A recruiter opens a CV and finds an impressive list of responsibilities but little evidence connected to the vacancy. It is tempting to conclude that the candidate has not read the advert. Sometimes that is true. Sometimes the advert has made it difficult to work out what matters.
When a job description gives every requirement equal weight, candidates have to guess which experience to emphasise. They may repeat the organisation's language without providing useful examples, or overlook a relevant achievement because the connection was not obvious.
Recruitment teams can make applications easier to assess by improving the information they give applicants before submission. A clearer advert cannot guarantee better candidates, but it can create better conditions for candidates to explain their suitability.
Define the work before describing the ideal person
Begin with the activities and decisions the role actually involves. “Excellent communication skills” tells an applicant little about the situation in which those skills matter.
For a customer operations role, a more informative description might explain that the employee will investigate account problems, coordinate responses with technical colleagues and maintain customer-facing guidance.
That description gives candidates several ways to find relevant evidence. Someone with service-desk experience may recognise the troubleshooting work. A candidate from a different sector may have managed comparable escalations.
Ask the hiring manager which responsibilities occupy most of the role and which are occasional. The advert should reflect that distinction rather than reproduce an unedited internal job specification.
Separate essential requirements from preferences
A requirement should be labelled essential because the work genuinely depends on it. Before publishing, question whether a particular tool, qualification or industry background is necessary at entry or simply familiar to the team.
Where equivalent experience is acceptable, explain what equivalence means. “Experience with a CRM” is more open than requiring one product when the underlying workflow is what matters. If expertise in a specific platform is genuinely necessary, keep the requirement and explain the relevant tasks.
Avoid offering flexibility in one sentence and contradicting it elsewhere. An advert that welcomes career changers but requires several years in the identical role gives applicants conflicting instructions.
This review also helps recruiters agree on what they will assess before applications arrive.
Tell candidates what evidence would be useful
An invitation to “demonstrate your suitability” leaves room for very different interpretations. A few focused prompts can make the request more practical.
For example:
-
Describe a recurring operational problem you helped resolve.
-
Explain your contribution to a project involving another team.
-
Give an example of documentation or reporting you maintained.
These prompts should connect directly to the work. They do not need to create an additional essay requirement; candidates could address them within their CV or a short application response.
Keep the burden proportionate. Asking for extensive unpaid work at the first application stage may deter people who cannot spare the time, even when they could perform the role well.
Leave room for different career paths
Useful evidence can come from employment, self-employment, volunteering, study or a return-to-work project. The setting matters, but it should not be the only information assessed.
A hypothetical applicant who organised a small community programme might demonstrate scheduling and stakeholder coordination. That does not automatically establish readiness to manage a large commercial operation. It does provide something specific to discuss.
Ask candidates to identify the setting and their personal contribution. This allows reviewers to evaluate the scope honestly without forcing every example into a conventional employment history.
Applicants also use tools such as MyCVCreator to organise their experience into a CV. A consistent document can make that experience easier to review, but presentation should not substitute for evidence of the capabilities the role needs.
Align the application form with the advert
Clear instructions lose value if the form asks for unrelated information or repeats the same request several times.
Walk through the application as a candidate. Can the requested file be uploaded? Does the form explain accepted formats? If a portfolio is optional, is it genuinely optional? Are instructions about employment dates consistent across the form and advert?
Tell applicants when a short explanation is enough. If you need a work sample, describe its purpose, acceptable formats and whether an existing example can be used.
Provide a contact route for application questions and accessibility needs. Avoid assuming that everyone will interpret an unfamiliar field in the same way.
Give reviewers a shared assessment approach
Before screening, agree on the evidence that would support each important criterion. Distinguish a lack of evidence in the application from clear evidence that a requirement is not met.
Use a small set of job-related questions to guide review. What did the candidate do? In what setting? What was their contribution? What needs clarification?
For a borderline application, an interview question may resolve uncertainty more effectively than speculation based on a title or writing style. Apply the same standards consistently rather than introducing new preferences after seeing a particular candidate.
Improve the next advert using actual application problems
After a recruitment round, review where applicants repeatedly misunderstood the role. Were essential details missing? Did people provide examples that were reasonable interpretations of an unclear prompt? Did the form prevent them from including requested information?
Track these observations alongside outcomes such as completed applications and progression through assessment. Avoid treating a larger application count as proof of improvement if the applications remain difficult to evaluate.
The aim is a clearer exchange: employers explain the work and the evidence they need, while candidates explain what they have done. Better job adverts make that exchange possible before the first interview.
