How to write the best job description?
WHY IT WORKS: Role description edition
Your eyes do not deceive you, and that is not a typo. There is a deliberate differentiation there between the phrase ‘job description’ and ‘role description’. One does sort of imply that you should describe every ‘job’ that needs to be done to get the best job description. It does make some sense, doing your best to give full transparency into every aspect of the role.
Right intent, wrong approach.
Listing all tasks doesn’t actually communicate what the organisation needs, but rather what the best guess is on the actions that contribute to the outcomes you need to achieve. A role description invites you to talk about the ‘role’ that will be played in the success of your organisation. Here are 7 reasons why this is a better approach. Strategically:
Structure and process: Teams are aligned around objectives, not around tasks. Shared goals can be cascaded through the functions and teams on the ground can flex their processes and handovers as needed.
Culture: Are you a mission driven organisation or a task focused culture? Something as ubiquitous as the role description sets a clear tone and signal to each team member about what is important. Articulating at a role level also gives staff the autonomy to create the best way to achieve the outcomes they are responsible for - great because they will be the experts who can spot the opportunities to refine actions needed on a daily basis, and because autonomy is generally nominated in all surveys as key to engaged and productive teams.
Leadership: Managers become less focused on (micro)managing tasks, and more on providing leadership to guide goal achievement when roles at a macro level, they have the space to invite perspectives and input on how those goals are achieved.
At a more granular level, defining the role gives you these advantages:
Flexibility: You communicate clear direction about what the impact and outcomes are needed, under which there could sit a multitude of actions. These may change depending on a variety of factors e.g. stage of business cycle, coverage for other team members, or changes in product or service to cater to market.
Prioritisation: Focusing on impact and outcomes helps make the priorities clear on a day to day basis. What action should someone take when faced with a decision on competing deadlines, or a to do list that simply cannot be accomplished within the allotted time? Reviewing what needs to be done with reference to what makes the most difference in achieving the outcomes you are seeking is a good idea. A laundry list of tasks will not give that clarity or direction.
Ease of understanding: Reducing the cognitive load makes it clearer for someone in the role, others interacting with the role or for someone applying to be in the role. Each person only has a limited amount of brain capacity to process and remember new information (1) - the same principle underpins elements of UX design that moves people through websites and even supermarkets. Similar to the reason people prefer bullet points rather than full sentences to summarise emails, or bullet point prompts rather than scripts for public speaking, streamlining what information and how you present it makes a difference to what information actually lands.
Hiring: It follows then that articulating a role in a way that potential applicants can understand will better allow them to demonstrate their fit. Now, you might have heard something akin to the sentiment that ‘we need someone who can handle ambiguity’ which is fair. However, in those situations your mission statement provides guidance and parameters in which you act. Having unclear parameters during a hiring process is just likely to lead both applicants and interviewers down the wrong path.
Not specific to role descriptions but something to consider generally in all communications is the language you are using. Is it inclusive or are you unconsciously alienating your target audience? The evidence for job advertisements is clear, when language leans predominantly towards what we as society consider ‘male’ characteristics then female readers are less likely to apply. The converse is not true for ‘female’ characteristics and male readers (2) . That is just one example and one axis. Diverse teams achieve better results (3) and can span all types of characteristics - age, background, diversity of thought just to name a few.
Read more
Sweller, J. (1988), Cognitive Load During Problem Solving: Effects on Learning. Cognitive Science, 12: 257-285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
Gaucher, D., Friesen, J., & Key, A. C. (2011). Evidence That Gendered Wording in Job Advertisements Exists and Sustains Gender Inequality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(1), 109-128.
Reynolds, Alison & Lewis, David. (2017).Teams Solve Problems Faster When They’re More Cognitively Diverse. Harvard Business Review.