Monday 20th May

The Pulse

How to Write Perfect Job Ads. Part 3: Structure

Written by
Paul Hassing

Businesses, Featured, Your Team

Print Page

28
Feb

Writing ads is easy, once you know how.

Welcome to the next chapter of our recruitment advertisement (job ad) creation guide.

So far we’ve covered briefing and audience.

Today we learn the easy way to write a great job ad without freaking out.

Blank stare

Two things make writing hard:

Where to start.
How to go about it.

Happily, the solutions to both are simple.

The intuitive way to write something is to start at the top of a blank page or screen.

Yet staring at a white wasteland can freak you out.

Job ads don’t have to be written this way.

Not what it seems

Many people find writing ads hard because the structure of an ad is different to the process used to create it.

This is the structure of a good job ad:

Headline.
Bullet points.
Introductory paragraph.
Duties.
Selection criteria.
Benefits.
Call to action.

Each part leads the reader to the next, which is great.

As a writer, however, this structure invites you to start at the top and work down.

This is much harder than letting the ad ‘evolve’ via the process below.

The right way

This is the process to create a good job ad:

Gather and study all data.
Imagine your audience.
Highlight data relevant to them.
Jot the information down in point form.
Order the points according to the structure above.
String them together in sentences.
Groom the sentences.
Write a headline.
Read the ad aloud.

With this approach, you don’t have to work out where to start writing, or how.

Nor do you suffer the blank-page blues.

You don’t even begin by beating your brain for a killer headline (we cover that in Part 4).

If you follow this method, you’ll never suffer writer’s block.

Questions

Think of the best job ad you’ve ever seen. (Maybe one that led to a dream job.)

Did its structure resemble the one I’ve described?

Now that you’ve seen my process, do you think it could work for you?

Either way, I’d be delighted to expand, explain or defend any part.

So please add your voice.

Or, voice your ad!

* If you like peeking at the last pages of books, go here.

Paul Hassing | Founder & Senior Writer – The Feisty Empire

advertising, job ads, recruitment, retention, staff, team

Next Article Previous Article

Add a comment Cancel reply

We love to hear what you think, but please note, that by submitting a comment you agree to our comment policy.

Our comments work like a dinner party. Differences of opinion are welcome but keep it respectful or the host will show you the door. If you're rude or abusive, your comment will be deleted. And if you're offensive, you won't be welcome back. We reserve the right to remove any comments that do not comply with our policy. Have fun and thanks for adding to the conversation.

What others are saying

Author

Stephen Hamilton

February 28, 2012 at 10:57 am

I’ve been waiting eagerly for the next installment!

I admit that the hardest part usually is knowing where to start, so any expert guidance I can get I will use.

Reply
- Author
  
  Paul Hassing
  
  February 28, 2012 at 11:02 am
  
  That’s very nice to know, Stephen. Apparently, these how-to posts generate far more interest than their relatively low comment numbers suggest. So I’m particularly pleased to hear they’re doing some good to someone. I’ll have Part 4 for you soon! Best regards, P.
  
  Reply
Author

Anna @ Copybreak

February 28, 2012 at 11:33 am

Is the introductory paragraph where you talk about what a very important company you are and how many equally important clients you have and what your very profound corporate ethos is?

Reply
- Author
  
  Paul Hassing
  
  February 28, 2012 at 11:51 am
  
  Thanks for your ace question, Anna. The intro para definitely used to be ALL about the employer. But in recent years, a few enlightened clients are realising they need to grab and hold reader attention like never before.
  
  So we’re recasting the employer para in terms of what’s in it for the candidate. Selling an organisation while hitting a reader’s hot buttons is something of an art. But it’s made MUCH easier if the recruiter is truly an employer of choice. If you’ve got a great, true story to tell, you’re 90% there.
  
  Reply
- Author
  
  Stephen Hamilton
  
  February 28, 2012 at 2:20 pm
  
  Sounds like you’ve done battle on this front before, Anna.
  
  Reply
Author

Leon Noone

February 28, 2012 at 11:37 am

G’Day Paul,
May i suggest two more criteria: never ever ask for resumes or written applications.
These are the greatest single cause of poor selection decisions. Instead, include your name and telephone number in the ad and ask applicants to call you. Conduct a telephone screening interview and on that basis compile your short list. This saves an enormous amount of time and enables you to dissuade unsuitable candidates without having to wade through pages of applicants’ sales blurb.

The other thing: always include in your ad a statement to the effect; “Do not apply for this position unless” or “only apply if.’ Follow these statements with statements of the minimum background and experience you require.

State unequivocally, “Written Applications and Resumes, including emails, will not be accepted.” If applicants or consultants send them, send ‘em straight back.

We easily forget that the purpose of the job ad is to attract the “ideal” candidate and deter everyone else. If you attract hordes of candidates, you’ve written a lousy ad. That’s the reality. And your ad will only be as good as the job analysis it’s based on. A poor job analysis begets a lousy ad.

You’ll find lots more of my “heresies” about staff selection on my blog .It’s quite good fun.

Best Wishes
l
Leon

Reply
- Author
  
  Paul Hassing
  
  February 28, 2012 at 11:56 am
  
  Hiya, Leon. I’m very happy for you to suggest, as I know this is your bag too. Your experience is vast, but quite different to mine. Therefore, while I can’t vouch for your method (having never employed it) I’m eager for our readers to get as many takes on this topic as possible. So, to this end, knock yourself out!
  
  I think we do have common ground on the desire to generate a manageable talent pool. I use my 20:5:1 Rule to judge the effectiveness of my ads. It goes a little like this: attract 20 good applicants. Interview 5 great ones. Give the job to 1 fantastic one, who lives happily ever after.
  
  How does that sit with you?
  
  Reply
  - Author
    
    Paul Hassing
    
    February 28, 2012 at 11:57 am
    
    PS. Could you please restate the link to your blog? The one behind your avatar doesn’t seem to work for me.
  - Author
    
    Paul Hassing
    
    February 28, 2012 at 12:22 pm
    
    Is this it? http://staffperformancesecrets.com/ (There’s a bung character in your avatar version.)
  - Author
    
    Leon Noone
    
    February 29, 2012 at 12:25 pm
    
    G’Day Paul,
    You have the blog address correct. Have a look in the staff selection category. There are a number of in- depth posts addressing the issues I’ve mentioned. If any readers would like to look, all they need to do is go to
    http://staffperformancesecrets.com/
    
    Might I just say that seeking written applications and resumes when seeking candidates, is like putting an ad in the paper when you want to buy a new car and asking all the dealers to write to you. If that doesn’t make sense to you, seeking written applications for a vacant job isn’t very smart either. There are a couple of posts on the blog about this particular issue.
    
    I find that managers accept this when they realise that the purpose of staff selection is to get a job done, not to choose a person.
    
    Thanks for the space
    
    Best Wishes
    Leon
  - Author
    
    Paul Hassing
    
    February 29, 2012 at 1:11 pm
    
    Good on you, Leon. I warmly welcome all your views.
Author

Byron Van Arsdale

February 29, 2012 at 8:07 am

Paul:
Brilliant! Leave it to a super creative person to give great advice on how to reframe the situation to not only make the task easier, but to also boost the likelihood of getting better results. Bravo.

Now, there appears to be two emerging approaches for considering job applicants: ignoring the cv and looking straightaway at the applicants FB, Twitter, and other social media to see how well the applicant is a fit for the organization AND the use of video to tell your story as to why you believe you’d be a good fit for the organization.

Can’t wait to see how this changes how organizations hire and look for talent.
Byron

Reply
- Author
  
  Paul Hassing
  
  February 29, 2012 at 10:48 am
  
  Thanks for your wonderful vote of confidence, Byron!
  
  In the long run, I believe our ‘resume’ will be everything we’ve ever done online. (Especially if Google has its way!)
  
  As a writer, I remain a big fan of the resume. With selection criteria set in advance, you can rip through a resume in seconds (and a pile of ‘em in minutes).
  
  Then again, some people lie on their resumes – which is where social media can be very handy for cross checking. The video pitch is a new one on me. Fascinating stuff …
  
  I think I’d find it too time consuming to start with an online analysis. I feel my two-phase approach would work better. Then again, I’ve not been a HR Manager for many years, so I’d love to hear from modern recruiters closer to the action.
  
  BTW, I was MOST impressed with your recent video:
  
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auFIZpKDVc8&feature=player_embedded
  
  May I ask whether it’s generated any joy?
  
  Reply
  - Author
    
    Paul Hassing
    
    February 29, 2012 at 11:28 am
    
    In case anyone’s wondering what my Google reference meant:
    
    http://www.theage.com.au/technology/if-you-use-google-you-may-want-to-read-this-20120229-1u1i9.html
    
    Think I’ll switch to Bing!
  - Author
    
    Paul Hassing
    
    February 29, 2012 at 11:29 am
    
    Bing:
    
    http://www.bing.com/
  - Author
    
    Paul Hassing
    
    February 29, 2012 at 2:53 pm
    
    … Mind you, resumes and application letters certainly ain’t all beer and skittles:
    
    http://myob.com.au/blog/200-grams-of-resume-thanks/
    
    http://myob.com.au/blog/tyre-kickers/
  - Author
    
    Paul Hassing
    
    February 29, 2012 at 3:07 pm
    
    … Mind you, resumes certainly ain’t all beer and skittles:
    
    http://myob.com.au/blog/200-grams-of-resume-thanks/
  - Author
    
    Paul Hassing
    
    February 29, 2012 at 3:07 pm
    
    … Nor are application letters:
    
    http://myob.com.au/blog/tyre-kickers/
Author

Judy

February 29, 2012 at 10:45 am

Hi Paul,
Thought I’d comment to let you know I’m an avid reader of your posts.
Sometimes think I’m too busy to reply
I find your posts interesting and useful … they keep me eager for the next installment.

When writing,I like to look at the keyboard and ignore my screen otherwise I get bogged down with worrying about spelling and grammar.I can fix that later.

Cheers,
Judy

PS how can I access spell check when writing in comment box.

Reply
- Author
  
  Paul Hassing
  
  February 29, 2012 at 11:19 am
  
  Dear Jude, I know how phenomenally busy you are. It’s always a surprise treat to see you make time for us here.
  
  To my knowledge, The System doesn’t let us check our spelling while commenting. This is a real bugger, as typos sure arnt a gud lookk wen yuo charg $120/hr for croppywriteng!
  
  The old blog let me under the hood to fix comment errors. Our swish new space doesn’t; seems we can’t have it all. Emma or one of MYOB’s IT boffins may be able offer further advice, but I regret to report this is as far as my power and mandate runs.
  
  For the record, I’d put up with any errors just to get your views. But I totally see where you’re coming from, given you’re a writer of no mean talent youself.
  
  With best regards and many thanks for giving a damn, P.
  
  Reply
Author

Philip Owens

February 29, 2012 at 8:18 pm

Hi Paul,

I’m on the other side of the Doona to Leon. He may be right in many circumstances, but I would find that unless a major component of the role was cold use of telephone calling, I still err on the side of resume. I find that I can evaluate resumes on my own time, I can call the potential recruit (capturing them in a more ‘authentic’ moment,and it also has the potential to discriminate against people with certain speech issues (I know a brilliant business analyst that any business would be lucky to have, but he has a problematic stutter).

I also have an issue that when you receive 50+ resumes for a position, I can use a group of people to ‘double screen’ the resumes, which I cannot do on the phone.

Maybe I’m just old fashioned?

I would agree that a ‘social search’ is important to back up any selection process.

Writing the ad to screen out’ unwanteds’, screen in the perfect target market and attracting a small pool of ‘qualified leads’ sounds like the stuff of magic. From your lessons, Paul, and your 50:5:1 ratio, it sounds like you are the man for the job!

Reply
- Author
  
  Paul Hassing
  
  February 29, 2012 at 10:08 pm
  
  Hi, Phil. I’ve heard that’s a very sensible place to be!
  
  Leon has been around the block too many times for me to weigh his words lightly.
  
  Also, I HATE talking on the phone, so I’m a very poor judge of his methods.
  
  I’ll be dedicating an entire post to ‘filters’ – by which we screen the gems from the dross. A huge candidate pool is as useless as no pool at all. Can’t wait to lay it all out for you guys to discuss.
  
  Thanks very much for your encouraging contribution.
  
  Reply
  - Author
    
    Philip Owens
    
    February 29, 2012 at 10:45 pm
    
    Dear Paul,
    
    I bet Leon has his methods and makes it work for him. You don’t get to scoot around the block a time or two without getting things to work.
    
    I look forward to the rest of the series!