"Hey, how's your grad job search going?" The language of job adverts...

Linkedin-Merchant (definition #7)

NOUN

1. A recruiter that relentlessly bombards your InMail with mass e-mails seeking "high performing, talented individuals" to join their "adventure" in the corporate world. It is not uncommon for these emails to feature promises of up to £80k per annum by the end of Y3 and an attractive work-life balance.

• My inbox: Hi Adam, I’m recruiting Russell Group graduates for a graduate scheme at a London-based Executive Search firm. With your Humanities degree, I think you'd be an excellent fit.

Dear Network,

In a real effort to be consistent, we're back with another edition of Officially Unemployed! As promised in the last post, we're reverting back to our roots with some over-cynical slating of our favourite social networking platform that we love to hate.

If, like me, you took the leap and edited your profile picture to have the fateful #opentowork filter showing in all its purple glory, I am sure you will relate to this week's definition and will have undoubtedly received messages like this.

It is seemingly inconceivable to the figures that order first year graduate recruiters to fire out as many of these e-mails or "first touches" as possible under the threat of not meeting their unattainable KPI's, that anyone could resist these offers, and they're not entirely wrong. The promise of a competitive salary and the use of random corporate jargon can do absolute wonders for the lost and afraid "humanities" graduate like myself who has given more thought to the many uses of the subjunctive than what they want to do with their life beyond university. However, given our eagerness to get started in the corporate world and with little idea about the career we actually want, the job descriptions we see can massively influence the roles we end up applying for and can often over-promise applicants.

With all this being said, and being influenced by The Athletic's "Football Clichés" podcast I'd like to delve into some of the buzzwords we see in job descriptions and recruitment communications and break down what they might really mean. Hopefully then we can have a clearer idea of what we are signing up for. Before we get going though, I'd like to put out a few disclaimers.

1. I am by no means suggesting that any company/recruiter/individual intentionally misleads applicants.

2. I am not criticising recruitment as a practice and particularly not the individuals that work in the sector.

3. I am joking and trying to be quirky and relatable, please don't bully me on the internet (or indeed in person).

Not directly relevant, but to show you who is really putting his opinions out there, this is a rejection I got from Paypal on Christmas Day 2020. Your weekly dose of "same boat".

"Competitive, fast paced, self-starter":

In industries like recruitment and sales, this type of language is particularly common and, despite being fairly apt for jobs that involve activity such generating new leads and cold-calling, can be problematic.

In a 2021 post by BBC Worklife (The coded words of job adverts that reveal important clues - BBC Worklife) former Chief People Officer at ZipRecruiter Renata Dionello discusses the danger of words like this and the possible subtext surrounding company culture and inclusivity pertaining to gender. She says that, smaller companies and startups with ever-evolving aims and priorities will sometimes select these buzzwords in an attempt to attract more people to the position. Demonstrating the point much more eloquently than I, she points out the pitfalls that come with vague language like this such as 'intense competition', 'excessive hours' and 'blind loyalty' to the firm and suggests that jobseekers seek clarity on the claims made in the job description. This post is a great read and I recommend it to all reading this.

"Self-starter", as you can probably tell from my constant references in these blogs, is one that inspires particular anger in me and I feel needs to be re-evaluated ASAP. Whilst I understand that being able to work independently is a necessary skill for any career, it can often undermine the importance of proper onboarding and deter new hires from asking questions. For most graduates, experience in a specific field is very limited and a new job can involve using platforms such as Hubspot, Salesforce and Google ads that they have never been confronted with before. We also feel under immense pressure to perform and hit the ground running. It is absolutely critical that these platforms are explained properly and time is taken to make sure that an intimidated grad has the necessary skills before being launched into a 6 hour cold-calling session. Having worked (with limited success) in sales and opportunity generation, I found confidence and knowhow to play a huge role in my performance whilst the threats of KPIs and indiscriminate offerings of bonuses and incentives as well as an overcompetitive environment were beyond counterproductive. For "entry-level" graduate roles, I propose that looking for companies centred around learning and application of the soft skills we already possess rather than an Alec Baldwin Always Be Closing-esque culture that fosters a cowboy approach to work will ultimately lead to a better outcome for both the company and the applicant.

Projection of my own past failures over. The lesson? Seek clarification on vague terms that could hint at a toxic or unsuitable working culture.

"Entry Level"

Oh yes, everyone's favourite old adage. If by adage you mean lie...

I ran a poll on my Instagram to help me write this post and this was the one that came up the most by a long way. Despite research on this famous catchword and Linkedin having an entire section of their job search tool dedicated to it, I cannot understand why employers have the audacity to type the words "entry-level" into a job description which not three lines later asks for 2-4 years experience in the field.

According to a post by TopResume (Why Do Entry-Level Positions Require Experience? | TopResume), employers may do this to restrict their application pool and prevent a situation where they are overwhelmed by applications. Okay, fine, but where does that leave us? They also offer some sound advice on adjusting your CV to help you and is 100% worth the read.

But, in reality, why should we have to do this? It blows my mind that companies don't see the disconnect here and how they are actively discouraging very capable people from showing what they have to offer because of inconsistent language like this. Do better.

Requirements list from a role Linkedin deems to be "entry level". Could it be a filtering issue? The frustrations remain nevertheless.

"A package of up to £X"

This may seem obvious to many, but as mentioned earlier, a promise of a certain salary can be a major selling point for a grad who spent their summer spending all their hard earned money and are now plagued by the reality of mounting student debt and an overwhelming desire to be financially independent. These figures can look great on paper but are always worth a second look. That is of course, as long as the employer doesn't withhold the salary in order to put you through 18 stages of an application to then tell you their compulsory in-person job in Central London will pay £18k per annum for the privilege.

In many roles, you are offered performance-based incentives and bonuses and whilst this in itself is not an issue, they will almost always be factored in to the numbers shown in the job description. Therefore, it is very important to make sure you understand what your basic salary will be so you can see if it is economically feasible for you.

"Adaptable, flexible, multi-tasker"

In addition to the long list of responsibilities shown in your job description, you are at our disposable for any random extra jobs we need doing on a whim.

"An exciting place to launch your career"

Maybe I'm being cynical here (it wouldn't be a surprise) but this one doesn't sit right with me. Despite its innocence on the surface level, I feel that it creates this impression for a graduate that they are doing you a favour by letting you work with them. This is particularly dangerous because this is never the case. No company would ever hire anyone out of kindness, if you are not qualified, the job goes to someone else, it is really that simple. Being new to the corporate world can make you feel that you need a firm more than they need you. This attitude is not only simply untrue but a real red flag when looking at roles. You are worth being treated properly and have plenty to offer, never compromise those values.

All this being said, I do think that recruiters and employers alike are moving towards more transparency. Compared to 5-10 years ago, recruitment best-practice is going in a positive direction and conditions for grads are slowly improving in many sectors. It is also worth remembering that a badly written job description does not necessarily signify a bad working environment and you should not be completely deterred from applying somewhere as soon as you see any of these buzzwords.

So, the takeaway here? Be curious.

In interviews, seek clarification on any sticking points you have, if they don't take you forward because you've asked a potentially difficult question, then you've dodged a bullet. More critically, remember your worth. A lack of specific experience can be an issue for some jobs but there is an employer out there that will see your potential and invest in your development and you should never settle for something that is going to milk you for productivity and create a relationship that is not symbiotic. As I mentioned in the disclaimers, the majority of companies do not want to mislead you and have been working productively with grads for years. Subtext is worth considering, but is not everything.

The application journey is such a feature of being 'Officially Unemployed' and I'd love to hear your thoughts on this post. Dialogue on this matter from all sides of the equation can only be productive for the working world as a whole.

Let's have it merchants, see you in the next one.

Your favourite LM,

AT