roles that come up in future. How can you keep in touch appropriately so that you help their decision making when another vacancy comes up? Find reasons to occasionally keep in touch (maybe once every couple of months). If they are active on LinkedIn you could follow their content and add constructive comments. It may come to nothing but it may give you early sight of a new vacancy. If you see another vacancy advertised check it out. Drop them a line directly rather than just apply given you are continuing a conversation rather than coming in cold. And if they reply to say ‘don’t bother’, at least you know.