Rule of three

Greg Wyatt • March 14, 2024

This is the first in a series on negotiation in recruitment, inspired by a recent listen.

To kick things off, let’s look at the rule of three.

I’ve found throughout my career that engagement and commitment come from tackling the same issue in three ways.

Whether it’s a presentation -

“Say what you’re going to say; say it; summarise it.”

Something we’ve been trained to do even in watching the news, as they attempt to get us to stick around… “later this evening”.

Or in candidate discussions, something I developed when I noticed the problem with selling too hard.

More on that later.

In his insightful (audio)book on negotiation, Chris Voss talks about the psychology of negotiating, influencing and manipulation of antagonists.

His negotiations skills came from hostage situations, yet he adapts this brilliantly to the corporate context. Because people are people.

It feels like my early-career attempts to do the same with candidates.

But candidates aren't antagonists.

In an employer candidate discussion, they should be deuteragonists - everyone wins in a successful job offer.

If you accept candidates can be the dual protagonists, then every candidate must be, including the readers that walk away without you ever knowing.

Because you don’t know at initial stage who the winning candidate is going to be. Especially those you can’t yet know about.

And everyone is a hero of their own story.

A second difference is, that while Chris states everyone wins in his negotiations, those wins are imbalanced - he aims to get more of what he wants while leaving the other feeling they got a good outcome.

The third difference is that Chris’ negotiations lead to a final decision, ideally to his advantage. Yet candidates can decide to do one thing, committedly, then change their mind for what can be impenetrable reasons, for changes in circumstance, or just because they want to.

Regrettably, there is a fourth point which ruins the form of this article. Our negotiations with candidate should also be a double assessment of fit - are they right for the role, and is the role right for them? In this way, a no can be a great outcome for everyone - ‘that's wrong’ riffing off the book's words, because you find out concrete reasons why it was never going to work out as early as possible.

I came to a pivotal moment in my career some years ago, in doing some recruitment for Anglian Water.

The recruitment manager said to me - “you have a problem with your candidates sticking.”

While my immediate inclination, as someone doing their best, is that it’s the candidates at fault, she was entirely correct.

How could it be that candidates seemed enthused by a role I presented to them, yet decided not to go for an interview?

It’s simply this - in conversation, it’s easy to get excited and think what a great opportunity!

Yet with time to reflect, the impassable objections can come up.

Objections that are sometimes easy to ascertain early on, while others are initially philosophical and then utterly practical the closer to offer/start/end of probation you get.

From this, over many years, I came to three adjustments in my candidate engagement.

  1. that an initial part of a first call should be about them and them only, so as not to bias the call to the vacancy. In doing so you can link the vacancy to their aspirations while identifying hard objections (the ones which mean they should withdraw for good reason). Candidates often want to hear about the vacancy first, but it’s in everyone’s best interest that I hear their side beforehand.

  2. that sending an application immediately after that call, can result in the situation with Anglian Water. Therefore at least one follow-up should occur. Perhaps a rare situation, yet a problem which has a solution. The immediacy of flinging CVs over at speed is a consequence of first-past-the-post recruitment and one reason I’ve moved away from the transactional contingency approach.

  3. that combining these with formal competency interviews can be intrusive on a candidate’s time. How could I implement a follow-up to gain commitment and qualify? The answer became my assessment-over-time interviewing technique:

    1. a call as described in point 1

    2. a follow-up call to discuss questions and concerns - to ensure proceeding to the next step is the right decision

    3. a third call, if it is of interest, to make sure I represent them in the right way

Perhaps those three points in the third point might seem like overkill, but this can happen over a couple of days, and isn’t so rigid we can’t adjust things on the fly.

I’ve found three byproducts of this:

  • I build trust naturally for the right reasons. By making a safe place to express concerns, in confidence, these concerns are often raised. And if a role isn’t right - well we’ve saved everyone a lot of time. Equally, it’s hard to fake during what candidates may feel are the ‘in-between’ moments - you can get a sense of what they are genuinely all about

  • this approach contributes to better hiring accuracy and retention. I can’t prove it at scale, because I’m a low volume recruiter, but it is the candidate mirror of my client work, and over the past few years I’ve filled every vacancy (that wasn’t cancelled by economic shenanigans), with an average retention of 3.8 years. But more importantly with feedback my placements are often future leaders, and exceed expectation.

  • this contributes, along other measures, with fewer issues - ghosting, poor/no shows, ‘losing’ people to counteroffers are rare issues for me.

You can apply this rule of three to any part of recruitment.

  1. Offer an interview; confirm the interview; check-in before the interview

  2. Verbal offer; confirm when paperwork will go out; check paperwork ok

  3. Pre-boarding; onboarding; induction

Chris Voss talks about his Rule of 3, to get counterparts to agree three times in conversation. Through calibrated questions, summaries and labels.

It works very well in the scenarios he describes.

But while employers love their ransom lists and the demands they buy from their candidates, candidates have their own non-negotiables too.

This gives an intermediary a unique opportunity to intervene, in the right way, in their negotiations.

Gaining commitment too early on can backfire, so instead we have to help them negotiate their deal with us, in service of the outcomes we want.

Besides, as an employer, if you ‘win’ a negotiation with a candidate and they come aboard cheap, well they may well vote with their feet if a better offer comes up.

Starting my business in 2011, I had an opportunity to build my philosophy of recruitment, in what I now describe as an outside-in approach.

I’ve made a 126-gallon load of mistakes, and continue to do so, but the results for employers, and candidates, are excellent, and I continue to learn and develop my thinking.

In this series, I’ll look at different aspects of negotiation from outside-in process, to owning candidate resentment, to problem-solving.

I'll look at my process in recruitment, alluding to some of Voss’s principles, so you could treat his book as a companion piece of sorts.

You can adjust my notions in line with Voss' negotiation style, adopt it as your own or... well this has always been called Your Mileage May Vary.

Thanks for reading. 

Greg

p.s. I’m bitterly disappointed that World Pi Day hasn’t coincided with British Pie Week.

p.p.s. sorry, I forgot to summarise at the end… rule of 3, recruitment vs Voss, coming soon, etc etc

How recruiters work

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.

After the interview

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.