A job description describes a person; a brief describes a problem
The description lists what someone should already have: years, tools, titles. It is written to filter, and it filters on the things that are easiest to measure rather than the things that matter.
A brief starts from the other end. What is not happening today that needs to happen? What will this person own in their first six months? Answer those and the profile narrows itself, usually further than the description would have.
The four things worth writing down
Everything else is detail. If a brief has these, a recruiter can go to market with it; if it does not, they are guessing.
- The outcome: what changes because this person joined
- The first project: something concrete they would pick up in week two
- The constraints: budget, location, clearance, seniority, anything non-negotiable
- The trade-off: if you could only have depth or breadth, which one
Say what is hard about the job
Every role has something awkward in it: legacy nobody wants to touch, a stakeholder who is difficult, a team that has lost people. Leaving it out does not hide it, it just moves the discovery to the third interview, or worse, to month two.
Candidates who are worth hiring are not put off by a real problem. They are put off by finding out you were not straight with them.
Write it together, once
Thirty minutes with the hiring manager and whoever will do the interviewing, at the start, is the highest-return half hour in the whole process. It is also where most searches that later stall could have been saved.
If the brief could describe three different jobs, the shortlist will contain three different people and none of them will be right.
Hiring for a role like this, or weighing a move?
Talk to us



