“I sit here looking at my screen wondering how to start a newsletter on how our thoughts come out as words. The sun reflects off my screen and my right eye squints. I wonder briefly if thoughts are punctuated and am distracted by the thought of the friend who is a boy arriving soon what time is it who will be spending time with Evie. I worry that in showing my thoughts in this way my readers might delete this email on how thoughts inform action in recruitment. “
That’s an attempt at stream-of-consciousness writing.
Yet it fails because I’ve written it in a way to try and show context and give meaning to my words.
Perhaps this would be more accurate
“How do I write about how our thoughts come out as words? Are thoughts punctuated? Sam’s going to be here soon <multiple scenarios exist at the same time>. A ray of light catches my eye. Hunh who’s going to unsubscribe without reading the full email”
Even that’s flawed in making conscious what runs in the background of my mind.
I am terrible writer.
Given it’s World Book Day in which we raise awareness of the marginalised art form that is books, I’ve accepted the challenge of shoe-horning one of the writing principles of Ulysses, by James Joyce, into a post on better recruitment.
One of the greatest works in literature, with writing methods so impenetrable they lose more friends than my last post on Diversity Statements.
“The twining stresses, two by two. A hand plucking the harpstrings, merging their twining chords. Wavewhite wedded words shimmering on the dim tide. A cloud began to cover the sun slowly, wholly, shadowing the bay in deeper green. It lay beneath him, a bowl of bitter waters.”
What an amazing passage, and doesn’t it make you think about the passage of your own thoughts?
How we talk and listen, has at its root the passage of consciousness.
Many people in conversation don’t really listen. Instead, it’s something more along the lines of:
Greg starts speaking
Ross anticipates how Greg’s sentence is going to continue
Ross starts formulating his response based on his extrapolating
Ross responds at the appropriate moment
The cycle repeats
This is why the best salespeople will tell you their key skill is in listening.
By which I mean active listening, so that you can understand what someone means when they talk. Not just the words, but the intent and background.
Fully taking in what is said so that you can answer, rather than respond.
Words are by their nature the interpreting middle man between two (or more) streams of consciousness.
Where this interpretation breaks, arguments, assumption, and a choice to step away can happen.
I expect this interpretation issue is also at the heart of the Double Empathy problem.
If we don’t know why someone says what they say, we can only make an assumption from our own context, which may be wildly different.
But if the best sales skill is listening, why then do most sales people leading with a pitch centred on themselves?
In the selling words of recruitment, this looks much like a job description led advert, entirely focused on the employers needs.
Shouldn’t instead we lead with our understanding of the needs of the people we hope to bring forward?
This might be a candidate for an employer, or an employer for a candidate.
And if we accept that our listening is a double interpretation between their thoughts and their voice, and their voice and our ears - how can we use this principle to start better conversations?
How can we bridge the gap?
When a potential candidate reads a job advert, invariably a few things will happen in their minds.
they’ll see if the word hot spots they look for are right
they’ll look for red flags like £competitive salary, because of how Candidate Resentment has trained them
they’ll think about their hair appointment
they’ll have questions on the tip of their tongue they might not think to ask
they may feel something
they may or may not trust what they read
they may consider taking action
Can you imagine how this comes together as a stream of consciousness?
By advertising, I mean a job board advert, a WhatsApp message, an email or DM. Even the carrier pigeon I sent now sat on your window sill 👀.
Phone/video calls are broadly the same with key differences - tone of voice, delivery and interaction.
For me, each medium has the same priority - to build trust and encourage their psychological safety in taking an action. Not cynically - because I want to build relationships between the right people.
How can we do that unless we recognise their train of thought?
Surely it’s impossible to know what our audience will think of our words?
I want you to think about your breathing.
And now you are. Maybe you smiled. Maybe you remember I pulled that gag some time ago. Maybe you think I’m writing to you personally.
We can estimate well enough what our audiences will think. People are people, with their own behaviors, habits, psychology, challenges and aspirations.
That’s why AIDA, PAS and all these other frameworks work well enough. It’s why my own adaptation for recruitment, AIDE, is at the heart of my approach.
And when we recruit within common roles, in specific regions, interests will broadly be the same.
Ask yourself this next time you form a message.
Why would someone leave a suitable job, and go through the stress of resigning, to work for you?
Why might they not thrive in your role?
What might they need from my message to build trust and feel safe to take action?
These notions that dwell in your audience’s mind are the catalyst to action.
It’s about them, their needs, and their thoughts.
It’s not about us and how we hope they might respond.
Happy World Book Day.
Regards,
Greg
p.s. Applications for the two spots on my preferred client list are open. KI is already halfway through her application, so don’t dither.
p.p.s. Feel free to send another random topic my way. It’s British Pie Week next week, that may be a stretch.
Thanks, Greg. Very thought provoking.
It's really hard to listen properly.
Mind you; it wouldn't hurt if people spoke more interestingly as well.
Thank you.