Mind the gap

Greg Wyatt • May 24, 2024

If we are so fortunate we will at some point experience grief.

Because you don’t experience grief if you haven’t lost something treasured.


I was first aware of grief as a process when my Dad died in 2013.

I said to my wife the other day, ‘I can’t believe this was a quarter of my life ago’.

I was very lucky in our relationship - the love of a son for his father, our friendship, and the mutual respect of our professional lives.

And when he died, after a long, painful illness, full of emergencies, I went through the full cycle of emotions you’d expect - sadness, anger, regret, and even relief that my own burden was over.

But at the same time, I found myself sitting with my emotions, recognising that they were a consequence of what had happened to us and that each instance wasn’t singular, but was part of a tableau of emotions in the journey of our relationship.

It was a weird thing to marvel at while going through a profound time.

If you’ve ever experienced grief, have you gone through the same process of emotions?


I found this happening again in 2020, during the early part of the pandemic, something I’d speculated might happen with Dad, way back when.

Although we thought it would be Ebola. We also talked about the advent of AI, World War 3 as a set of proxy wars, climate change, and the inevitable cycles of civilisation.

What a time to be alive!

To experience these things, and recognise how we react to these stimuli, well it’s pretty much AIDA, isn’t it?


A couple of weeks back I ran an advert for what proved a common skill role - it might have been uncommon a couple of years back, but now there are many great candidates.

450 applications, 85 of whom were viable candidates on paper.

I emailed each of the 85 basic questions, confirming salary expectations, that they were happy with the working arrangements, etc.

This reduced the pile to around half - despite the advert stating the salary clearly, many were waaay above budget, which ruled them out; same with location and their requirements.

The remaining half was halved again because despite responding to my first question, they didn’t reply to phone calls and emails to discuss further. Who knows why - maybe they changed their minds, maybe they got another job, maybe they just didn’t want to talk.

What was notable though, was that two of the candidates were responsive in the right way. Timely, showing relevant interest, and asking great questions.

These alone didn’t make them suitable candidates, yet my experience of them made me want to reciprocate their care.

I found myself sitting with that notion.

Why exactly did this prompt my intrinsic response?

  • a move from transactional to the start of a relationship

  • an emotional reaction to how they contacted me

  • recognition that they would take this approach forward with the employer

Probably more that I hadn't identified.

The process I carried out was fair and effective, although I made a few mistakes due to the volume. The feedback from the client was excellent too.

From one vacancy, they’ve offered two candidates who have both accepted.

Can you guess which two it was?


Their behaviour and attitude were consistent with how they represented themselves in their CV and in person.

A sign of ‘how you do anything may be how you do everything’.


The flipside of the relationship they built with me and the employer in this process, is the relationship we built with them.

A relationship you can see through their unconscious feedback, their responsiveness and the words they choose to use.

Would they have behaved in this way had the experience I gave them been different?

It’s no coincidence that they commented on the ‘human’ nature of my advert, my responsiveness and the care I took.

Instances I’ve learnt to provide throughout my career, because of the impact I know it has, and because it’s a natural part of my personality and aspirations.

These are things I do because I know that candidates don’t respond to situations in an instant, they do so as a tableau of their emotions in the journey of their career.


In this same process, the opposite happened too, from my post on LinkedIn , with examples of how wider bad experiences intersected with mistakes I made.


For people who’ve had a very challenging job search, reflective of many of the 450 applicants for this seemingly common skills role, what experiences have they had that shape their behaviour and decisions?

How can we stand out, so that the inertia of their experiences doesn’t interact with our actions in the wrong way?

What are we doing to stop ideal candidates from expressing interest in roles that are ideal for them?

It all comes back to their experiences and emotions.

Recognising that what we experience of candidates isn’t the whole story, is a step towards creating better experiences for them while serving our recruitment goals.

Whether it’s more accurate job descriptions, transparent processes, showing what’s in it for them, being responsive to their needs, creating a safe place to ask for help, or all these other steps we have control over that can make a difference.

But to see these benefits that make it easier to recruit, you have to cross the gap between our own needs (inside out) to placing their needs first (outside in).

By being mindful of what a candidate might go through, feel and experience in our recruitment processes, we can deliver a better process.

Thanks for reading.

Regards,

Greg

p.s. I’m waiting for formal signoff on a senior sales role in the next couple of days, but other than that I’ve filled all my vacancies. Let me know if you need any help filling your vacancies (I’m a bit needy, mind) or improving how you recruit.

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
By Greg Wyatt February 23, 2026
What follows is Chapter 21 in A Career Breakdown Kit (2026) . It's a good example of how a job search is an inverted recruitment exercise, but also how the same principles from recruitment can be applied in a job search. Market mapping is one of the first steps of a search process in what is often called headhunting. Here though, instead of an exercise that helps find a person for a job, you help find a job for you. This can be in one chunk, at the outset, and iteratively, as you learn more information. It's a great example of how LinkedIn can be used as a data repository, given the vast majority of professionals are present here. And if they are present here, the insight that is their careers is too, allowing you to identify potential viable employers, who works there, and therefore where else they may have worked, with further potential hiring managers. The snake that eats its own tail. Try doing the iterative work above, every time you come across someone new, whether in an application or in networking . You can use this to build out your network, identify companies to contact proactively. Simon Ward and I will talk more on this in our LinkedIn Live on Tuesday February 24th at 1pm GMT. You can join us, and view the full recording afterwards, here: Is The Nature Of Networking Changing for Job Hunters? If you happen to read this as a hiring authority, market mapping is one of the invisible processes in a structured search. It can often take me 80 to 100 hours to fully map a role for potential viable candidates, given I try to find non-traditional candidates as well as those that are easier to find through sourcing. 21 - Map the market Market mapping is a common activity in executive search. Why wouldn’t you adopt the same approach in your inverse of a recruitment exercise? The idea is to fully understand your market, so that you are better able to navigate it. This is a summary chapter because market mapping is both a strategic and a tactical exercise. I’ll cover some of the How of mapping in Part Three. There are three ways in which to map the market. The vacancies you are qualified for This is about determining which vacancies you should focus your attention on. In which domains does your capability directly apply? This could be context related, if your expertise is in start-ups, growth, downsizing or other contexts. It could be industry related - your process manufacturing expertise might directly apply in food, plastics or pharmaceuticals. It could be job related, with the right applicable skills. Establish where there is a market for you, and if what you offer is needed by that market. Advice on the transferable skills trap (p55) and whether you are qualified (p178) to apply will help. The geography of your job search Where are all the employers and vacancies that you can sustainably commute to? A geographical map can help you target opportunities by region. What resources are available to help you with this map? Searching online for local business parks, even driving around them, can give a list of viable companies to contact. Directories and membership hubs. Local newspapers, social media stories. If you see a company you like the look of, say from an advert, search on their local post code. Who else might be there? The chapter on doorknocking (p241) has more ideas. The people of your network Every time you come across someone you might build a relationship with, connect with them on LinkedIn. Then check out their career history. Who else have they worked with? Where else have they worked? This works for peers, hiring managers, and recruiters - a headhunter in one company may well have worked in a similar domain in a previous one. Is there anyone at these previous companies you should introduce yourself to? What about their listed vacancies? Building out a map of relevant recruiters to develop relationships with (if they answer the phone) can lead to vacancies. Treat it as an iterative exercise. Check out the chapter on networking (p236). This map isn’t just about potential opportunity. It’s also about information that might be helpful now and in future. This might be for job leads. It might be industry insight you can share through content. It may even be topics for conversation in interviews or with peers. Make sure you track it in the right way, whether through Notion, Excel or other resources you have available. With any information, check it is accurate, then prune appropriately. Prioritise on degrees of separation (closest first) and context fit (where what you need is most closely aligned with what you offer).