Standard definition; A Recruitment AiDE, pt 12

Greg Wyatt • January 22, 2026

It might seem like the AiDE framework is about better advertising, but really that depends on what you think an advert is.


While it's clearly intended to attract ideal employees, particularly for context heavy key hires - it's consequential, not standalone.


Because you can't attract ideal hires if you don't know specifically who 'they' are or what good looks like. The definition of which is also a consequence of what the role actually is.


Get these points wrong and you might have a compelling advert that attracts a great person, who buggers off in 4 weeks because they were never the right person to start with.


Yet another reason why those dynamic, market-leading adjectives are entirely the wrong way to go about it.


So, this edition introduces the D in AiDE - definition.


May, 2023


I first came across ‘Minimum Viable Product’ when I recruited a product management role a few years ago (I love product management roles – they are super contextual and allow my process to shine).


MVP is the simplest version of a product that allows it to be tested for commercial viability and market demand. It’s the most basic version of the intended product that is fit for purpose.


In recruitment, the principle of ‘minimum viable’ might be the sporting MVP for any part of your process that requires definition, with meaning to the right people – if you apply suitability and sufficiency.


It’s the foundation on which ‘Definition’ is built on in my AiDE framework.


Let me share a LinkedIn post which shows a jobseeker’s reaction to a recent interview:


"Today I had a fantastic #interview."


Can you see the ikigai of their experience?


More than that, this excellent experience is a consequence of a skilful process, as any good candidate experience should be.


What might be the benefit of doing this for the employer?


Part of her experience is how the process has been defined in advance.


Before they apply, most candidates want clarity both on what a role is, and why they might be a good candidate for that role.


They likely already know the general duties of any given job title – we neither want them to learn to suck eggs, nor to wade through volumes of irrelevant content.


We know that many demographics may pre-select themselves out if they don’t sufficiently meet the ‘required criteria’ set out in a job advert, even if those criteria aren’t actually required.


Some of these demographics suffer from isms – do we really want to be precluding potentially great candidates just because of poor use of language?


Better accessibility in language used benefits everyone.


It goes to follow that we might aim to describe both the role and person requirements in a way that has meaning to the widest relevant reader base: minimum viable.


For the role – the immutable truth of a vacancy that defines what it is, without ambiguity.


For the person requirement – the immutable set of skills, qualifications, attitudes and/or experiences that any successful employee in this role has to have.


Everything else can be stripped away.


You can use So What? and Why does it Matter? to help edit these down to size.


What’s left should be no more than 3-4 bullet points – fewer, if you can do so without introducing ambiguity.


If you disagree, tell me why you can’t trim your requirement down and I’ll be happy to explore this with you.


These definitions give clarity to readers, open up access to the widest pool of possible candidates and help you in establishing what you actually need.


Simplifying to minimum viable takes work and requires you to challenge habit and accepted process. If you’ve always ‘done it this way’, it can be hard to see past your blind spots.


Much like the rest of an advert, the content should be the consequence of the work that’s led to it.


In this case, the job description and person requirements.


These have a different part to play than the advert, including both assessment and performance elements.


Yet if you apply minimum viable to these, you shouldn’t lose any of the necessary elements, while giving better clarity to both candidates and your own hiring process.


Any advert will flow from this clarity, or lack of.


I wonder what would happen to those job adverts that require “4 years experience in tech invented 1.5 years ago” were smacked over the head with this approach.


Remember Sebastien Ramirez?


‘Definition’ isn’t just about advertising, it can be used everywhere.


“What is the minimum viable definition that is both suitable and sufficient?”


A question you might ask of every step in your process, including expectation management -


If your offer process takes 6 days from point of verbal acceptance to generating offer paperwork, and there is no way to shorten it, this should be clearly explained to the candidate at the point of verbal offer.


“We’ll generate the paperwork asap” is not a minimum viable definition for the candidate.


Might they get cold feed during your 6-day-asap?


Or how about a minimum viable interview process?


What if you defined your interview process at the earliest opportunity?


How might this benefit both you and your candidates?


Minimum viable doesn’t mean as little as possible.


It means establishing concrete candidate needs from each step in your process, and giving them the definition and experience that helps bring them forward to the next step.


From there you can layer on additional information, if needed, to get an optimal result.


Give better definitions in your writing, and you’ll help everyone involved.


Thanks for reading.


Regards,

Greg


p.s. While you are here, if you like the idea of improving how you recruit, lack capacity or need better candidates and are curious how I can help, these are my services:


- UK key hire recruitment

- manage part or all of your recruitment on an individually designed basis

- outplacement support


DM me if you want to discuss.


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).